Didn’t get job

The same thing happened to me - I was told before the interview that the job would go to the person who gave the best answers to the interview questions on the day and that me working the role already did not guarantee me getting it. The job went to someone else, they said was a close call between me and the other person but their answers to a couple of the questions were better than mine.

Twenty years ago you would have just been given a permanent contract and that would have been that but now employers have to be seen to give everyone who wants the job an equal chance of getting it which means advertising it and interviewing all the suitable candidates - political correctness.

I wouldn’t say your Manager lead you on, it’s normally more than one person’s decision to make, I was interviewed by my Manager but also someone from HR at Head Office who didn’t know me and it was a joint decision between the two of them. Of course you think the person who got the job is rubbish at it, you’ve been doing the job for a year and they have just started. You are also feeling bitter that you didn’t get the job which is clouding your judgement.

Lose the negativity, starting thinking positively and put all your focus and energy into finding a new role. You are not getting this job now, time to accept that and move on. There is a better job out there for you - I ended up getting another job earning much more money than the job I didn’t get, better location and less hours.

Was the minor issue related to your interview performance, or something related to the actual job you have been doing for a year?

If it is the latter, and they didn't raise this issue/provide feedback with you at the point that it occurred so you could resolve the issue, they are being completely out of order. All feedback should be timely and if they hadn't previously raised it, how would you know that there was a problem?

So sorry OP but turn this round and into an opportunity to start looking elsewhere. You deserve a permanent position which gives you benefits. Contracted hours only from here on.

I’d find it very hard to help them. I’d have to work up a series of standards - first is I do my work first. ‘I’d love to but have a lot to do if I want to leave on time’ second is I’d leave on time. 3rd is a set of replies to basically say no professionally ‘oh that is just the way I worked out, I think it’s really individual and you’ll work out what suits you best when you look into it!’

That’s really shit op, I’m sorry. If that was me I’d leave - wouldn’t be able to come back from that myself. Also, presumably they factored in that you might leave if you didn’t get the job, and still didn’t appoint so they can’t be that keen to keep you. I’d try for more feedback from the hiring manager, although you not get anywhere, but what was the deciding factor for them. As you say, I’d far rather take someone who I know can do the role, than risk an unknown, so they must clearly feel this person is worth the risk. Good luck with getting useful feedback, and getting a new role if you decide to move on.

My employer gave a job to a woman who on paper and at the interview scored very well & was articulate. However, she failed her probation after having it extended because she couldn't do the job. She talked a very good interview but that was all she could do, it was just bullshit.

It can be upsetting. I was once passed over for promotion for some spurious reasons, and the shock when I resigned a few weeks later was bizarre. Onwards to something better is always the way OP, you are not valued enough.

I got feedback (after requesting it) and it was just a minor issue that I’ve already resolved. In other words, something they could have raised ages ago but never did.
It would be good to understand this more; was the feedback related to something from doing your job? Was it a specific error, and why do they seem to think it was more significant than you do?

I remember that. Being asked to go onto a permanent contract. It is a far wiser recruitment process: witness someone doing a job well, getting on with current team versus judge them by how they answer a STAR question.

It's the manager's role to onboard a new recruit and not yours so you should redirect queries their way. If asked, just say that you haven't finished the task you're on so can't do it. However, maybe they could as part of the onboarding process & their duties as the new recruit's line manager.

Send your CV to as many recruitment agencies as possible and leave the job. Work to your contract and do nothing more than that. The company has shot themselves in the foot by not hiring you.

I think a better evaluation system would be something that incorporates both previous experience in the role along with performance in interview. It's good to avoid nepotism but also isn't fair to discount a candidates proven ability that managers have very often observed through their own experience in working with them.

I'd collect the feedback and move on somewhere else if it was me. Would definitely depress me for a few days though not getting the job.

