Hearing nothing back from interviews

thermionic

The more I think about it the less I think asking for feedback is a good idea at all. If you have a disaster of an interview you'll probably know why anyway and can learn from it. Otherwise, forget about it and concentrate on the next one.

Sporky

chrispy108 said:

Indeed, and perhaps gut feeling isn't quite the correct phrase, but when you're interviewing three graduates with identical CVs you're choosing based on the feeling you get in the interview, which is hard to explain.

The HR system had a score you gave each question, which then got added up across the interviewers, and the highest scorer got the job.

That's fair. I've only done a bit of recruitment and there was always a candidate who was obvious best fit for the person spec and job spec. I suspect it's not always that easy.

mart

thermionic said:

...
The best I got was "you were good but we offered the job to someone better". Yeah, thanks for that, helps a lot. The worst was "your CV didn't have the right experience". So, you only read my CV after interviewing me?

No wonder HR departments and employment agencies are universally despised.

In most of the interviews I've conducted lately, most of the candidates were appointable but there were more of them than we could employ. So for most of them it really was a case of being good, but not the best. We could tell them exactly how they weren't as good as the best candidates (and if they ask for feedback, we do), but I'm not sure that's very useful, since they're unlikely to be competing against the same people again. For candidates that are not appointable, I think it can be very helpful, but not otherwise.

In some cases gut feeling can come into the decision, but nobody would ever dare leave it like that - that gut feeling would have to be backed up by something legally defensible. This is partly because obeying the law generally leads to the best decision (e.g. stopping you from discarding the best candidate because she's a woman), but also because somebody may question it, and challenge the legality of the decision made. 

But despite trying scrupulously to stay within the law, I can very much relate to the reason @chrispy108 mentioned, that if someone challenges the decision then it can lead to a lot of time-consuming paperwork even when everything is legal and above board. The idea that "if you've done nothing wrong you've nothing to worry about" is rather hopelessly naive. These things can chew up a lot of time if nothing else - I've spent a solid day and a half of the last week dealing with exactly that sort of complaint, when there was no wrong-doing at all, just an outcome that somebody wasn't happy with.

And yes, HR departments are generally despised, but from what I've seen, they're also generally massively under-staffed, so the HR folk are running round like headless chickens trying to do the essentials, and I'm afraid that feedback to candidates is not an absolute essential. Making sure the paperwork is there so feedback can be provided, and lawsuits defended against, is more important.

My experience is in public sector; I have no idea how similar it would be in private sector organisations. 

mart

@Myranda: in case it's not clear from my post, if you haven't had any feedback, then ask for it. You should be able to get something helpful comments from them. 

DefaultM

My fiance applied for a job at one of the museums in Leeds and she got an interview.
After a week or so she hadn't heard anything so she logged in to an online account they'd given her and there was just a picture of a big green hand giving a thumbs down. Nothing else.
I've never seen anything like it.

musteatbrain

Which Uni? It's more likely lack of organisation, an under resourced process or a poor applicant tracking system that leads to no response rather than a lack of being bothered. Often everyone else thinks someone else has done it and they lose track. It's worth raising with the Uni. 

Hertz32

chrispy108 said:

The reason you get vague feedback is because there is only a vague answer.

The truth is, alot of the time, when you interview people it's just gut feeling that makes you agree on one candidate over the other, and that's not feedback anyone wants is it? So easier to say nothing.

"you were good but we offered the job to someone better" What else do you want them to say @thermionic ? That's the truth, you'd have been fine, but someone they felt was better showed up.

Sorry but that's absolutely untrue. Correct feedback upon the boarding process is not difficult to achieve. You can even template out a response! 
Businesses must be looking for candidates to meet certain criteria and an objective assessment of an individual's ability to meet those given criteria is by no means a difficult thing. 

If people want to read it, I'll copy and paste the board report given to me following my interview for the RAF as an example of how an objective feedback of a candidate is entirely achievable and highly valuable when done correctly? 
I'm reluctant to post it here unless people ask for it but feel free to ask for it in a PM and Ill copy it to you. Don't want to be accused of boastfulness or false humility. 

richardhomer

My recent job-hunting experience was piss-poor in terms of feedback - or even communicating their decision not to employ.

Whatever the perceived legal 'risks' to employers, it seems to me that manners/politeness/decency/call it what you will - has been lost from the process. 

There are few worse places to be in life than out of work - treating an applicant with any level of distain is an awful thing to do.

Bridgehouse

I once applied for a job at KPMG. Interview at Canary Wharf, big bosses the lot. 

