The One That Got Away: ‘Buyer’s Remorse’ in Recruiting and Marriage—a Comparison
In 
Compare data on regretted hires: A worldwide November 2012 Career Builder survey of thousands of full-time, not self-employed managers discovered the following percentages of managers who reported having made a bad hire in the previous year:
- Russia – 88 %
- Brazil – 87 %
- China – 87 %
- India – 84 %
- U.S. – 66 %
- Italy – 66 %
- U.K. – 62 %
- Japan – 59 %
- Germany – 58 %
- France – 53 %
On a first take, it appears that in Russia, Brazil, China and India, hiring is more likely to result in “buyer remorse” than the average marriage surveyed—88% vs. 76%. Moreover, because the numbers are so similar, there may be a temptation to assume or look for some commonality among the explanations for and feelings associated with buyer remorse, e.g.,
- inflated or delusional expectations
- initial desperation
- previously undetected bad habits and attitudes
- self-misrepresentation
- unperceived poor skills-challenge matches
- demotivation over time
- switched loyalties
- breach of contract
- selective perception
- poor planning
- deteriorating enterprise fortunes
- modified opportunity-cost calculations [when someone better is encountered or remembered]
- financial burdens
- insufficient commitment effort
- absenteeism
- drastic change in the enterprise mission
[Notice how every one of these may factor into both a less-than-perfect marriage and a lamented hiring.]
However, to be fair to the high-remorse BRIC [Brazil/Russia/India/China] managers and employees, the odds of experiencing buyer remorse at least once in a year, as a manager, are vastly higher than in a marriage, if only because polygamy is generally prohibited—i.e., the average manager will be hiring more people per year than [s]he will be marrying. Hence, obviously the manager rates of regret will be higher than the spousal admissions of foregone true love.
Therefore, comparing the manager 88% rate with the spouse 76% rate may be as misleading as comparing outcomes of a game of Russian roulette played with one loaded bullet with another game played with five.
As for why the rates are substantially higher in the BRIC economies, it can be speculated that
- In emerging economies, things may change faster—including opportunities for job hopping that leaves managers in the lurch.
- The rules and expectations of corporate culture and associated workplace channels of communication may not be as elaborated, assured and entrenched in societies with sectors making a rapid transition from agricultural to industrial or post-industrial enterprises.
Caution in assuming there must be common explanatory factors underlying buyer remorse in both marriage and employment is advisable: To assume, rather than to merely allow, that there is a commonality of explanations in the hiring and marriage cases is just bad statistical logic.
For example, a 2010 survey conducted by Visa revealed that 88% of married couples believed that they overspent on their wedding; in another study, a UK investigation found that 88% of frequent flyers through Gatwick Airport overspend before they board their flight. So, are we to infer that
1. 88% of people with credit cards will overspend? So the common factor is the credit card?
2. 88% of married couples honeymoon through Gatwick? So the common factor is a penchant for a honeymoon flight through the UK?
3. 88% of all people will overspend given the chance? So, the common factor is human nature?
Of course not.
Hence, caution is advised in comparing and explaining buyer comparable remorse rates among the married and among hiring managers. Nonetheless, having a cautious eye does not mean turning a blind eye to whatever factors may explain buyer remorse in both populations.
Review the long list above and note the prima facie great explanatory fit the items have in accounting for remorse in both the marriage and hiring markets.
Another caveat: We must not assume that admitting having hired the wrong candidate is directly comparable to admitting that one’s spouse has never been one’s true love. The difference between these can be huge, because a spouse who settled for less can still be quite content, whereas a manager who hired the wrong person is much less likely to be satisfied.
The main reason for this is that marrying someone who is not a “true love” can, as successful arranged marriages over the centuries seem to have suggested, can result in a good fit and satisfying relationship, whereas hiring the “wrong” candidate, by definition, cannot create a good fit. Logically, “not a true love” should be compared with “not the ideal candidate”.
In both cases, settling for someone who is less than these isn’t necessarily wrong—whereas hiring the wrong candidate is. Although both the spouse and the manager who settle for less will feel buyer remorse, it is the manager who will be more likely to feel remorse because the person was not merely imperfect, but because [s]he was wrong for the job.
But also note that buyer’s remorse does not invariably presuppose the existence of one that actually got away—as some of the marriage data suggest. Translated into hiring terms, the 17% of cases in which a spouse met a true love only aftermarriage corresponds to manager regret only after hiring the wrong candidate and before meeting the right one.
As for why the French have the fewest regrets about their hires, well, maybe it’s because, romantics that they are, they also probably have the fewest regrets about love affairs—even the failed ones.