Employee Relationships in Greenpeace

             • First interview (phone, Skype, or video conference) .
             • Second interview (face-to-face or video conference) .
             • Job offer.
             • Reference check.
             Noteworthy, Greenpeace assesses capabilities first (e.g. short listing based on grades for entry level white-collar positions) as a sort of qualifier. Once an applicant has taken this hurdle, he has to undergo more subjective assessments, such as a first and second interview. During these interviews a panel investigates the potential job candidate´s fit with the company and the job in question, the final result being based on a joint decision of the panel. Especially for higher ranked and key positions, such as campaigners, an intense screening process is profitable, as a good part of performance evaluation will be subjective and stakes are high (Lazear & Gibbs, 2009). In contrast to these higher ranked positions, lower positions with less impact on the overall organizational performance, such as fundraisers, are filled with less prior assessment of the candidates. An interesting feature of personnel policy at Greenpeace (which will resurface in the Careers and Promotion section) is however the practice of recruiting these lower ranking employees into higher positions, once they have proven their commitment to the company over a longer period of time, creating a credible signal to the organization.
             Another aspect Greenpeace stresses on its website is the perception of the application process as a mutual undertaking, not only giving Greenpeace the chance to scan and test applicants, but also allowing applicants to realistically assess whether their beliefs and expectations about the company are realistic. The importance of this is not to be underestimated, as will become clear in subsequent sections of this paper. It mitigates the occurrence of a non-profit specific form of agency problem, namely the hijacking of the company by employees who are too extreme in their opinion of where the company should go mission-wise.