To be completely thrown seeing a job re-advertised literally weeks after they rejected me?

Well they picked someone else and it didn't work out. It doesn't mean there's anything horrendous about the firm or their recruitment process necessarily.

If you desperately want the job then reapply. If what they said was true surely you're in for a very big chance?

Presumably you've done due diligence about them. The role is legit, good employee reviews, solvent company etc?

maybe budget got frozen then released if you want it apply again

And then she has completely ignored everyone who has pointed this obviousness out and keeps repeating herself. 🙄

It was a Teams call rather than a written rejection, but, yes it probably is standard phrasing.

Maybe they decided that none of the candidates who put themselves forward were suitable, including you? The ‘steep learning curve’ comment suggests that even though you were the preferred candidate, they ultimately decided you don’t have enough experience.
That’s why they put it back out there; to attract a new set of candidates.

It really isn’t that strange. Why would they reach out to you before readvertising when they’d already told you that, reading between the lines, you weren’t experienced enough for the role? It seems most likely they didn’t get any candidates that had the right experience so decided to put the advert out again in the hope of attracting different candidates. It happens all the time.

Surely thats just their template rejection letter though 1

I have seen many a time that a hiring manager or panel can change their mind after the first stage, I've had it myself where I was the best thing since sliced bread after round 1 (according to the recruiter) one time even being asked when I would be able to start etc by hiring manager only for it to fall apart at stage 2. A couple of times I was even told it was very close, just pipped at the post etc and then the first choice candidate pulled out but when they were approached (by the recruiter) I wasn't quite right and they are going back to the market.

I think sometimes they just don't know, or change their minds and sometimes they just say the 'best candidate' 'close call' thing to soften the blow after all no one is going to say we didn't find anyone and you were a bit shit so we're going back out there.

Having been a hiring manager myself and forced to take the best of a bad bunch but not quite right candidate for a temp role, it was an absolute ball ache having to explain everything to someone who I was expecting would have a certain level of knowledge and skills and took me away from my actual job quite a lot - that was temporary so I put up with it but if it had been a permanent hire I would have probably failed them in probation, which is a horrible thing to have to do, and even more horrible for the employee, so better to make sure it is right (as far as you can) from the off.

That's happened to me with an internal role. When they rejected me they said something about a 'high calibre of applicants' - obviously not that high calibre since they've had to advertise it again 😄

Hi Op. Frankly some the comments here are odd and unnecessary unkind. Weird.
Anyway, ignore them, sounds like you’re applying for other things so onwards and upwards.

I find this odd. Why would it be a ghost job, whatever that is, and why would they have no idea what they are looking for. Sounds to me they know exactly what is required to do the job, simply on chatting to the op they realised she didn’t have the skill set, so have went out to look for someone who does, rather than employ her. That’s not remotely unusual nor is it a lucky escape.

she wasn’t suitable for the role. They are still looking. If you’d ever managed people or recruited, you’d know this is not uncommon and it is much better to find someone you feel capable rather than just take someone as they looked good on paper.

Exactly, and it takes a matter of moments to send an email asking HR to readvertise, so of course it goes back up quickly. Nothing odd about that

A steep learning curve for you, surely. So they might have decided that no candidate met what they needed. They are hoping by readvertising they will get some more applicants. This is not hard to work out.

Quite. It's a somewhat arrogant response actually, which suggests a possible lack of self awareness

It sounds like something in that informal chat meant they realIsed they would rather readvertise than hire you.

I have learnt as a manager it's always better to readvertise than just recruit someone because they were the "best I could get" after a particular round of interviews.

They are perfectly entitled not to recruit and go out to look again

I was involved in recruiting someone recently. We offered to one and told the others no. The person we offered to messed us about for a couple of weeks then decided to stay where she was so we re advertised. We considered going back to one of the candidates we had rejected but for a variety of reasons decided against it. That can’t be too unusual a situation?

What's a ghost job?

We had to readvertise at a company I worked for. They interviewed three candidates - two young women and a young man.

They decided to go for the man as he was less likely to go off on maternity leave (and yes that got my back up!).

He lasted a few weeks and then quit as he decided to go to university full time. I might have wet myself laughing when I found out 😂

It’s not odd. You didn’t get the job is all and you are confusing things because it seems that’s no one got the job. Unfortunately being the preferred candidate wasn’t enough and they have decided to try again in the hope they attract more suitable candidates. I’m sorry you didn’t get the job but it’s just that simple, you didnt get it.

As others have said, you’re presuming they offered it to someone and that fell through.

I agree they shouldn’t have told you you were the preferred candidate but there’s no reason it can’t be true - you were the top of the list but on further consideration decided you weren’t it, so readvertised. Agree that their comms haven’t been good but that’s not unusual.

i was on a panel last year where we interviewed 4 but didn’t appoint as no-one we felt a good fit. We readvertised a few months later (people on leave, time to shortlist etc). It didn’t occur to me that any of the interviewed candidates would be in any way baffled by this!

Unfortunately because there is a big pool of good candidates at the minute, many employers are looking for the great white shark hire and the perfect person they think they need rarely exists, particularly on today’s reduced salaries. It’s a bit of a red or at least orange flag to me if employers have been through more than one round of interviews without finding someone, unless it’s a very senior role.

You do need a lot of resilience for job seeking at the moment. It’s common to be ghosted after interview, so in this case you at least got a response. It sounds as if you have a strong cv/linked in presence but need to work on your interview skills. It’s important to remember that a casual chat is never just that, treat it as if it is an interview and prepare accordingly- I lost a chance to progress by thinking otherwise recently.

I don't understand what you're so baffled about.

You were presumably the "preferred candidate" on paper - which they shouldn't have told you, but whatever. Then they had the informal chat, and realised that you weren't suitable after all, which is why they said it would be too steep a learning curve for you.

They might have recruited someone else and it has fallen through, but the most likely scenario is that they simply didn't appoint because they didn't have any suitable candidates. It is extremely common for employers to re-advertise in this situation.

You seem to think that they should have reached out to you before re-advertising. Unfortunately, it sounds like they decided after your "informal chat" that you weren't the right person for the role.

Chalk it down to experience and move on to the next opportunity. If you have received any feedback from the recruiter (e.g. about what exactly made them think it would be a steep learning curve), then try to learn from it. If you haven't had feedback, you could consider asking for this.

A line manager of a different team at work approached me to apply for a role whilst I was happy with the role I already had. We had an informal meeting and she gushed about how great I would be for the role.

I had the interview which went well. I found out Christmas Eve it was a no and it was given to the only other candidate. I was cross because it was a waste of my time. The other candidate then took redundancy the next year.

I was cross, she should never have approached me.

To me this sounds very clear:

OP was their best option from all applicants, but still not a perfect fit (‘preferred’, not ‘ideal’), so they decided not to hire anyone but to try to find their ideal candidate. And I think they’ve been quite honest with OP why she didn’t get it.

I’m sorry op. I know this is hard. But being the preffered candidate doesn’t mean here have the job, you still need to go through the process and if it they find during that, as they did, that you are not suitable, then no job offer is made.

they simply don’t have someone so are filling the position. I am unsure why you’re baffled by it.