Getting rejected for a promotion at work - how to respond?

lincroft1710

I've encountered several people who were excellent in their current role, went the extra mile, were a team player BUT really hadn't the qualities needed for the next step up

Jude57

lincroft1710 said:

I've encountered several people who were excellent in their current role, went the extra mile, were a team player BUT really hadn't the qualities needed for the next step up

Absolutely this. Management is a very different skill from hands-on technical ability. The qualities required often have nothing to do with technical skill and everything to do with collaborative leadership. I'm sure many would echo my experience that some of the best managers I've known were not the most technically gifted, but they knew how to get the best out of every member of the team.

I'd be wary of anyone who assumes a nefarious reason for a manager to be absent from an interview panel. They could have a million reasons for that, and the likelihood is that they had other, more pressing matters to attend to. Staff below that level have no way of knowing those reasons and no right to know them. Failing to see that bigger picture is something an aspiring manager would want to address.

I'd also be cautious about accepting at face value colleagues saying you're the best person for the job. They don't know the requirements of the role unless they've done it themselves so aren't equipped to make a reasoned assessment. And, really, are colleagues actually going to tell you to your family that you'd be a hopeless manager? An aspiring manager needs to learn how to filter out the fluff and seek opinions from experienced managers they admire, not shop floor colleagues who see good management very differently, from a perspective of what would suit them.

A final word on public sector recruitment on which, like @lincroft1710 I have some experience. External advertising is part of most public sector recruitment, even if a job is advertised only within the service nationally and not to the general public. The process is designed to be transparent, so that the possibility of nepotism is minimised, as well as increasing the potential talent pool from which to draw candidates. It doesn't always work because, as with any process with a human element, humans are fallible. In my experience, it works more often than not if followed properly, even when that has meant I didn't get a job I thought I was right for.

breaking_free

lincroft1710 said:

I've encountered several people who were excellent in their current role, went the extra mile, were a team player BUT really hadn't the qualities needed for the next step up

^ totally this. I was once hired for a temporary position and after several weeks was doing very well. So much so that when another newbie arrived, to my consternation I was put in charge of them (I am not cut from managerial cloth!).

After a few days a situation occurred where the newbie was doing something incorrectly and I was pulling a face, wondering how to mention it. Newbie noticed my facial contortions and asked if she was doing the task wrong. "Errr...yes", says I. "Well if I'm doing something wrong SPEAK UP!" 

I'd been there longer but there's no question which one of us should have been in charge! 

esj13

breaking_free said:

lincroft1710 said:

I've encountered several people who were excellent in their current role, went the extra mile, were a team player BUT really hadn't the qualities needed for the next step up

^ totally this. I was once hired for a temporary position and after several weeks was doing very well. So much so that when another newbie arrived, to my consternation I was put in charge of them (I am not cut from managerial cloth!).

After a few days a situation occurred where the newbie was doing something incorrectly and I was pulling a face, wondering how to mention it. Newbie noticed my facial contortions and asked if she was doing the task wrong. "Errr...yes", says I. "Well if I'm doing something wrong SPEAK UP!" 

I'd been there longer but there's no question which one of us should have been in charge! 

I can understand this. Sometimes people don’t feel comfortable to raise their concerns with people.
I have been given line management responsibilities and I have received positive feedback on my work and have had minimal supervision or intervention from my manager while doing so.
I have the skills and discretion to deal with sensitive issues and address areas of concern in an appropriate way, and let me tell you the staff I have been given on this workload certainly know how to push the boundaries so I have had opportunity to flex this “muscle” and all the while got positive feedback from my manager.
So it is certainly befuddling to me the situation I find myself in and I am feeling very put out at the moment.
I have a meeting to discuss it today so I’m intrigued to hear what they have to say.

wilfred30

esj13 said:

Elliott.T123 said:

Andy_L said:

Elliott.T123 said:

Ath_Wat said:

They don't take a job in such an inane organisation in the first place.

Unfortunately from my experience virtually all public sector jobs are like this. They cover themselves so heavily from any form of complaint by unsuccessful applicants that they do not allow interviewers to use common sense. I know instances in the NHS of staff applying for a promotion in a team they have worked in for 5+ years, are exceptional and everyone knows they would be perfect for the role, however on the day they were slightly off their game and didn't interview well and an external applicant did. Despite having had an informal off the record reference on the external applicant because on the scoring system they were better they got the job... and to no ones surprise they were awful.

Fully agree it is a terrible system, much better to use a bit of common sense and give the hiring manager some freedom, if they know someone is right then give them the job don't follow some tick box exercise. But unfortunately the world isn't full of common sense! 

A sensible interviewer could avoid that problem by only advertising the job internally first. 

If that were allowed yes, but again public sector often doesn't allow that. There are a million hoops to jump through and one of those is the job being advertised for a certain length of time externally.

It is allowed, as previous jobs here have been advertised internally only first, and filled that way as a way of ensuring redeployment to disadvantaged staff where there has been a restructure or redundancies. 
That being said, jobs usually go internally first and then externally where there has been insufficient interest/suitability from internal candidates.
This time, however, for whatever reason, it went externally only and I had to apply that way.
I have made my feelings known and my manager has scheduled in a meeting tomorrow, as they have been interviewing fro other roles, however I have noticed today they are absent from the panel, yet still working but said they were unable to make time for me today because of interviews.
It was also announced yesterday who got the job before I was even spoken to about feedback/support, which I am a bit miffed about and happen to know that the person who got the job knows the manager personally, so wonder if I should raise questions there.

