Manager saw my Teams message - AIBU

Cmon Now. You don’t actually believe that do your? Yes they gave the job to the person several rungs above the op simply as they answered questions better.

cmon. Apply some critical thinking.

This thread just proves how bs interviews are. They know op would be great at the job and they hired someone else because that person was better at... answering questions. Ridiculous

Hi OP

I hear exactly what you are saying & I agree. I have a few things to say.

Firstly, I absolute loathe the entire premise of interviews. They are all about performing, and I’m not interested in whether or not people can perform, on demand. It’s fake and means absolutely nothing. I’m interested in how good they are at their job, and if they’re competent. Anyone can lie in an interview, and they do. Your track record will tell me what you’re capable of, not an interview. I’ve seen far too many bullshitters succeed at interviews, while they’re appalling at the actual job. Meanwhile, people who are excellent get overlooked simply because they can’t or won’t perform.

Secondly, interviews are one-size-fits-all, and consequently, only certain types of people excel at interviews. People that are good at talking shit or ‘performing’. Interviews as they are currently designed are a horrendous way of filling positions. One-size-fits-all just doesn’t work because it doesn’t find the best people and quite frankly it’s lazy and unimaginative.

Sadly, ‘the interview’ represents everything that is wrong with corporate UK. If people want to pretend and tell themselves this system means the best person gets the job then leave them to their delusions.

We do very technical jobs and our questions are very targeted around specific scenarios and gauge their knowledge and experience, but I understand that may not be the case for all organisations.

Where I work the interview goes on a points system, if someone scores more points than you regardless of whether they want you or someone else to get the job they have to give it to the person who interviewed best. You should have listened to their feedback and practiced your interview skills. It literally all comes down to the interview

Of course I wouldn't rather hire someone that is not capable, what a silly statement, but if that candidate scores higher, you have to. Surely you can't fail to see that?

'Within the organisation' - so more than likely mostly to HR then.

@DontSetYourselfOnFireToKeepOthersWarm

I meant that the other candidate was probably just as well known to the interviewers and senior management as OP is.

Of course it's speculation but two internal candidates are probably just as well known within the organisation as the other. It's not like one was external and a complete unknown gamble.

There are plenty of people in my company I have never met and would not even recognise their name.

'Probably just as well known' is as much a guess and no more likely to be true than me saying they were 'unknown'. Unless you mean 'known to HR', which doesn't really count.

Exactly, and just proves how scoring interviews just doesn’t work.

This is exactly why interviews are just daft!

Fancy having a loyal and hardworking employee who fails to pass some bullshit arbitrary process to tick some HR boxes on the day (because let’s face it, that is all HR really is) and instead pick someone totally unknown who ‘interviews better’ (ticks more boxes).

But in this scenario, the other person wasn't a "total unknown" - they were an internal candidate from another department.

So, probably just as well known as OP and just happened to interview better on the day.

YABU. You didn’t score well enough to earn the job and someone else did. That is obviously how they progress applications at the company and you’d know this surely? Did you ask? It seems they made it clear they KNOW you’re a good fit, but you didn’t work the interview in your favour as well as the other candidate.

To then turn it around and put it down to a popularity contest sounds bitter. And to do so via a work communications system is extremely silly. Your boss is likely disappointed in you.

Glad to hear it.

Also having been a hiring manager it is very much a box ticking exercise - so you can’t only give it based on who you know. If a candidate knock it out of the park (or bombs) you can’t ignore that

This is very true. I only write on Teams what I wouldn’t mind being shared with my manager. I switch to WhatsApp for the goss 😂

OP I think you should go for it. I went for a promotion in a team we work closely with. Didn’t get it, the hiring manager hired her former colleague. Didn’t let it phase me and I got the next one. I got useful feedback from the first one which helped.