About 2 weeks later I'd heard nothing so assumed it was a no, and moved on.

6 further weeks passed and someone from KPMG's HR department rang me to ask why I hadn't got back in touch. 

"Sorry?" I said, somewhat confused. "We offered you the job and you didn't reply - we wanted to know why"

"Er, no, I didn't get an offer at all..."

"Really?" Said the HR woman. "I'll go check on that.."

Anyway, 2 hours later I got a call back from her...

"Urm, we meant to send you an offer but the HR person dealing with the vacancy forgot, then went on holiday, then when they got back they 'filed' the offer and forgot about it. The department in question rang me up to find out when you were starting.. I don't suppose you still want it do you?"

Needless to say, I explained to her that if her HR department were that crap that the last thing I wanted to do was to work for them....

mart

Hertz32 said:
.... 

Businesses must be looking for candidates to meet certain criteria and an objective assessment of an individual's ability to meet those given criteria is by no means a difficult thing. 
...

Even supposing the criteria are such that one can make an objective assessment of whether or not these are met, what do you do when five candidates meet all the criteria but there's only one job?

in reality the criteria are rarely so clear cut, and you may have one candidate who clearly meets one criteria but is borderline on another, and another candidate who is borderline on the first but meets the other. You could reject both, or make a judgement of which candidate is "closer" or which criterion is more important. All are in the subjective realm.

I'm really glad you felt the RAF recruitment process worked so well for you, but don't extrapolate too much from that.

In every interview process I've done this past year it's been hours of interviews followed by hours of painful argument among the committee as to who should be offered the job, and that's despite everybody working from a grading against the same criteria.

fob

Do you know for a fact that you don't have the job? i.e. have the posts been filled?

If these are jobs that are, in part, preparation for the 'real' job market then they might be trying to foster a proactive approach. As has been suggested a few times, asking for feedback is essential; keep an open mind and you might learn something that will be genuinely useful in your next interview (or 20).

FreddieVanHalen

I always give people feedback on the things they did well and the things they could have improved from interviews.

Maybe you can't always say why exactly someone else was preferred, sometimes it's just chemistry, but it is surely possible and respectful for a competent interviewer to give some objective and useful feedback to someone who made the effort to come to an interview?

Myranda

Chalky said:

Which part of "You weren't the best candidate" is the hard bit? Seriously. You didn't impress them enough with your experience, skills and character. That's the truth, right there. Deal with it and stop blaming other people for your failure.

So in order to have better luck in the next one, just "be better" ... better at which bit of the interview? or perhaps better references? Better looking? Taller? Nicer? What?

Do you know what feedback is? Are you just rude or actually ignorant of the things you're talking about AND rude?

The two points are a) if you're told you haven't gotten the job you know you need to keep looking - which to some might be important and b) feedback helps you improve for next time.

fob said:

Do you know for a fact that you don't have the job? i.e. have the posts been filled?

If these are jobs that are, in part, preparation for the 'real' job market then they might be trying to foster a proactive approach. As has been suggested a few times, asking for feedback is essential; keep an open mind and you might learn something that will be genuinely useful in your next interview (or 20).

The department offers part time contracts for 1 year at a time, so at the beginning of each year they lose 11 part timers and are down to the 3 full time staff only to cover two floors ... given how desperate they are to cover I can't see them waiting very long. Emails were sent to the student email accounts on Friday. I know 3 of the 11 positions are filled for fact, I doubt they decided to let the other 8 stew for a bit

I am, sorry as I am to admit it, resigned to not having the job - still, I waited a year for this job, what's another two more.

Mkjackary

When I worked temp in a student resources of a massive college I was actually part of (somewhat) the process of hiring a new person.

They don't go for the cleverest, the best qualified, they went for who they felt would work best in that team.
As the whole team saw all the candidates waiting in reception, we all got to give our opinion on each one, and that made an impact.

Silly that is. I spent weeks preparing for my last interview, months even. Yet for certain positions simply the way you look/how you dress can instantly rule you out, before you have even said a word.

It isn't always that there was someone better than you, it might have been that there was someone who would have worked better in their team, someone who looked and sounded more like the people already there. Maybe they needed to make up their diversity quotas/already had the person in mind and they only had the interviews as it was part of the process that had to happen. In which case you never had a chance.

Regardless, I would call them up and ask what happened and why haven't you heard anything, ask why they picked someone else/why they didn't pick you.

viz

fob said:

If these are jobs that are, in part, preparation for the 'real' job market then they might be trying to foster a proactive approach. 

Whenever I have to go to an interview I always send someone else in my place, do demonstrate my ability to delegate.

