What can an interview tell them?

Surely you can see they can’t just give the job. What if someone else there wants to apply?

If someone else in-house wants to apply they can judge both the OP and the other applicant on the work they've been doing/personal skills/dedication etc etc. I can see why the OP thinks the interview process is arbitrary.

If they don't interview and some arse who is on the bottom most rung of the company applies and you get it. They lay themselves open to an employment tribunal.

However, the fact you don't know this shows you are not suitable for the role on the board of the company. Sorry to be blunt, but this is basic level one manager of the tea boys level stuff you should know.

Decline to be interviewed explain you are happy where you are because there's no way you're not getting found out at that level.

I’m surprised you think like this. Board level comes with a significant amount of pressure and responsibility. Yes, they know you but they don’t know if you have what it takes.

I was in a similar position. I was head of a dept but invited to apply for a director position. They also knew me very well and I went up against two external candidates in a very gruelling interview process. I got the job and I’ll always be glad I got the job on merit. The job is very different to how I imagined it. I enjoy it but it definitely comes with a great deal of pressure, the sort I didn’t have in my previous role.

If you don’t realise this, perhaps as you say, you’re better staying where you are.

Conducting a full recruitment process for a senior job is about demonstrating due diligence. Very senior posts often have external representative on the panel - depending on your field these might be representatives from professional bodies or regulators. The recruitment process is useful for the candidate to truely consider the role and decide whether they want it, and is the beginning of a transition. Your response sounds like it’s not for you.

If you don't understand why you should be interviewed, I would have serious concerns about your credibility as a Board member.

Once upon a time they might have just given someone the job.

Then we campaigned for ages to stop them handing out "jobs for the boys" and instead have a level.playing field and some form of meritocracy.

You wouldn't be right for the job if you dont understand that things should be fair, and should be seen to be fair.

Tbh you sound really dour 😂
Just crack on with it and get the interview done!!

Appointed not anointed. It is important for your credibility too.

My colleague was asked to apply for a higher level position. I randomly also decided to apply (2 steps up for me). I interviewed surprisingly well and so they restructured to split the role.
Just because the board ask you to apply you can’t assume you’re the shoe-in for the role.
Also as pp have said, if you’re unaware of the issues of offering jobs to people without following due process, maybe it’s not for you.

You're going for a board level position yet you come to mumsnet to ask a question like this?

Given you weren't originally interested in the role and you find the interview process gruelling and unnecessary then it's fine to say no thanks and focus on your current role.

But if you're a board level candidate surely you know how the process works.

You’re that senior and don’t understand why there has to be a recruitment process? Odd post.

The interview process would ask you how you see yourself in that role, how you’d manage specific situations, what you would do if…. Blah blah blah it would pertain to how you would cope or fit the role as it is different to what you are currently doing

Well, your response to being asked to interview is showing a lack of understanding of due process, limited ability to see the broader picture, that you consider your wants without any consideration of company impact, inability to consider consequencs. I'd have thought these were all important traits needed at board level.

I’ve seen a colleague interview for a leadership role. He was a nice friendly colleague but the interview made it clear he had no idea what the more senior role required. Being good at one job does not make you good at the next level.

Your 'I am not sure I want it' attitude will come across at interview. Unless you have always aspired to go further, I would save yourself the bother of applying. You have to really want it.

With my cynical hat on ….
They could be asking you to apply even though there’s another candidate , possibly external, who’s a shoe in for it. By interviewing you they’re making the process look fair and above board.

what it will give you is a taste of the process and insight into what the role would mean in to your work life balance.

they could be giving you the opportunity now as they see you have potential and want to find out if that assumption is correct but someone else might still be in line for it.

By this logic every new person that joins a company is there because someone took a punt on a stranger.

If all this is true then you will walk it.

I've had colleagues not be offered the job even though they had all the right experience because they did not mention that experience at their interview, and the interview panel have to limit their decision to what they are told in the room. Frustrating for all concerned but that is the policy to keep it "fair". People in role doing the job below still have a massive advantage, as long as they use it to play the game and don't rely on interviewers knowing them.

They have known me for years, seen my good and bad points, seem how I have actually managed all kinds of scenarios, know how I fit.
You seem to be concentrating on how you fit within the company whereas C-suite is more outward-looking. They need to know how you would work as an ambassador or negotiator with external parties. Companies often ask an outsider to get involved in C-suite appointments purposely to get this impersonal, dispassionate view.

I think it’s in a lot of companies’ ts and cs tHat there has to be an interview process

I think you're being a bit silly.

Perhaps an interview isn't as good a way to know someone's abilities as a prolonged period working together, but equally, assuming the best candidate for a role is drawn from the tiny pool of internal applicants is hardly effective either.

Perhaps there's a manager who can help you work on your interview technique if it's causing you a lot of worry that you won't be able to showcase your abilities in that forum? You should really be able to use your years of experience to demonstrate your capabilities.

Because the playing field has to be level in hiring decisions. Knowing you for 14 years vs knowing the other applicant for 6 months isn’t a level playing field. There is a structure to recruitment processes for a reason. They also weed out the people who aren’t that committed (possibly, in this scenario, you).

It’s not a made up process, it’s a legal process.

They have a duty to try to hire the best person for the company - and that’s not necessarily ypu even if you have done well in your current position.

You need to interview to show:

a) that you are indeed better than an external candidate.
b) thst you really want the job and are committed to the company.

You have an advantage as an internal candidate but if you aren't willing to put in the effort to prove that to them, then they are best to choose someone else.