It’s that season again. Public schools are winding their academic year down while district administrators and principals are gearing up to hire teachers to fill vacancies they know they will have next year. In this activity, I’ve seen many bad practices that made the interviewer look unprofessional and made the applicant feel sub-human. Here are a few things that have happened in the last two weeks (not in my building, thankfully):
- Cutting interviews short due to personal appointments
- Applicants, who were promised building-level interviews at schools that had advertised vacancies, being turned away at the door with no explanation
- Making a hiring decision and then interviewing applicants when it was known the position was no longer available just to have a fall-back position — and not telling the applicant their chances were slim
- Promising to make a timely decision and then not doing so
- Making a hiring decision and failing to notify the candidates who were not chosen
- Sending applicants not chosen a curt you-didn’t-get-the-job letter — that HR probably wrote with the help of the corporate attorney — and nothing else
Potential employers do not have to expose themselves to a lawsuit to show sensitivity to applicants who are not chosen for a position. A Psychology Today article shares better practices when it comes to hiring and, specifically, how to inform those who were not hired so that they rebound from the process in good form and with their self-esteem intact. From providing procedural information about the decision-making process (yes, I know the legal perils of saying too much), to using the person’s name in the body of the letter, several emotionally sensitive strategies are discussed.
“Cut to the chase. Don't put off the bad news by starting the letter with a compassionate paragraph highlighting a candidate's good points. These "buffers" prepare a reader for good news and just make them feel worse when they scroll down and come to the real reason for the letter.”
There is great information here.
Psychology Today: The Fine Art of Rejection.
I had the lovely experience last year of having a series of visits to an office for a job position. The first visit was (without my knowledge ahead of time) NOT an interview but a series of aptitude tests. I had to come back after I got a call setting up the actual interview. The day of the actual interview, instead of lasting an hour, lasted four hours and went through three levels of interviewers (each the supervisor of the preceding).
After having spent a total of 6 hours of MY TIME at their offices, I received a form letter two weeks later from their corporate office (out of state) to inform me I was not chosen. Heck, by that time, I had already written them off since I'd heard nothing. However, despite all their claims to caring for the employees, it sure didn't show in their treating me as a number when I wasn't chosen.
All I asked for was a 2 minute phone call that let's me know I can go on with my job search without holding out because I thought I was a shoe-in.
I made sure that sentiment was voiced to my Realtor. Why? Well, he was the father-in-law of the third guy who interviewed me, the director of the department. I knew that my disappointment was going to be voiced to him. Of course, I'm only more glad I wasn't chosen because of the way they came off through that whole ordeal.
Posted by: Charles Martin | May 12, 2006 at 12:20 AM
I had applied for a position at a company I was working for. I thought that while the interviews weren't great, I couldn't have done too badly, and so I was waiting for some contact about whether I would get the job or not.
It turned out that I didn't, but I had to email the guy at HR to ask before I got a response that basically said, "Your career goals don't match with the position." I don't remember how long it was between the last interview and that email, but I apparently wasn't going to get any notice at all unless I had asked.
Posted by: GBGames | May 12, 2006 at 10:31 AM
Doing a bad job at interviewing and following up after the interviewing has got to be one of the worst mistakes a company can make. This is the first impression a person has of your organization, and unless you are absolutely sure you're never going to have any kind of business contact with them again, you've made a mistake by alienating them.
I had a friend who interviewed for a promotion at her job. She came in twice on her days off to be told--*after* she got there--that the interview was rescheduled. Then they took over a month to fill the position and then finally informed her that she did not get the job.
She was offended. I was offended for her!
Posted by: Mark Morgan | May 12, 2006 at 03:26 PM
I recently posted my resume online and was recruited instantly by a company HR rep for a 30 minute phone screen and subsequently a request to come to an on-site interview on two-days notice. That interview was with five people and lasted three hours. That day I received a call to come back for a second interview with one day's notice where I repeated the process with 4 different people over 2.5 hours. I then participated in a home office personality profile done by telephone (another hour). All told, I invested 7 hours of my time over a period of a week. I then received a request for references. My references where never called, however. Nor was I. I had to chase them down weeks later to get an e-mail stating that they selected another person. The HR person inserted a smily-face icon in the e-mail text! I politely thanked her but was fuming at the total disregard of my effort and feelings. as a manager, I would never allow this to happen during a hiring process. I look at it as the first exposure to a company culture and perhaps it is all for the best that I did not receive an offer.
Posted by: Manager M | December 18, 2007 at 11:44 AM