TheBlueWolf

I can think of one job interview where I'm happy I got the job against the "gut feeling" of the interviewees.

It was for a supermarket who were having a recruitment drive, so various jobs were on offer, along with the warehouse job I was after. There was one of those group activity thing, and my "group" let me bomb, David Brent style, doing the presentation. The consensus was not to offer me a job but two guys convinced the rest of the interviewers that I was ( rightly ) ideal for counting stuff, moving heavy things and driving a fork lift truck. 

Getting back on topic, if you haven't heard back, contact them

mart

Mkjackary said:

.... Maybe they needed to make up their diversity quotas/already had the person in mind and they only had the interviews as it was part of the process that had to happen. ....

I totally agree with everything else you've said, but no sane recruitment panel would choose someone to "make up their diversity quotas" - that is positive discrimination, which is illegal. 

But it often seems to happen that the panel already had someone in mind, and knows exactly how they'd fit the role. You'd have to be very strong to overcome that, especially if the role was custom created specifically for them.

Chalky

 I've been interviewed maybe 30 times and interviewed others at least double that number. I read the CVs as they come in, so if someone gets to my interview then they are a good candidate for the job, unless their CV is a lie. As an interviewer, my job is to corroborate and expand on the CV, give the interviewee the chance to relate their skills and experience to my walkthrough of the role, and provide the situation for the interviewee's character to shine through.  I give feedback as we go through the interview.

I am not the interviewee's life coach, analyst or parent. It is not my job to nurture their career, give them guidance for their future, or provide emotional support for their disappointment. Unless they are an internal candidate of course - I've often followed up with training, coaching and mentoring because I do have an obligation to help their development.

Too many external candidates think that giving them the opportunity for an interview - something for which other applicants would be delighted to take their place - entitles them to detailed personal analysis and guidance. When the truth is, some one else beat them. The fact that you NEED feedback is probably connected to why you failed to get the job.

stimpsonslostson

Mkjackary said:

They don't go for the cleverest, the best qualified, they went for who they felt would work best in that team.

When I've done interviewing this is often my approach. I've never been involved in the selection process- as team leader (but not a manager) I know that anyone attending interview is qualified to be there, so I'm looking for someone who I can spend 7-8hrs a day with.
We often provide feedback & have said on occasion that another candidate simply "better at interview", we DO try to be constructive with it though and offer what advice we can. 

On the other hand I'm job hunting at present & have had very variable experiences when looking for feedback. 
One didn't know! "you look like a good candidate, but I guess there was someone stronger"
Another admitted there was an internal candidate for the job (& the advert was a box ticking exercise!)
The worst was the NHS who said it could be "up to 3 months before we get around to short listing the job- we're testing the market". So I COULD hear back eventually. 

Myranda

Chalky said:

 I've been interviewed maybe 30 times and interviewed others at least double that number. I read the CVs as they come in, so if someone gets to my interview then they are a good candidate for the job, unless their CV is a lie. As an interviewer, my job is to corroborate and expand on the CV, give the interviewee the chance to relate their skills and experience to my walkthrough of the role, and provide the situation for the interviewee's character to shine through.  I give feedback as we go through the interview.

I am not the interviewee's life coach, analyst or parent. It is not my job to nurture their career, give them guidance for their future, or provide emotional support for their disappointment. Unless they are an internal candidate of course - I've often followed up with training, coaching and mentoring because I do have an obligation to help their development.

Too many external candidates think that giving them the opportunity for an interview - something for which other applicants would be delighted to take their place - entitles them to detailed personal analysis and guidance. When the truth is, some one else beat them. The fact that you NEED feedback is probably connected to why you failed to get the job.

You really are a total fuckwit aren't you.

This is the university I'm paying near £10000 a year for an education in the world of IT employment... and you don't think there's a similar obligation for them to help my development? Words fail me that you cannot see that. You feel an obligation to someone paid to be there, but think somehow there's no obligation for someone who is PAYING to be there... 

And feedback doesn't have to be a 50,000 word dissertation, a couple of sentences in an email at most would be enough. Given that 99.99999999999999% of uni students have no work experience in IT helpdesk support it seems highly f***ing unlikely that it's because anyone was more experienced, given that we're here to GET qualifications it's highly unlikely there were more qualified people... so just perhaps, it was something in my interview technique, body language etc that scuppered me - so perhaps it's something I NEED TO KNOW FOR THE FUTURE WHICH IS WHAT THE UNI IS FOR YOU FUCKING CRETIN. Is that clear enough as an explanation of what I might be thinking?