Years ago, when I was first getting started in leadership, I was given a piece of advice, “Don’t hire volunteers”. The rational was clear, if you hire a volunteer, then you are effectively paying for something that you used to get for free. Plus, then all the other volunteers will start to think they’ll be hired, which will create problems.
Looking back now, I can see how wrong-headed that kind of thinking is, but I think lots of leaders still hold onto this theory.
I’ve gone the opposite direction: I look first to standout volunteers when needing to fill a position. Here’s why:
1. Compatibility: Ideally you already have seen the way they work with others and how they best function.
2. Passion: My philosophy has always been to work 100% regardless of what you’re being paid, but a volunteer has already told you they’ve got enough passion to do the job for the love of it.
3. Culture: one of the hardest parts of starting a new job is adjusting to a new culture. The volunteer has already observed the culture from a distance and knows what he/she is getting into. For better and worse.
4. Reward: I’m a firm believer that we should reward the kinds of behaviors we want to see repeated. I love that people volunteer, we’ve had 6000 of them in the past 12 months, and I can’t help but think it’s an encouragement when they know that sometimes we hire a standout volunteer.
I know that this concept flies in the face of some long held beliefs, what do you think? Is it a problem to hire standout volunteers?
David Curry
