Curious reason for not being offered a role ...
Discussion
So I interviewed for a directorship with a new organisation this morning. 5hr event with multiple panels, interviews, presentations and testing.
All went well, 2 others in the process, both older (15-20yrs my senior) women who I understand work with the organisation already.
Recieved feedback after a couple of hours deliberation that I was unsuccessful, that’s not a problem (although of course disappointing) but their rationale was they were disappointed I didn’t ring and canvas the chief exec and other current directors before the process. Now I know I did have this option, their details were in the application advert after all but it wasn’t an explicit expectation, just the standard line “if you would like any further information please contact XXX on 0000”
Seems crazy that that’s the fundamental reason for me, so ... what strange reasons have you been told a “No” based on??
All went well, 2 others in the process, both older (15-20yrs my senior) women who I understand work with the organisation already.
Recieved feedback after a couple of hours deliberation that I was unsuccessful, that’s not a problem (although of course disappointing) but their rationale was they were disappointed I didn’t ring and canvas the chief exec and other current directors before the process. Now I know I did have this option, their details were in the application advert after all but it wasn’t an explicit expectation, just the standard line “if you would like any further information please contact XXX on 0000”
Seems crazy that that’s the fundamental reason for me, so ... what strange reasons have you been told a “No” based on??
I once applied for an internal role when with a previous employer, which had a starting salary on the advert. It went something like this:
- Hiring manager asked me to apply.
- Had a long discussion with hiring manager about role, expectations, what I could bring, etc.
- Applied.
- Was shortlisted.
- Was invited to interview.
- Was interviewed.
- Nailed it. Properly nailed it.
- Asked around, and discovered I was either the only one interviewed, or one of two.
- Was offered the role at about 80% of the starting salary.
- Had a long discussion with the hiring manager and their line manager about starting salaries.
- Offered them the chance to re-consider and offer the starting salary, let me work less hours so they paid me their offer, equivalent to the starting salary, or to withdraw the offer.
- Offer was withdrawn.
alorotom said:
Recieved feedback after a couple of hours deliberation that I was unsuccessful, that’s not a problem (although of course disappointing) but their rationale was they were disappointed I didn’t ring and canvas the chief exec and other current directors before the process. Now I know I did have this option, their details were in the application advert after all but it wasn’t an explicit expectation, just the standard line “if you would like any further information please contact XXX on 0000”
Was this a public advert - and it listed the CEO and other directors 'phone numbers?
@louiebaby - that’s very strange and mind boggling really
@sheepshanks - it was a public advert (it’s a public sector organisation) and there is/was 2 directors and the chief exec listed with names and emails/telephone
I do reflect that element of personalisation may have been expected to be more prevalent however they did acknowledge that my knowledge of the subject area/matter was very apparent and thorough!
Hey ho onward and upward
@sheepshanks - it was a public advert (it’s a public sector organisation) and there is/was 2 directors and the chief exec listed with names and emails/telephone
I do reflect that element of personalisation may have been expected to be more prevalent however they did acknowledge that my knowledge of the subject area/matter was very apparent and thorough!
Hey ho onward and upward
alorotom said:
So I interviewed for a directorship with a new organisation this morning. 5hr event with multiple panels, interviews, presentations and testing.
All went well, 2 others in the process, both older (15-20yrs my senior) women who I understand work with the organisation already.
Recieved feedback after a couple of hours deliberation that I was unsuccessful, that’s not a problem (although of course disappointing) but their rationale was they were disappointed I didn’t ring and canvas the chief exec and other current directors before the process. Now I know I did have this option, their details were in the application advert after all but it wasn’t an explicit expectation, just the standard line “if you would like any further information please contact XXX on 0000”
Seems crazy that that’s the fundamental reason for me, so ... what strange reasons have you been told a “No” based on??
Seems a bonkers reason - possibly you were strong across the board and that was the only thing they could possibly mark you down on. Having said that, I've always phoned up for an informal chat whenever I've applied. It can't do any harm.All went well, 2 others in the process, both older (15-20yrs my senior) women who I understand work with the organisation already.
Recieved feedback after a couple of hours deliberation that I was unsuccessful, that’s not a problem (although of course disappointing) but their rationale was they were disappointed I didn’t ring and canvas the chief exec and other current directors before the process. Now I know I did have this option, their details were in the application advert after all but it wasn’t an explicit expectation, just the standard line “if you would like any further information please contact XXX on 0000”
Seems crazy that that’s the fundamental reason for me, so ... what strange reasons have you been told a “No” based on??
I've never been given a strange reason when I've not been successful. Most of them, whilst being quite painful to hear, were perfectly accurate
[PHMode] never been unsuccessful, in most cases the CEO has offered me a £10k golden handshake and the chance to boff his wife/daughter/pet rottweiler[/{PHmode]
alorotom said:
(it’s a public sector organisation)
Missed that bit.I'd suggest that the other candidates answered the questions using examples that were directly relevant to the organisation. As an outsider naturally you wouldn't have been aware of this, you won't know what the big issues are internally, you might have a passing awareness from the media but it's no substitute for actually sitting in on senior management meetings or being cc'd on emails from the Chef Exec. So you will have scored less marks than the other candidates. the panel recognised why and suggested that, had you contacted them beforehand, you might have gained information that would have helped to improve your answers.
