Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
So I have been interviewing a lot lately. It seems that when we get around to the "when will a decision be made" question, inevitably they say something like "in a few days" or "next week". A few days go by and then a week goes by and nothing. I check back in and there are a myriad of excuses.
I know employers don't care how long it takes but don't they know that I have deadlines? (that's a joke).
But seriously, it does seem in today's world, many of the jobs are based a "decision by committee" mentality. Many of my interviews involve interviewing with panels and multiple decision-makers which makes it even more complex and leads to a longer process.
Oh well, in the meantime I just keep applying and going on new interviews. Have to keep the pipeline full.
Location: RI, MA, VT, WI, IL, CA, IN (that one sucked), KY
41,936 posts, read 36,974,024 times
Reputation: 40635
Well, sure, I don't see a problem with this.
This is only really a problem for employers when their indecision leads them losing high quality candidates. That does happen. Happens a lot in government.
Generally though, the private corps I've worked for, if there is a rock start applicant that they know they want and really want to have suddenly the process speeds up a great deal.
This is only really a problem for employers when their indecision leads them losing high quality candidates. That does happen. Happens a lot in government.
Generally though, the private corps I've worked for, if there is a rock start applicant that they know they want and really want to have suddenly the process speeds up a great deal.
Yep, I've seen multiple decision-makers who I know that I did well with say that a decision will be made shortly and that I was a strong candidate while others are more non-committal and say that it will be awhile which I take as that I didn't make as strong as an impression with. I'm sure there's a lot of back and forth behind the scenes as every decision-maker has their favorites.
I understand your frustration and I have also experienced that "back and forth" from HR and beating around the bush responses.
I'm a recruiter now and any chance I get, I try to be as upfront and honest with the candidate as I can with their status since I don't want them to go through the same BS I did.
I've been in this situation as well and it's frustrating. And you're right about the "decision by committee" mentality, the way I look at it, from a salesperson's perspective, hiring is just like any other capital expense (capex), it's the cost of human capital.
When I'm selling a product to an 'end-user', I'm not just selling to the low-level decision maker, I'm indirectly selling to his manager, and his manager's manager, and maybe even the CEO of the company before a decision is made. If the Hiring Manager signs off on the dotted line but the recruiter is the 'end-user' there maybe many other people between the two and even above the Hiring Manager that get in the way and put a wrench into the works. A consensus means that everyone has to be on-board, and considering internal politics, competing interests that exist within and across departments, and internal referrals that enable current employees to give someone else a job through the back door--It's no surprise that they're indecisive.
Remember that the new 'No' is simply ignoring you when requesting a simple update. Sometimes the update is the perennial 'there's is no update' or a call goes directly to voice-mail. Get used to it.
I've been in this situation as well and it's frustrating. And you're right about the "decision by committee" mentality, the way I look at it, from a salesperson's perspective, hiring is just like any other capital expense (capex), it's the cost of human capital.
When I'm selling a product to an 'end-user', I'm not just selling to the low-level decision maker, I'm indirectly selling to his manager, and his manager's manager, and maybe even the CEO of the company before a decision is made. If the Hiring Manager signs off on the dotted line but the recruiter is the 'end-user' there maybe many other people between the two and even above the Hiring Manager that get in the way and put a wrench into the works. A consensus means that everyone has to be on-board, and considering internal politics, competing interests that exist within and across departments, and internal referrals that enable current employees to give someone else a job through the back door--It's no surprise that they're indecisive.
Remember that the new 'No' is simply ignoring you when requesting a simple update. Sometimes the update is the perennial 'there's is no update' or a call goes directly to voice-mail. Get used to it.
Coming from a sales background, I get what you're saying. While the new "no" may be silence, once I invest my time and efforts in multiple interviews, I usually try to make the employer provide some sort of confirmation. It's a shame that in this day and age, you need to prompt people to have a little courtesy.
I understand your frustration and I have also experienced that "back and forth" from HR and beating around the bush responses.
