Recently, Desirée Rincón shared a screenshot of a comment by Mike Cuthriell, the CEO of Grow Sciences. Full disclosure: I don’t personally know Mike. His remarks were made a year ago, and he has already been slammed for his insensitive comments, yet some themes in this topic are still relevant today, and since it was my first time reading the post, I wanted to share my thoughts.
The original comment reads:
“Am I insensitive to the world if I think people should pay a small fee ($20?) to apply for a job, as a means to prevent an overwhelming quantity of underqualified or mismatched submissions?”
Mike later amended his comment, stating:
“This is a thought exercise, not a practice or consideration. The fee could be $1 and would guarantee an in-person interview, but it’s not intended as a revenue generator.”
While Mike tried to shift the perspective—reducing the fee to a nominal $1 and framing it as a means of guaranteeing an interview instead of new revenue—the change doesn’t fully address the broader issue: one that focuses more on emotional intelligence than mismatched candidates.
The Opportunistic Executive
Our entire world has become increasingly more opportunistic due to artificial intelligence (AI) and automation. Despite revolutionizing operations and employment recruiting (for the better, it is debatable), questions about removing direct human engagement still seem to linger in some executives’ minds. This line of thinking—framed as a resource management problem—often leads to decisions that inadvertently devalue the people they are trying to reach.
The scenario proposed by Mike Cuthriell reignites the debate about the boundaries of respect and efficiency in business. Monetizing out mismatched candidates might seem like a pragmatic approach on the surface. However, underneath, it reveals a deeper issue in how leaders approach relationships, be it with potential employees or customers.
For C-level executives, this is not merely a thought exercise. How your organization approaches recruitment, customer onboarding, or even internal processes sends a clear message about your values. At its core, this scenario is about much more than screening candidates. It’s about how much you value other people’s time, their trust, and the relationships you hope to build with them.
The False Economy of Time vs. Relationships
Efficiency is critical in any business, but efficiency at the cost of respect is a false economy. Charging job candidates for the opportunity to be considered—regardless of the amount—implies that your time is more valuable than theirs. It creates an immediate barrier to forming a trusting relationship and disregards the notion that time and respect are mutual.
This same mentality can bleed into customer interactions. If executives believe that charging a fee for applying to a job reduces inefficiency, what stops them from considering similar tactics to gauge customer intent? Imagine adding an extra fee at checkout to ensure that customers are serious about completing their purchase. Or imagine if your entire new business pipeline was behind a paywall where your sales team only engaged with potential customers that anted up before starting a conversation.
Even a tiny, almost imperceptible amount establishes a clear intent: the company’s time matters more than the customer’s experience.
Respect in the Hiring Process Reflects Your Customer Relationships
The hiring process isn’t just about filling positions—it reflects your company’s culture and values. From the moment someone applies, they are forming an impression of your organization that could foster loyalty or disillusionment. If your company asks potential employees to pay for the chance to be considered, you are signaling a lack of respect for their time and effort. The transaction becomes one-sided, where the organization’s needs supersede the individual’s.
Like job applicants, customers expect respect, trust, and fairness from the companies they engage with. Whether you operate in B2B or B2C, relationships begin long before a sale is made. Every touchpoint, from initial inquiry to final purchase, defines how customers perceive you. Suppose your recruitment process demonstrates that you place a price on people’s time. In that case, you are inadvertently sending the message that your organization values its efficiency over building lasting, meaningful relationships.
Valuing Time Should Be Mutual
One fundamental principle that should guide employee onboarding and customer engagement is the mutual valuation of time. Yes, businesses need to run efficiently. But that doesn’t mean pushing the burden onto those seeking to engage with your company, whether they are job candidates or customers. An organization’s success is rooted in its ability to build trust from the outset, and trust begins with respect for each other’s time.
Consider the experience of sitting in the lobby for an interview, only to have the interviewer arrive late. For the candidate, it signals that their time is less critical. Imagine a customer waiting on hold or navigating a confusing support process, only to be greeted by an impersonal response. In both cases, the individual feels undervalued. In these moments, time reflects trust—or the lack thereof.
Additionally, many companies now lean on AI-driven bots to conduct interviews, hoping to streamline the hiring process. While AI can enhance efficiency, relying solely on automated tools for such a critical, human-centered task can lead to a disconnection between the company and the candidate.
Consider the experience shared by Jim Rivers, an awesome recruiter who recently encountered this firsthand:
“I just had my first AI interview… A BOT called me on the phone and started asking me interview questions. I know this might be how the future of recruiting is going, but… It left me VERY not interested in the job anymore!! It did what it was supposed to do, but it had no SOUL or CONNECTION. It didn’t have any way of asking questions about anything?!
I understand that cutting costs and slimming down your company overhead is how you stay competitive in this market, but losing humanity in the process is not the way to go!! I LOVE talking with my candidates, I enjoy hearing about who they are and what makes them happy!! The BOT did its job, but now I am not interested.”
Jim’s story highlights the critical issue with AI-driven interviews (or any other interface): they may achieve the functional goal but at the cost of a human connection. When candidates feel they are merely part of an automated process devoid of personal interaction, they can quickly lose interest in the opportunity. This directly reflects how automation without emotional intelligence can erode relationships.
It positions the company in a place of superiority, where applicants or customers must prove their worth simply for the opportunity to engage. Executives who understand this create systems that respect the time of everyone involved. They optimize for mutual benefit, where both the company and the individual—a job applicant or a customer—see value in the interaction. This approach fosters relationships built on trust, leading to long-term loyalty rather than transactional engagements.
Respect Drives Results
Ultimately, how you treat people—before they are even part of your organization or customer base—sets the tone for the relationship. Much like the customer journey, the hiring process is a critical first step in relationship building.
Efficiency is essential, but it should never come at the cost of relationships. The accurate measure of a company’s success lies in its ability to build trust from the first interaction, whether with a job candidate, a customer, or even a potential partner. By valuing people’s time, respecting their efforts, and building trust from the outset, executives can create a culture where employees and customers feel valued—which drives long-term success.
Ultimately, it’s not about saving time but investing time in relationships that matter.