I was recently turned down for a position with an American company overseas for a management role following a six-month process and 32 interviews over the phone, during a domestic trip to their headquarters and a trip to the company’s site in central South America.
Combined, the two trips for interviews took eight full days of my time. My direct travel expenses were covered, but I had to take unpaid time off work. The icing on the cake was the silence when I got home and thanked them for their time, and more silence when I politely requested brief feedback on what was lacking in my candidacy. I was simply told by the internal recruiter that I did not get the offer, without any explanation.
While understanding that companies must manage risk in interactions with candidates and may have policies against providing feedback, from an HR perspective doesn’t blowing off a final round candidate carry far more risk of harm to the company? While seemingly not the best fit in the end, I was obviously a pretty good general match and might have considered other positions with the company or recommended it to similar colleagues, if not for the above. Instead, I am now inclined to never consider any position with the company and actively warn friends (in a narrow field) away from them.
Finally, 32 interviews seems to me to verge on the absurd. At what point do you see diminishing returns with the number of interviews in screening a candidate?
To keep reading, click here: Are Your Hiring Tactics Unethical?