I disagree with Sheepshanks - if they had a preferred internal candidate then they would only have shortlisted for interview those people that wouldn't have been a threat IYSWIM.
Terminator X said:
Could have told you that before you "wasted" 5hrs with them too!
TX.
I thought this also.TX.
I once went for a sales role and was asked, after two lengthy interviews which went well, to name my price in terms of basic salary (bearing in mind we hadn't discussed OTE, car, benefits etc, so there was PLENTY of scope on both sides to tailor the package to be financially viable on either side). I knew the market well and named a price that was around the 80th percentile of the market range and offered justification.
Got rejected and told that, had I named a price which worked out to be 2% lower than I proposed, it'd have been a definite yes.
I'm not a big fan of dismissing things as 'someone else's fault', but I did, on this occasion, simply assume the hiring manager was a compete idiot and I'd had a lucky escape.
Countdown said:
I disagree with Sheepshanks - if they had a preferred internal candidate then they would only have shortlisted for interview those people that wouldn't have been a threat IYSWIM.
Maybe the OP was that person. 
That happened to my daughter - senior teaching job - she got to the last two and was flabergasted by the other choice, the least capable of all of the interviewees. Daughter got the job. She'd basically been head-hunted for it, although I'm not sure she realised.
I'm sure there are examples of slam-dunk internal candiates who have lost out to an unexpectedly good external candidate though.
ferrariF50lover said:
I thought this also.
I once went for a sales role and was asked, after two lengthy interviews which went well, to name my price in terms of basic salary (bearing in mind we hadn't discussed OTE, car, benefits etc, so there was PLENTY of scope on both sides to tailor the package to be financially viable on either side). I knew the market well and named a price that was around the 80th percentile of the market range and offered justification.
Got rejected and told that, had I named a price which worked out to be 2% lower than I proposed, it'd have been a definite yes.
I'm not a big fan of dismissing things as 'someone else's fault', but I did, on this occasion, simply assume the hiring manager was a compete idiot and I'd had a lucky escape.
Sorry, they asked you how much you wanted. You were within 2% of their top end, and they rejected you out of hand rather than a light be of negotiation?I once went for a sales role and was asked, after two lengthy interviews which went well, to name my price in terms of basic salary (bearing in mind we hadn't discussed OTE, car, benefits etc, so there was PLENTY of scope on both sides to tailor the package to be financially viable on either side). I knew the market well and named a price that was around the 80th percentile of the market range and offered justification.
Got rejected and told that, had I named a price which worked out to be 2% lower than I proposed, it'd have been a definite yes.
I'm not a big fan of dismissing things as 'someone else's fault', but I did, on this occasion, simply assume the hiring manager was a compete idiot and I'd had a lucky escape.
I think I agree with your conclusion. Possibly not just the hiring manager.
Sheepshanks said:
I'm sure there are examples of slam-dunk internal candiates who have lost out to an unexpectedly good external candidate though.
there have. I interviewed about two months ago (one internal candidate for whom the job description had basically been written, and one external candidate who looked really great on paper but whom we all assumed would struggle against the internal candidate).External guy blew the internal guy out of the water. He was amazing - the only thing the interanl guy scored above him was on the tech side (but we all agreed that the external guy would be able to pick up enough to get by). Everyhting else he scored strong 4's or 5's for each question (5 being top mark). Really annoyingly he's one of those guys that would make Brad Pitt feel insecure so all the women in the team (and a couple of the guys) were chuffed to bits.
Anyway it was rare that it happens and it must have been really hard for "internal Guy" to accept the knock back when everybody in the Dept assumed he'd easily get it.
I absolutely get this.
Any of my clients will tell you that I stress that it’s essential you meet the hirer prior to interview. And not just the hirer; walk the ground, chat to some staff and essentially, do your own due diligence.
I also haven’t hired if a candidate has not bothered to come and meet me to discuss the role and what I’m looking for. How can you possibly be sure it’s the right role for you if you haven’t investigated fully.
It’s essential. It’s even more essential at the higher end of the scale where personal relationships are key.
Any of my clients will tell you that I stress that it’s essential you meet the hirer prior to interview. And not just the hirer; walk the ground, chat to some staff and essentially, do your own due diligence.
I also haven’t hired if a candidate has not bothered to come and meet me to discuss the role and what I’m looking for. How can you possibly be sure it’s the right role for you if you haven’t investigated fully.
It’s essential. It’s even more essential at the higher end of the scale where personal relationships are key.
@Rog007
To be fair that’s why Director hirings tend to be 2 or more interviews on different days with different panel members and both formal and informal settings with Board as well as Leadership Team). You need to get an idea of the social/soft skills of the applicant and you can’t really risk a mistake.
To be fair that’s why Director hirings tend to be 2 or more interviews on different days with different panel members and both formal and informal settings with Board as well as Leadership Team). You need to get an idea of the social/soft skills of the applicant and you can’t really risk a mistake.