This is hard for you, but shows your lack of understanding of the hiring process. The rigid process is the thing that matters, employers have go by the interview only to be fair to all candidates, they can't score you on other knowledge of you. That is how hiring works. One day you will be on the other side of the desk and you'll look back on this and understand. The good news is you're good at the job, start looking for another one and remove yourself from this place.

So was that minor issue something outwith the interview? Like you were filing spreadsheets in the wrong place or started at 9.05 instead of 9am because of childcare issues that’s now sorted. Or something similar? And they used that against you? My question would be why are they using something against you when interviews are about performance at the interview?

I don’t think they will ever hire you. As someone else said it could be the agency finders fee is putting them off. It can be thousands. It’s probably your job they’ve hired for as you suggest.

If I were you I’d leave. Go back to the agency and see what they have as you feel gutted at what’s happened and you don’t want to stay. Sign up with another agency if necessary. They are just getting all your info and skills passed onto the the newbie and then will sack you anyway. So I’d pay them back for not hiring you by leaving asap, providing the weeks notice or whatever obviously.

If you are working with an agency in your current role, it may be that they would charge your company a fee (finders fee) if they took you on? This may have swayed their decision if so.

Understandably upsetting. Get your cv out there and get another job, it'll be satisfying to be able to walk away from this one.

This thread explains how odd other companies are, re how they hire etc.

I do feel for you OP, but just wanted to pick up on your rigid process point.

The rigid process is designed to promote a meritocracy and fairness, not just handing a job to Sarah the office temp who just so happens to be the SM niece.

I’ve been in a vaguely similar position and with hindsight dodged a bullet.
Afterwards, when asked questions, I’d sometimes politely respond: I’m not sure/to confirm ask x mgr’ - if I’m not good enough to promote then I’m not in a position to give SLT level instruction.

Feedback given in that failed interview was very helpful as I accepted (then and now) that I hadn’t performed as well as I could have.

I was internally poached with full interview process, shortly after on the basis of the projects I had run in that role anyway - they did me a favour.

I wouldn't be training the new person, OP. Not out of any malice towards them, but if the company thinks I'm not good enough to do my own job, then surely I'm not good enough to train someone else to do it.

We're their qualifications highers. Or conversely was the job offered with less pay and conditions. It seems mad to me as you have proved yourself. Is your manager have the last word on recruitment? Maybe someone else thought differently. I would look elsewhere or return to temping for a while.you can never tell with interviews .maybe they just came over better or had something new to offer.just put it down to experience and move on.next time treat new job interviews as if you were completely new.read up on company. Ask questions even if you feel you know the answer .just play them at their own game.often it comes down to more than one person's decision. Don't take it personally!

Maybe it’s just down to personality. OP maybe very efficient etc but they want a good team dynamic , a good fit personality wise . It doesn’t mean there’s anything wrong with OP just that this employer wants something different.

This happened to me . I had been temporarily promoted for 2 years but didn’t get the permanent post . The department decided they wanted “new blood” . I also had to help train the new person . I was very disappointed. After months of training she decided she didn’t like the job and wanted an office nearer her home . She got a transfer and guess who got the job !

How did the interview go? I’m a hiring manager and I have to recruit off an interview matrix where I have to give the role to the candidate who scores the highest. I hate it as this has often meant that I’ve not recruited who I feel would be the best person for the role or the best fit for the team. Did you ask for feedback on why you weren’t successful?

Happened to my DS. He quit on the spot. Said he couldn't face having to effectively train someone for a job they didn't think him good enough to get.

This tells me you don't recruit or don't recruit fairly, some people are just really awful at interviews. They don't give examples, waffle, don't answer the question you've asked them even when prompted. I've had some excellent potential candidates for promotion who just go to pieces in interview, and some of them don't even realise how badly they perform, you give feedback, interview coaching etc even tell them the examples they could've used and then the next interview is the same. How can I appoint them when other candidates score so much better? If you're going to do that don't bother to have an interview process at all.