As a heavily tattooed person, I’ve been denied opportunities because of my appearance. As an IT leader, I would like to understand the connection between how someone looks and how they behave in terms of the work that they do. Appearances should not determine whether someone gets a chance to display their skills.
I use a simple test…
- What does this person know about the job?
- How does this person conduct him or herself?
- Does this person demonstrate good judgment, as shown by the information that I’ve gathered about their actions and decisions?
This means that for a fair assessment of a person’s skills and decision-making ability, attention should be focused on the four qualities that matter most to your organization. For me, I evaluate the person’s knowledge of the job that they’re being considered for, how they conduct themselves, if their judgment is sound, and their degree of accountability for their work. Professionalism should be specific enough to explain and consistently applied.
An employee who reads up, looks after confidential information, treats other employees with respect, and fulfills their commitments in a proper and timely fashion demonstrates professional behavior. On the other hand, an employee who dismisses concerns of others, covers up their own mistakes, and is repeatedly late with their deliverables creates a performance problem that can be assessed in detail by their manager. The presence of a tattoo adds little to that evaluation.
Work samples or scenarios will need to be developed to assess a candidate’s skills when hiring. Establish the criteria that need to be met prior to interviewing candidates. Compare candidates by asking similar questions and use the candidate’s responses to measure against the pre-established criteria for the position.
If hiring technology leadership talent, consider having candidates assess a security issue, prioritize competing activities, or communicate a difficult recommendation to a business audience. Then, evaluate their demonstration of their thought processes, factors they consider, and resulting consequences.
Decision-making deserves that kind of scrutiny too. A person can gather relevant information, challenge assumptions, weigh different options, and be responsible for the consequences of their decisions. Yes, maybe we should carefully consider a permanent personal mark before getting it but that doesn’t mean that person is going to make poor professional decisions because of it.
When it comes to performance reviews and promotions, it’s also critical to define the standards and explain their relevance to the work the employee is undertaking. This ensures that appearance doesn’t influence judgments about an employee’s ability to deliver on their job. These other considerations must be evaluated within the guidelines of the Workplace Standards identified above and reasonable responses determined in order to ensure that all employees are held to the same standard of conduct.
This sets a fairer standard as it explains the real reason for the appearance-based standard and then outlines the ways in which that appearance can be managed in order to comply with the Workplace Standards.
Similarly, when there are concerns about how your appearance with tattoos may affect the perceptions of your clients, examine that situation closely. Are there any facts in that situation? Has your appearance caused any harm? What are the requirements of your assignment? Can you respond to that situation in a way that addresses your concerns and is fair to you?
Excluding someone from assignment opportunities because of their appearance is a business decision with potential adverse consequences to the employee including denial of critical learning and development opportunities. How will their lack of experience affect their ability to bring value to the client and subsequently get visibility with senior management?
Additionally, this approach has to be applied consistently with all employees regardless of their seniority. A high level executive with visible tattoos shouldn’t be viewed differently than a junior employee with similar tattoos. If a junior employee’s appearance affects how they’re viewed for opportunities, then that must be evaluated with senior management. An employee’s professional credibility should only be established based on their ability to perform.
We would need to go through all of the instances where appearance has been used to determine whether someone would be a good fit for an organization or for a role. Reframe the reasons for hiring or for someone’s progress based on the real reasons that we use for hiring or promoting, rather than referring to appearance-related terms like “executive presence,” “culture fit,” or “professional image.”
Since I’ve been a victim of tattoo discrimination for work opportunities, I carefully attempt to give the individual’s real work capability a fair hearing and define their work expectations. A corporate environment that demands the highest standards of competence, of integrity, of accountability, and sound judgment should demonstrate the same qualities in its evaluation of people.