Here is the scenario:
Johnny began taking piano lessons at a private school. His teacher was moving and mentioned it in passing to Johnny’s mother. They were happy to learn that the teacher was moving closer to Johnny’s house.
“Can we start lessons in your home instead of driving all the way to the school?”
“Sure. It’s better for me because I stay at home.”
“Ok. When can we start?”
It seems innocent. There is no intent of malice. It was Johnny’s mother, the paying customer, who suggested the idea. On the upside, Johnny keeps the teacher with whom he began his lessons. Johnny’s mother doesn’t drive out of her way. Johnny’s teacher continues teaching. Everyone wins.
Or do they? Johnny’s teacher was hired by the school to teach the school’s students, not the teacher’s students. The school’s owners and directors have spent money on advertising their services to both students and teachers, great efforts toward a good reputation. Albeit, done unconsciously, Johnny’s teacher involved himself in a practice known as “poaching” students.
What would have been a better way of handling this?
“Can we start lessons in your home instead of driving all the way to the school?”
“That’s a great suggestion. I’ll consider it, and we’ll talk more about it next week.”
Johnny’s teacher approaches the school’s directors and lets them know what is happening, keeping his own reputation as an honorable and trustworthy peripatetic teacher intact. After that, there are many avenues that all parties can consider if they would like to keep Johnny’s best interest in mind.