I'm a recruiter now and any chance I get, I try to be as upfront and honest with the candidate as I can with their status since I don't want them to go through the same BS I did.
The problem is that the REAL answer is usually something you can't really disclose or it isn't to the benefit of the company to disclose. For example:
1) Budgeting issue, or financial forecasts have spooked those in charge and they want to see how things turn out before committing to bring someone new.
2) There is a rumored restructuring or potential new layoffs, so those hiring slow things down because they don't want to fire some just after they started.
3) There is a shakeup in the hiring office, maybe the hiring manager or his boss quit or transferred.
4) Maybe they lost a big client or lost a major bid, or a power struggle at the company.
5) Maybe you aren't the top candidate, but if they tell you that you might withdraw your candidacy.
6) Maybe they want to do more interviews, but it is hard to coordinate schedules as everyone already have full time jobs that are more pressing.
7) Maybe the big boss is just too busy, lazy, disorganized to sign the papers to authorize the hire.
In my experience, #7 was fairly common. They had a million things going on and hiring was low priority when they were reviewing contracts that could result in millions of dollars of business. Though #1, #5, and #6 were common too.
So many jobs have multiple candidates applying for them that most companies don't really see the need to make a timely decision on who to hire. They can sit back, wait to see which candidate's background check comes back the best and then continue to overwork the employees who they already have on staff until they decide.
If there wasn't a glut of potential employees on the market ( although not necessarily GOOD ones), most companies would get back to you in a more timely manner. The ones who didn't you could easily dismiss from consideration.
Location: East of Seattle since 1992, 615' Elevation, Zone 8b - originally from SF Bay Area
44,585 posts, read 81,206,701 times
Reputation: 57821
As a hiring manager I can tell you that we too are anxious to get the person hired and started, because if we didn't need them we wouldn't have announced the opening. Even with an effective and efficient HR staff, it takes time. After the last of the interviews, I will always make the decision that same day. The exception being the rare case that no one interviewed is acceptable and we re-announce, That happened once in the last 5 years. Normally I give my decision to HR and they proceed with the background and reference checks. That can take time if they have to leave messages and wait for the references to call back, and one or more is on vacation. Once the candidate has passed those checks, we call to make an offer. That can also take time, if the person requests a few days to decide, or there is negotiation on the salary and HR has to come back to me for approval. After the offer has been accepted and start date confirmed, we will call the other candidates that were interviewed. No one can predict how long the process will take. Most of the time it would be within one-two weeks of the last interview, but it could be 3-4 weeks.
My most recent experience has been with a company that I have had five interviews with. The last interview was with my potential boss's boss. He said that I was a "strong candidate" which I'm sure means very little and that they would make a decision on Monday (this past Monday).
Monday came and went and finally I called yesterday (Thursday) and left a message asking for an update. Nothing. This tells me that one of two things has happened. The first is that they're still discussing it since I met with several of the people I would be working with (high level people). Or they made an offer to another candidate and are waiting to see if that goes as planned.
Either way, Monday has come and gone and nothing has happened.
Of other concern is that this company seems to do things differently. They will not make a formal or contingent offer until the candidate passes a drug test and background check. That's odd to me. We haven't even had the money talk. The "big kahuna" said that they will "hint" at the figure but will not make a formal offer until all the checks and the drug test are complete.
So I guess this means that I'm releasing a lot of personal information including bodily fluids with no guarantee of a offer. They could still decide to pass even after I submit to "big brother" testing.
But given this information, this tells me that there is a really strong chance they are waiting for their first choice to go through the process.
BTW, my interviews with the other high-level people I would work with was very disjointed except with the highest level decision maker or as I described as the big kahuna. Our time together was quite long and he seemed to be really interested in getting to know me and explain expectations. The other executives were not as professional as I thought they would be and seemed to not really have a good questions prepared. They seemed more interested in talking about our love of dogs. I have no idea what this means but I am suspect.
Who knows. It's all just a big guessing game.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
