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.
Why are great internal candidates that interview for a position sometimes passed over for an outside candidate that has less experience and will require a lot more training? I know a lot of people say it’s salary but I know someone who was making less than the outside candidate they hired.
Moderator note: Two threads on essentially the same topic have been merged into this one thread. If any posts seem redundant or out of order, that is the reason.
Last edited by PJSaturn; 04-11-2018 at 02:22 PM..
Reason: Merged threads.
Why are great internal candidates that interview for a position sometimes passed over for an outside candidate that has less experience and will require a lot more training? I know a lot of people say it’s salary but I know someone who was making less than the outside candidate they hired.
The only person who can answer that question is the one who made the decision.
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
We have specific salary ranges for every position, so it makes no difference whether inside or outside. Besides, as a hiring manager I want the best person, and don't care about saving money on salary. Many managers will take a less qualified internal person because it takes less training. When I pass up an internal person and go outside it's either because the
outside person is better qualified and a better fit or am aware of some reason(s) that the inside person could be a problem in the future. One disadvantage for an internal candidate is that the hiring manager can talk to the current manager/supervisor. Sometimes that can also work to their advantage, when the current manager gives a "stretched" positive review just to get rid of the person. Just in my group I have hired 6 people in the last few years. Of those, 3 were internal promotions, 3 outside.
A friend who is an in-house recruiter revealed the dirty secret that the recruiters have a perverse incentive to bring someone in from the outside since that helps the recruiters’ numbers. An internal transfer does not help the numbers. Maybe it’s not that way everywhere, but it is at her employer and I have a feeling that’s the way it works at my employer.
Why are great internal candidates that interview for a position sometimes passed over for an outside candidate that has less experience and will require a lot more training?
The answer is simple: because they are better candidates.
There have been several times in my experience wherein an internal candidate with experience complained to me how bitter and resentful they were that an alternative got the job. In reality though, after having to work with them and getting to know them, it became clear how limited their skills were.
They really struggled with more abstract parts of the job. They would also have an issue with taking responsibility, and avoided learning about the company or making meaningful relationships. Sometimes they would have a loose mouth. They didn't have the skills necessary to proceed and did not realize it.
So the company did the right thing by hiring someone brand new.
There's always the problem, too, of the awkwardness when a person who was your "coworker" suddenly becomes your "boss". Some companies hire from outside just to avoid that problem.
Is recently-advanced Sue, who is super good friends with Mary outside work going to give Mary an unbiased job evaluation? Is Bob, who is the new department head and always felt that Tom is a slacker going to be a little harder on him than his other direct reports? Are Mark, Chris and Ava, who always ate lunch with Betty, going to be resentful when Betty, their new supervisor, tells them they're taking too much time for lunch? In an ideal world, no problemo....in the real world, problemo.
In the past I thought it was a slap in the face when management went outside, but after working in a bad environment...I see why it's often necessary. There was a situation where a manager was late opening the office and nobody else knew what was going on. A line employee (HER direct report, to make matters worse) text her to figure out what was going on and told everyone. I was floored (and so was a contracting supervisor). I would have never done that in front of peers even if my supervisor and I had that type of relationship. But some people have no concept of professional boundaries. Sometimes hiring outside is necessary so there's no baggage. It takes a very professional manager promoting a very professional subordinate to make it work otherwise.
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.
