Anyone been in a situation where you didn't get the job, but nobody was hired?

Predaleko1984

I've just had the fate of "double disappointment" of failing to get two jobs - one I wasn't too bothered about, as it seemed a bit of a unprofessional company and the other, it was a taxing interview but I felt I sold it the way I could.

However with the latter, NOBODY got the job. Has this ever happened to anyone before? It just seems a bit strange and shows that it was a hard role to get into.

xbrenx

I used to be Assistant Manager in a shop and when they were looking for my replacement, of the candidates they chose to interview, more than 10 I believe, none of them were hired. It just meant they kept on looking.

Surely it's better to get wait for the right person than to settle on the best of that particular bunch.

Tigsteroonie

There's a very senior position where I work that has been hiring for well over a year now, every couple of months they interview people, but still haven't found whatever it is they are looking for ...

The fact that it leaves the rest of us without guidance/direction/representation doesn't seem to be an concern.

Predaleko1984

Fascinating - and I can understand why they would want someone perfect, as opposed to the best of a very poor bunch especially in management roles as you need the right people and someone with the right experience.

To be fair, the man who found me the job and got me the interview did say, they were more looking towards a very seasoned admin person e.g someone who has always been involved with admin and had senior positions, so to get this far is an achievement.

I was the one who posted about re-training, to be fair if I don't get anything by August, I will re-train. It's got to the point where it's all or nothing now.

ElefantEd

I've been in the situation where we haven't hired anyone from a batch of interviewees, and have re-advertised because none of the candidates was really suitable for the role. A decision taken with extreme reluctance as having to go through the whole process again is a pain in the fundamentals!

TELLIT01

Definitely better to re-advertise a job than to take on the least bad of the people previously interviewed.

mattcanary

Predaleko1984 wrote: »

Fascinating - and I can understand why they would want someone perfect, as opposed to the best of a very poor bunch especially in management roles as you need the right people and someone with the right experience.

To be fair, the man who found me the job and got me the interview did say, they were more looking towards a very seasoned admin person e.g someone who has always been involved with admin and had senior positions, so to get this far is an achievement.

I was the one who posted about re-training, to be fair if I don't get anything by August, I will re-train. It's got to the point where it's all or nothing now.

Ie: they want the perfect option because they are too lazy to put in any work themselves once they have hired their "perfect" employee.

mattcanary

ElefantEd wrote: »

I've been in the situation where we haven't hired anyone from a batch of interviewees, and have re-advertised because none of the candidates was really suitable for the role. A decision taken with extreme reluctance as having to go through the whole process again is a pain in the fundamentals!

Why would you think you will get any " better" candidates if you advertise again?
Unless you advertise in a different way or in different places than the first time.

sangie595

mattcanary wrote: »

Why would you think you will get any " better" candidates if you advertise again?
Unless you advertise in a different way or in different places than the first time.

Because that is exactly what we decided to do! It has absolutely nothing to do with wanting the perfect person for the job "because they are too lazy to put in any work themselves". We want the right person with the right necessary skill set and the right aptitude - which includes being able to learn things that are needed.

Your responses here suggest that you have never been involved in any form of recruitment. Taking the best of a bunch who do not fit the bill simply means that we end up with staff that we don't feel will be able to do the job and who cost us more in the long run - because they don't stay, or we don't keep them, and we end up recruiting again anyway. It is not fair to candidates, and it is not fair to our service and the people who depend on it, to take people who aren't right.

mattcanary

sangie595 wrote: »

Because that is exactly what we decided to do! It has absolutely nothing to do with wanting the perfect person for the job "because they are too lazy to put in any work themselves". We want the right person with the right necessary skill set and the right aptitude - which includes being able to learn things that are needed.

Your responses here suggest that you have never been involved in any form of recruitment. Taking the best of a bunch who do not fit the bill simply means that we end up with staff that we don't feel will be able to do the job and who cost us more in the long run - because they don't stay, or we don't keep them, and we end up recruiting again anyway. It is not fair to candidates, and it is not fair to our service and the people who depend on it, to take people who aren't right.

It is easy for a company to say they can't find capable staff, when it would perhaps sometimes be better to look at why already capable candidates don't apply for the job, or why the company doesn;t seem to consider that an imperfect candidate (but one with potential) cannot develop with the company.

Anyway, my main point is why would there be a dramatic change in the type of person that applies for the job the second time it is advertised?
Otherwise isn;t it a case of - why should you expect to get a different result if you do the same thing constantly?

NewShadow

We're on 6 months for two senior posts - about as senior as you can get in the specific profession.

As others have said, we've gone out for application, extended the deadlines, held the first round of interviews, tweaked the package and gone back out for application, and now gone to headhunters.

Not because the applicants we had weren't great people, but because they weren't the right person.