January 2, 2012
Marketing PR
To everyone who ever conducts job interviews...
I have run into a couple of colleagues lately who, after they were interviewed for a position, did not hear back from the potential employer (no less hear back from them in a timely manner). I believe the folks who told me, but I find such treatment unimaginable.
If you're guilty of this offense, give me a moment (I can tell you the truth because I'm not in the market).
What I want to say is this: No matter who you interview, if someone has gone to the trouble of coming to shake your hand and tell you about themselves with the understanding that you might hire them, you are REQUIRED by any measurement of human decency to contact them in a timely manner and to give them a status of the process.
Maybe you're still considering them, maybe you've decided not to hire anyone, maybe you hired someone else, or maybe you haven't made a decision in the days since you spoke with them — the point is you OWE that person a thank you and an update — in writing or by phone. Period.
It doesn't matter if you're the CEO of a publicly traded corporation or the manager of a small business, you need to build a timely, meaningful response into your hiring process. If you delegate the responsibility to others and you're not clear if and how they follow up, you are equally at fault if it's not getting done. (It is not surprising that many of the most powerful people I've dealt in my career are also some of the most cognizant of other people's feelings — that's one reason they got to where they are.)
Disagree? I'd love to hear your thoughts. I just hate to think that anyone who has the wherewithal to hire someone else needs to be reminded to "do as you would be done by".
The balance? If you are seeking a job, don't apply if you're not qualified. It is always amazing the deep "unrelated" resume flow that stems from almost any job posting. The effort to sort these "candidates" really takes away from follow-up time with more qualified interviewees. This is not a valid excuse for lack of follow up but is also the reality of hiring.
Posted by: Dave Shaver | January 2, 2012 9:56 PM
I can appreciate that Dave. Let me be clear though, I said, "If someone has gone to the trouble of coming to shake your hand and tell you about themselves with the understanding that you might hire them". That would preclude people who were clearly unqualified and who you would not interview.
Posted by: chuck
|
January 2, 2012 10:18 PM
At the risk of being repetitive: "The effort to sort these "candidates" really takes away from follow-up time with more qualified interviewees."
Meaning that if I can dedicate 200 man hours to finding a new employee, having higher sorting cost on the front end takes away from graceful follow-up for those that interview but are not made an offer. It also takes away from other aspects of the search process such as deeper, more personal interviews.
Again, I happen to agree with you that anyone who interviews deserves a final follow up if they are no longer being considered. At my company we will try to close the loop with everyone, even those whom have just received a phone screen.
My broader point: It takes two parties and both must be professional. IMO hard to talk about only half the equation.
Posted by: Dave Shaver | January 10, 2012 7:51 PM