Countdown said:
@Rog007
To be fair that’s why Director hirings tend to be 2 or more interviews on different days with different panel members and both formal and informal settings with Board as well as Leadership Team). You need to get an idea of the social/soft skills of the applicant and you can’t really risk a mistake.
What risk though as you have 2 years to fire them for any reason at all bar discrimination, effectively a 2 year probationary period.To be fair that’s why Director hirings tend to be 2 or more interviews on different days with different panel members and both formal and informal settings with Board as well as Leadership Team). You need to get an idea of the social/soft skills of the applicant and you can’t really risk a mistake.
TX.
Some time ago... I was invited to go for an interview with a nearby company, unadvertised post, not applied for.
Nailed the interview.
Was invited for a follow up chat to meet the team and sort out stuff with HR. They asked what I wanted money wise. I said what I was on, (very unexciting, first stage above grad level) I said I wanted a bit to cover the extra commute, a bit to cover the fact the pension wasn't as good, and a bit so I actually had a pay rise. Wasnt at all greedy
They then withdrew giving 'didn't think I wanted to leave where I was currently working'. Not for less money, no pension and longer commute at least!
Nailed the interview.
Was invited for a follow up chat to meet the team and sort out stuff with HR. They asked what I wanted money wise. I said what I was on, (very unexciting, first stage above grad level) I said I wanted a bit to cover the extra commute, a bit to cover the fact the pension wasn't as good, and a bit so I actually had a pay rise. Wasnt at all greedy
They then withdrew giving 'didn't think I wanted to leave where I was currently working'. Not for less money, no pension and longer commute at least!
Terminator X said:
What risk though as you have 2 years to fire them for any reason at all bar discrimination, effectively a 2 year probationary period.
TX.
The risk is the time and effort invested in recruitment, induction, training. If they’re rubbish all that goes to waste and then you’re back at square one. So it’s better to invest extra time at the interview stage just to make sure TX.
rog007 said:
I absolutely get this.
Any of my clients will tell you that I stress that it’s essential you meet the hirer prior to interview. And not just the hirer; walk the ground, chat to some staff and essentially, do your own due diligence.
I also haven’t hired if a candidate has not bothered to come and meet me to discuss the role and what I’m looking for. How can you possibly be sure it’s the right role for you if you haven’t investigated fully.
It’s essential. It’s even more essential at the higher end of the scale where personal relationships are key.
Totally appreciate the POV, have to say it’s not something I’ve come across before at this level and I was always going to treat whatever the outcome was as a learning curve and it’s not a ‘mistake’ I’ll make again (even on the off chance!)Any of my clients will tell you that I stress that it’s essential you meet the hirer prior to interview. And not just the hirer; walk the ground, chat to some staff and essentially, do your own due diligence.
I also haven’t hired if a candidate has not bothered to come and meet me to discuss the role and what I’m looking for. How can you possibly be sure it’s the right role for you if you haven’t investigated fully.
It’s essential. It’s even more essential at the higher end of the scale where personal relationships are key.
Countdown said:
Terminator X said:
What risk though as you have 2 years to fire them for any reason at all bar discrimination, effectively a 2 year probationary period.
TX.
The risk is the time and effort invested in recruitment, induction, training. If they’re rubbish all that goes to waste and then you’re back at square one. So it’s better to invest extra time at the interview stage just to make sure TX.
some daft reasons there. ive had a few. had one google maps my address then emailed me to say in their opinion i would need to take 2 trains and a 15 mins walk at the other end to get to the office and in their experience that type of commute soon get tiresome.
only in the last few years have employers seemed to start looking at commutes. ive never known it before now. Yet for MDs managers supervisors CEOs its ok for them to have an hours commute every day but not a grunt like me? I know people that commute 4-5hrs a day so an hour is nothing.
my CV lays out all my experience so when I get an interview I feel great only to have an email afterwards telling me they are looking for somebody with more exposure to the areas concerned - yes but you did read my CV didnt you? Clearly not or if they did they just filled the numbers up by getting me in.waste of time. thats direct and agency. both as bad.
another was where the winning candidate had a book of business they could take with them to the company. nothing in the job advert for that as part of the criteria.
lots of goal post moving these days IMHO. its so hard to nail every single thing becuase they always pull something out of the bag that you think where have you got that from?
only in the last few years have employers seemed to start looking at commutes. ive never known it before now. Yet for MDs managers supervisors CEOs its ok for them to have an hours commute every day but not a grunt like me? I know people that commute 4-5hrs a day so an hour is nothing.
my CV lays out all my experience so when I get an interview I feel great only to have an email afterwards telling me they are looking for somebody with more exposure to the areas concerned - yes but you did read my CV didnt you? Clearly not or if they did they just filled the numbers up by getting me in.waste of time. thats direct and agency. both as bad.
another was where the winning candidate had a book of business they could take with them to the company. nothing in the job advert for that as part of the criteria.
lots of goal post moving these days IMHO. its so hard to nail every single thing becuase they always pull something out of the bag that you think where have you got that from?
Gassing Station | Jobs & Employment Matters | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff