The Disappearing Act by Yasmin Taj is a very contemporary article. The issue dealt with in the it is rampant today and especially in IT industry. Companies these days have modified their process of recruiting and inducting personnel to counter the "no-show" act. It definitely calls for certain amount of professionalism and morality to inform the company incase the candidate does not wish to join for any reason whatsoever. The problem is that companies are also not very mature to handle responses like "I am opting for company X due to better pay or better profile".
Companies on the other hand today have cases where they have confirmed employment and then frozen the position or defered recruitment. This of course does not justify the "no-show" act but adds a perspective to the problem.
It is a small world today and hence, one needs to keep their employment records as well as relations clean and healthy however hard it might be because we dont know whom we end up meeting someday down the line, at what capacity or position.
The cause according to me is very cultural. We are not very forthight and honest about our opinion - as an individual in the workplace, or in a family or as friends in a relationship. We do not give out our "true opinion" about any issue unlike in the West where they are candid and clear about their opinion. Similarly, we are also not open to honest opinions. A simple example to clarify my point would be the advertisement of a triangular biscuit/ wafer where the boss, subordinate and the client are sitting together and continuously turning the triangle.
Life would be much easier if we are no nonsense like the message in the Sprite advertisement.

I am blogging with reference to the article printed in Ascent dated 28 April, 2010, Perception v/s Reality. Being an HR professional, many a times, I feel strongly about these issues and must thank you for such valuable observations and thoughts expressed in the issue. Yes, it is usually a practice to consider a candidate with a similar background for a certain position and play it safe since it is easier to evaluate and the time taken for evaluation is lesser.

But as the expert in your article says, others who are deserving should get a fair chance too. Perhaps many HR professionals understand this rationale too, but it has yet to be accepted by other SBU heads and decision makers.

If candidates like Ms. Dhawan are not given due consideration, it is a waste of talent and perhaps, a loss for the hiring company who, may choose to employ a less talented and committed candidate who would have stayed on in previous companies primarily, only in a quest to strengthen their resumes, but could be complacent and incompetent. The contributions from such employees may not match the short-term contributions of more genuine staff. At times, employees who stay longer may not be truly loyal.

In my opinion, recruitment professionals need to consider other factors besides relevant experience such as knowledge regarding the subject, passion towards the role desired, potential, willingness to learn, sincerity & hard work, right?