I think the explanation is probably contained within that sentence.

It could've been because they didn't consider that there was a potential internal candidate who was able to meet all the criteria.

It would seem that your opinion that you were absolutely perfect for the role was not shared by your manager/the interviewing panel.

Indeed, the fact that it was only advertised externally and you applied for it anyway even though you were an internal candidate, might not have particularly gone in your favour.

Ath_Wat

esj13 said:

breaking_free said:

lincroft1710 said:

I've encountered several people who were excellent in their current role, went the extra mile, were a team player BUT really hadn't the qualities needed for the next step up

^ totally this. I was once hired for a temporary position and after several weeks was doing very well. So much so that when another newbie arrived, to my consternation I was put in charge of them (I am not cut from managerial cloth!).

After a few days a situation occurred where the newbie was doing something incorrectly and I was pulling a face, wondering how to mention it. Newbie noticed my facial contortions and asked if she was doing the task wrong. "Errr...yes", says I. "Well if I'm doing something wrong SPEAK UP!" 

I'd been there longer but there's no question which one of us should have been in charge! 

I can understand this. Sometimes people don’t feel comfortable to raise their concerns with people.
I have been given line management responsibilities and I have received positive feedback on my work and have had minimal supervision or intervention from my manager while doing so.
I have the skills and discretion to deal with sensitive issues and address areas of concern in an appropriate way, and let me tell you the staff I have been given on this workload certainly know how to push the boundaries so I have had opportunity to flex this “muscle” and all the while got positive feedback from my manager.
So it is certainly befuddling to me the situation I find myself in and I am feeling very put out at the moment.
I have a meeting to discuss it today so I’m intrigued to hear what they have to say.

All it is is that whoever is selecting for this job doesn't share your opinion of you.  You might disagree with them, and that's fine, but the fact that you find this mystifying is to be honest a bit of a red flag.  When this happens, and something like it happens to most people at some point, the normal reaction is just to assume they don't think you are as great as you think you are yourself and look for a company where you will be properly, in your own opinion, appreciated.

TELLIT01

Once the OP has had the conversation with the manager, they need to take on board whatever is said - whether they agree with it or not, and move on.  Getting all bitter and twisted about not being promoted isn't going to help.

Undervalued

wilfred30 said:

esj13 said:

Elliott.T123 said:

Andy_L said:

Elliott.T123 said:

Ath_Wat said:

They don't take a job in such an inane organisation in the first place.

Unfortunately from my experience virtually all public sector jobs are like this. They cover themselves so heavily from any form of complaint by unsuccessful applicants that they do not allow interviewers to use common sense. I know instances in the NHS of staff applying for a promotion in a team they have worked in for 5+ years, are exceptional and everyone knows they would be perfect for the role, however on the day they were slightly off their game and didn't interview well and an external applicant did. Despite having had an informal off the record reference on the external applicant because on the scoring system they were better they got the job... and to no ones surprise they were awful.

Fully agree it is a terrible system, much better to use a bit of common sense and give the hiring manager some freedom, if they know someone is right then give them the job don't follow some tick box exercise. But unfortunately the world isn't full of common sense! 

A sensible interviewer could avoid that problem by only advertising the job internally first. 

If that were allowed yes, but again public sector often doesn't allow that. There are a million hoops to jump through and one of those is the job being advertised for a certain length of time externally.

It is allowed, as previous jobs here have been advertised internally only first, and filled that way as a way of ensuring redeployment to disadvantaged staff where there has been a restructure or redundancies. 
That being said, jobs usually go internally first and then externally where there has been insufficient interest/suitability from internal candidates.
This time, however, for whatever reason, it went externally only and I had to apply that way.
I have made my feelings known and my manager has scheduled in a meeting tomorrow, as they have been interviewing fro other roles, however I have noticed today they are absent from the panel, yet still working but said they were unable to make time for me today because of interviews.
It was also announced yesterday who got the job before I was even spoken to about feedback/support, which I am a bit miffed about and happen to know that the person who got the job knows the manager personally, so wonder if I should raise questions there.

I think the explanation is probably contained within that sentence.

It could've been because they didn't consider that there was a potential internal candidate who was able to meet all the criteria.

It would seem that your opinion that you were absolutely perfect for the role was not shared by your manager/the interviewing panel.

Indeed, the fact that it was only advertised externally and you applied for it anyway even though you were an internal candidate, might not have particularly gone in your favour.

Exactly ^^^^^

abssorb

esj13 said:

I don't want to appear whiny or entitled 

You are a little bit. That is not how the world works.  

I'm afraid you do not get promoted for what you have done. You get promoted for what you are capable of doing in the future.
As the business finance world is obliged to point out:    "past performance is not indicative of future results"
I will often use that phrase in an interview, to remind candidates I want them to apply their anecdotes to possible future scenarios.

If I'm hiring a manager it's because I need management capability right now.  Someone with existing experience.  Someone who has done a team job exceptionally well doesn't make them a candidate for a manager's job, it makes them a candidate to enter a training program.

Best path is for you to ask what skills and behaviours are necessary for the manager role, and ask for a development path to achieve those skills.  Moaning will absolutely not help.

Undervalued

esj13 said:

.........
I don't want to appear whiny or entitled.......

I am sorry to be blunt but your posts in this thread come over as exactly that. Nothing suggests that you have taken anything even vaguely negative on-board.

I hope your meeting today was productive and hasn't cemented your position once and for all.