The most common reasons for NOT getting the Job?

DKLS

Prothet_of_Doom wrote: »

I'm contracting. I went as far as I wanted into a management position, hated it with a vengence, and I hated what I'd become, and the great thing about contracting is nobody ever asks you that.
The truth is that I want to be working on something that uses a fair proportion of my brain, needs at least some of the experience that I've got, forces me to learn new stuff, and pays well.

I love contracting double or triple the money and half the bollox and politics. Especially good when you drop lucky and can run 2-3 projects side by side. :cool:
To keep me sane, I need to work on challenging and interesting projects, and contracting stops me getting bored and has massively enhanced my skill set.

Prothet_of_Doom

DKLS wrote: »

I love contracting double or triple the money and half the bollox and politics. Especially good when you drop lucky and can run 2-3 projects side by side. :cool:
To keep me sane, I need to work on challenging and interesting projects, and contracting stops me getting bored and has massively enhanced my skill set.

Not double, once I factor in my away from home expences, and the risk of not having a contract, but definately worth 10/6th's so far, after expences taken out.

J_i_m

Gavin83 wrote: »

If you've had that many interviews and still haven't got a job your doing something wrong. Have a think about what that might be

Well ahead of you on that one, I've taken up interview skills workshops.

noelphobic

Takeaway_Addict wrote: »

Not always. If I feel someone is going to be bored as the work might be a large step down from their current/last job or they are just going to use the job as a stepping stone onto another job and only last a matter of months then there is no way I would employ them because I would have to go through the whole process again.

Would they get as far as an interview if that was the case? Would you not be able to glean that from their application form or CV?

makeyourdaddyproud

Takeaway_Addict wrote: »

Not always. If I feel someone is going to be bored as the work might be a large step down from their current/last job or they are just going to use the job as a stepping stone onto another job and only last a matter of months then there is no way I would employ them because I would have to go through the whole process again.

If I was prepared to use your job as a stepping stone, there is no way you will detect that in me. I will get the job, leave, and you will go through the process again.

That's because your job is, well, not good as the other one. Comprende?

Woolwich_Kim

thehappybutterfly wrote: »

Completely the opposite in my work place! We often use agency staff and they don't always get the permanent job even if they've been doing it for weeks.

Ive turned people down if I know they're just telling you what they think you want to hear.

Of course this does work the otherway too i.e. the temp has no chance at all even if all questions are answered perfectly. Ultimately in some organisations it's all political. If they want you, then they'll make sure you get it and vice versa.

J_i_m

Woolwich_Kim wrote: »

Of course this does work the otherway too i.e. the temp has no chance at all even if all questions are answered perfectly. Ultimately in some organisations it's all political. If they want you, then they'll make sure you get it and vice versa.

The advantage of being a temp though is that you do physically get the opportunity to display how you fit into existing team and to prove your capabilities etc. A temp who fits in well and does a good job is surely increasing their chance of getting the job permanently because they're a known quantity. I know situations where the temp has been promised the job before advert stage.

I've also attended an interview where the first thing they told me was that the vacancy was being currently covered by a temp and that they'd applied for it. Something which immediately made me feel to be on the back foot before I even started.

I do think "politics" play a major role in these things. Of-course recruiters are supposed to remain neutral and promote equal opportunity but in reality this has to be balanced with "needs of the business" which then gets confused with "conflicts of interest". And I believe it all becomes intertwined and murkier from there.

Now, I'm sure we'll get some experienced people in recruiting on here claiming to be entirely neutral and maybe they are largely so.

But there's also no deneying that is a culture of malipulation out there which flys in the face of equal opportunity or of what might seem "fair".

Within my organisation there has been a certain clique, of people who been effectively "gifted" or awarded roles without interview or that hadn't even been advertised, or else having been promised the job before even short-list stage. There's a faction which very much malipulates things to their own agenda.

Now, in a small private bussiness you might argue that is "par de course" but I currently work for the NHS and it's supposed to be an equal opportunities employer. In reality it very much isn't.

Ultimately a recruiter can decide to give/or not give someome a job for absolutely any reason they like, if they so wish they secretly decide to reject someone on grounds of perceived disability, they can chose the 3rd, 4th, 5th best interviewee simply because they didn't personally like the candidate who did best. As long as they make sure not to use any protected characteristic (i.e. age, race, gender, disability etc) for the official reason for rejection then there is no comeback.

But it does result in what is effectively un-fair practice and discrimination. It's just nigh on impossible to prove and hence police for it.

missymish

I recently went for an interview and didn't get it as I messed the test up could have kicked myself but had prepared myself for not getting it, however the people who interviewed me really liked me and said that another role would be coming up and to please reapply. So when it came around I applied and got an interview. Sailed through the test (as I knew what it would be so prepared myself!) sailed through the interview everything went really well, felt so positive, when I was told I didnt get the job I was GUTTED! when told why I couldn't believe it, it all came down to one question that another candidate sold themselves better on, what are your strengths, although I had some good answers the other candidate elaborated a bit more so to me all that means is gave them a bit more nonsense!

J_i_m

Some of the feedbacks I've had have suggested that I missed out on the narrowest of margins. I'm sure when recruitment say things like that they are trying to he diplomatic and to keep the rejected candidates spirits up.

But when you've had a succession of "near misses" it gets harder to feel positive about it. Frustration soon turns to demoralisation.

In my situation I sometimes feel the closer I get.. The further away I actually am.

El_Torro

Over the years the most common reason for not getting the job has been "We went with someone with more experience". I tend to interpret that as "We interviewed you because your CV looked good but when we met you we decided we didn't like you".

I'm currently contracting, doing a role that is being advertised as permanent. I've applied for the permanent job. I get on well with the team so I'm hoping that the fact that I'm already doing the job will seal the deal. Fingers crossed!