Running Head: CASE STUDY

Case Study Final

Kilee Wagner

Organizational Communication-Ottawa University

Running Head: CASE STUDY

Case Study – Final

As an of age adult, it is easy to fall into a lifestyle that features parties, bar hopping,

celebrations involving alcohol, etc. While most are cautious about the pictures, they, or their

friends, post on social media, others do not show that same caution. That bares the question,

should employees be penalized in the workplace if they post content on social media that may

make the company look bad? If someone posts a picture on social media wearing a shirt with

their company logo, while they have a beer in each hand, should that employee be passed up for

a promotion? While most employers are understanding that their employees partake in such

activities, they are less understanding about the evidence that is posted on social media.

In example, the “Is Harry Too Social to be Promoted?” Case. To paraphrase, this case

speaks on the behalf of an employee who posted, on social media, of his drinking an excessive

amount of alcohol while wearing clothes that reflected his workplace. The question being, should

he be panelized within the company, and be passed up for a promotion? Along with this, this

bares the question of: if he hadn’t been wearing clothes that announced where he worked, would

his employers be questions whether or not he deserved a promotion?

With the rise of social media, more and more employers are using social media to

“scope” out their candidates. Cornell React (2018) states, “CareerBuilder surveyed over 2,000

hiring managers and human resource professionals, finding out the 51% of employers who do

take the time to search up candidates on social media have not hired candidates based on the

content in their social media pages. Why wouldn’t they hire specific candidates? Well, some of

the reasons were as followed:  

 the candidate posting inappropriate or provocative pictures or content (46%)

 evidence of drinking or drug use (41%)

Running Head: CASE STUDY

 discriminatory posts (28%)

 inappropriate screen names (21%) (Cornell Reacts, p. 3).

While I would not consider this a problem. I do wonder how fair companies and employers are

when they are looking at their employee’s social media. Especially at a younger age, candidates

and prospects, perhaps new college graduates, are still working on transitioning out of that party

lifestyle that they adapt to in college. While some employers understand this transition, they are

not so mindful that they ignore and continue to choose that candidate do fulfill the employment

opportunity that they are more than qualified to do.

This specific case study states, “The pictures and posts from last weekend’s party at

Harry’s apartment showed Harry having a wonderful time with two bottles of alcohol in each

hand while wearing his company tee shirt with its highly readable logo. Harry’s posts about not

remembering anything the next day were concerning. Martin would not have been on Harry’s

Facebook page had his assistant not mentioned to him that office workers were talking about it”

(Zalabak, pg. 431). This case suggests that this may not have been a problem if Harry’s co-

workers had not seen the post. That being said, that could have happened whether or not Harry

was wearing a shirt with his companies’ logo. If someone works for a company, everything they

do represents the company that they work for.

There are multiple solutions that could rectify this situation. Employees simply putting

their profiles on private and not letting their co-workers or those of a higher power in a

workplace to follow them or befriend them. The Impact of Social Media On Employment: The

Good, the Bad, and the Ugly (2018) article states, “Your current or new employer may send you

a friend request on Facebook or follow you on Instagram. But this isn’t because they want to

become your friend, this is a way for them to find out who you are as a person. Of course, you
Running Head: CASE STUDY

supplied them your resume and cover letter, however, now with social media, it’s clear that a

resume is not enough” (The Impact of Social Media On Employment: The Good, the Bad, and

the Ugly, p. 2). Those of authority, and those who are not, in the workplace are following their

candidates specifically to see who they are. This also goes for clientele that could be following

one on social media. The study goes on to state, “Harry has been with Merton for five years and

Martin believes him to be one of the most promising candidates for this promotion. Martin also

knows Merton clients would not think highly of the Facebook posts” (pg. 431) Avoiding letting

those in the working become a follower on social media, or just avoiding posting any content

that could criminalize them within the workplace.

A second solution being that responsibility of the employer. Letting employees have their

personal lives without feeling like they are being watched and monitored. Along with this,

everyone has a personal life. Everyone does things that their employer would not like to be

associated with the company. This bares this question, is it really an employer’s business what

their employees do while off the clock. The Cornell article goes on to state, “Most of us have

questionable content on our social media, depending on which angle we look at it. Your political

views, your views on medical marijuana, for example, and the activities you take up in your

spare time are all viewed under a microscope” (p. 5). This highlights that everyone has different

opinions when it comes to political views, alcohol consumption and drug use. With this point

highlighted, an employee could post something that they do not believe it bad or that they

believe should not cause them to be panelized within the workplace.

Failure to participate in either of the points above could result in a candidate struggling to

find work, or an employer struggling missing out on a qualified candidate. Lauren Salm (n.d.)

states, “Fifty-seven percent of employers are less likely to call someone in if the candidate is a
Running Head: CASE STUDY

ghost online” (Salm, p. 8). Meaning, if a candidate or employee refrains from posting anything

offensive or cause any controversy, they will most likely be called by an employer before those

who have a more apparent social media presence. The article continues, “The same study from

CareerBuilder also found that 33% of employers found information which made them consider a

candidate. Some of the reasons why an employer would hire a candidate after looking through

their social media included:

 the candidate’s profile conveying a professional image (43%)

 the candidate’s profile portraying an individual that would be a match for the company’s

culture (46%)

 the candidate appearing to be well rounded (40%)” (p. 5).

These bullets highlight that an employer puts a great deal of judgement on one’s social media

content.

A long-term solution would be implementing rules within the workplace. Those who are

already employed with the company are to not post videos that would be inappropriate to show

in the workplace i.e. drinking, drugs, sex, and other things that could attach a bad brand to the

company. A long-term solution could mean having a contract that is signed by both parties, the

employee and the employer, that could clearly point out any restrictions and consequences. This

way if someone were to post content outside of the restrictions, they could suffer any

consequences that come along with it without a fight, because they signed the document stating

so. This sets clear boundaries for all of the involved parties and keeps a clear understanding

between all. This is something that was not in effect during this case study, “While Merton has a

strong code of ethics and behavior expectations for all employees, nothing in their code relates to

personal social media usage” (pg. 431).

Running Head: CASE STUDY

While most employers are understanding of their employees’ personal lives, it is a lot to

ask of them when they are expected to look passed the pictures of excessive drinking while in

company gear. “But does the good outweigh the bad? It all depends on how you use social

media. The way you manage your social media says everything about you. You need to think

about the message you’re sending out about yourself through social media” (p. 5). Harry posted a

picture on social media that did not look good for the company he works for. Preventing him

from getting a well-deserved promotion. This questions whether Harry should be more cautious

about what he posts on social media, or should his boss be more open-minded and understanding

when it comes to his employees? This answer varies between companies. Setting clear

boundaries with employees on all counts would be the best way to avoid this situation, or some

that are similar.

Running Head: CASE STUDY

Reference:

Salm, L. (n.d.). 70% of employers are snooping candidates' social media profiles. Retrieved from

https://www.careerbuilder.com/advice/social-media-survey-2017

Shockley-Zalabak, P. (2015). Fundamentals of organizational communication: knowledge,

sensitivity, skills, values (9th ed.). Boston: Pearson.

The Impact of Social Media On Employment: The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly. (2018, May 16).

Retrieved from https://blogs.cornell.edu/react/2018/05/16/the-impact-of-social-media-on-

employment-the-good-the-bad-and-the-ugly/