The scandal at Satyam in India brings forth an interesting thought. In an article by him, Jitendra Singh, a Wharton management professor who is currently dean of the Nanyang Business School in Singapore says, “…companies with “the bluest of blue-chip reputations [such as] Infosys and TCS” could actually gain in the current environment, because of a potential “flight to quality” among client companies.” The third-tier and weaker companies will probably undergo a lot more scrutiny.”

Why does it make sense to do in-depth due diligence on third-or-lower tier companies, while taking top tier companies on faith and accepting their reputations with only cursory review.

Until their dirty linen came to light. Bernard Madoff’s hedge fund, Jeff Skilling’s Enron, WorldCom and Tyco were all considered top-tier.

This attitude of blindly accepting what is said by the top and increasing due diligence on lower levels is found everywhere, but it really permeates the hiring process.

I’ve lost count of the executives and managers I’ve known who went with cursory or no reference checks because the candidate

• was a C-level executive;
• graduated from a top-tier school;
• earned over $100K;
• had a PhD;
• was referred by an executive or board member;
• etc.

but ran exhaustive reference checks on every candidate below VP or director, including credit and criminal checks.

Does that make any sense to you?

Image credit: flickr