So many HR people and middle managers on this thread showing just how HR only exists for HR’s sake

I'm not HR or a middle manager 🤷‍♀️

The user yo uquotes is right- it's a tick a box activity, not who is suited for the job. And let's face it, nepotism is widespread and it's fairly easy to evidence someone scored more than someone else if you want to.
I once went to an interview against 7 other people, we all knew in the first 5 minutes who would get the job and sure enough they did. They were earmakred for the job and the rest of us were invited in case they dont take it I guess.
Telling people the interviewing process is fair if a blatant lie- sometimes it may be, but it's easy to skew it and then give feedback along the lines "You need to do more networking".

Who makes the rules though? It’s HR isn’t it.

I'm not hR and there are decent and bad HR just like any HR etc

To interview fairly they must abide by the rules.

I was on a few interview pannels, the most junior person there as the manger felt it important to inc my grade as most of use had as much knowldge as almost anyone in the dept - many were unhappy - one temp qualified person did not get the job they kicked up a stink and called us in one, by one re interview process - as it was conducted fairly, the temp did not get the job and was offered another contract - he decided to leave

Interviews have to be fair but I understand where you are coming from

Hi

Tips time and it worked for me.

Many years ago, around 35 years I was on a temp contract and there was a vacancy - the job was so sort after in the social services department, in general chat in a team meeting someone asked if many had applied and was a good calibre of people - the response, yes and yes. It transpired over 150 apps and 30 interviewed

(I had applied for other osts in NHS and soc services but started coming 3r and second and twice I was beaten by someone alrealy in the department by temp contract

Tip Time = Seek if possible a mock interview from people not involved in the interview. Look at the shortlisting criteria and the job app as it offers details on what you may be asked and what the shortlisting criteria is. Take in bullet point concise notes and ask if you can refer to them and most will say yes. Treat the panel as clowns ie not those you work with bet meeting some people for the first time who dont know you - ask for a moment's thinking time - ask them to repat the question as I often forgot what was asked.

I was the first to score 100 out 100 points.

This was years ago and never had an interview since other than one to one's for pay scale rises

It may be different in the private sector but i have never worked in it and even soc services/nhs interviews may have changed

Initially, I could not even get an interview

it hurts when you dont get the job and you have been there for a while, but there is always another day

If anyone is lol at you, trust me they are nasty people

Revision for interview, concentrate on whats in the application forms, job spec and if you don't know be honest - towards the end when u r asked if you want to add anything - you may want to add a bit more and just tell them you get really nervous at interviews

Many thanks

So many HR people and middle managers on this thread showing just how HR only exists for HR’s sake and why the whole ‘failing upwards’ into management is just so totally true in most cases.

Fancy having a loyal and hardworking employee who fails to pass some bullshit arbitrary process to tick some HR boxes on the day (because let’s face it, that is all HR really is) and instead pick someone totally unknown who ‘interviews better’ (ticks more boxes). No wonder UK productivity is among the worst in the western world.

I was supportive until I read the "throw a paddy", please don't ever say that again. It is very offensive.

Think its fairly standard practice these days that all candidates are asked the exact same questions which are scored- highest score gets the job. This means there is evidence if there are any accusations of bias.
It sounds like your LM wanted to give you the job but the other person scored higher during the interview. It does suck if your not great under interview conditions but it does mean interview panels are “fair” to all. Hence the comments about knowing you could do the job- likelihood you would have been the preferred choice but their hands were tied.

Years ago my manager was interviewing for a new member of staff- there was 1 person who probably would have fitted perfectly into our team however they hadn’t had much notice for the interview so missed out to someone else who was better prepared by a few points. Person who got the job didn’t give my manager a good vibe but answered the questions well- he was right they were a nightmare to work with……..

Having interviewed internal candidates for a senior role, we have a score sheet. Who ever scores the highest gets the job. If it was tied we would go with a gut feeling. I have to say normally everyone scores in the same order as the rest of the panel. So it's not about someone having a personal preference.

Only once have I interviewed someone then once they have left, a panel member has said "that was pure BS, they have never done the things they said they have" but tbh they came across badly anyway.