Ive just been turned down for a job in a call centre, but can't think why?

[ManicUnicorn]

Just that really.

It's an inward bound call centre, so not sales. Went along yesterday for a skills assessment, after previously passing a verbal reasoning test and telephone interview. I had to do a few more tests, spelling (which I know I passed), General knowledge (which I know I passed as the questions were absurdly easy), a timed typing test which I got over 94% because it showed up on the screen and recorded voicemail which I did in one go, no stuttering. I also had to answer a questionnaire on how i'd react in certain situations and how I feel about certain things etc.

My parents run and business and I often help out if at a loose end, so am used to answering phones and my first proper job was in estate agency so I'm always complemented on my telephone voice.

Everything seemed positive, they were very nice. I asked questions. The next step would have been a face to face interview, and they made me feel like I'd be asked back, but this morning I received an email saying after reviewing everything I'm not being asked back and thanking me etc.

So random and I can't work out what Ive done wrong really? Don't get me wrong I have a job, but just fancied a change. Any ideas greatly appreciated.

Positive discrimination is legal, and indeed encouraged, if it improves diversity in the workplace or narrows the gender pay gap; companies can't claim meritocratic hiring practices as justification for white male leadership on higher pay

Positive discrimination done properly (two equal candidates) where one is "white" or "male" or "straight" and the other is not in whatever way works well to create a healthier balance in certain areas. I worked with a local fire service on this very thing. It was nearly 100% male, straight and white before they brought in so called champions. Where it falls down in my experience is where one person for the fact they're in a minority group gets the job over a better qualified white/male/straight person.

At the moment there is a massive oversubscription to jobs like you describe. There are 24 qualified candidates for similar roles at a client we work with, with over 80 applications for each role. With that many they utilise a scoring matrix which simply creams off the top X% after first stage interviews/tests. If where you have applied is similar you may find they do a recruitment drive every quarter or every six months. I would definitely ask for feedback but to be honest you might be better (given what you've said and nothing more) looking for office work - usually better hours, environments and rates of pay. Good luck!

Your comment comes from a position of privilege. You may not know it or fully understand it but does. If we had equality then then there’d be no need for positive discrimination period. I do feel for you though, perhaps they simply had too many good applicants for the job.

What on earth are you on about?! Why would you even bring up something like that?
*
This isn't the politics forum ffs. All I wanted to know was why I may have been unsuccessful*

You said positive discrimination for ethnic minorities was 'shitty'people are explaining why it's not shitty. The fact you don't understand indicates you don't have a grasp on what white privilege is. Nothing to do with politics 

There may have been someone who had just the tiniest edge on you. Gutting, but it happens.

I am in fact putting off giving a candidate similarly bad news - she didnt get the job, she’s great and I also just really liked her as a person which makes it even harder, but, but... oh it’s so hard. So I'm sitting here putting that call off until after lunch argh!

To show the complete unfairness of the world of job hunting, if she’d interviewed early on in the summer, when I first advertised the role, she would have got it, as in that round, she would have out classed everyone else by a country mile! As it is, no one applied that was right for the job then, so I took it off and am doing a second recruitment round now.

Unfortunately for her, this time, someone else applied who was just a bit more experienced and in herself feels slightly more grounded and capable, just a slightly ‘safer pair of hands’. I didn’t ask for much experience in this particular skill set in the advert, as it’s something the right candidate can be trained kn, but I’d be an idiot not to take the person who can start being productive in the role straight away.

On the other hand it could have been something you said in between the assessments which set off alarm bells, although I hope not! I’ve had candidates do really good interviews, and sail through a trial, but when they relaxed thinking the job was in the bag, and did ‘chatting’, they revealed something really unpleasant or concerning about themselves which meant that they didn’t get the job.

Eg a few years ago I had someone let slip something really unpleasant and racist after the interview.

Obviously I’m not saying you did something like that, as that’s quite an extreme example of awfulness! But maybe you did say something that they misinterpreted, or that made them think that you might not be a good fit with the team, I know that’s unfair but it could happen I guess?

as a PP said, you may have been too good. I worked for a new call centre years ago, and so many of the new recruits were moving up into management, or moving away from the company for more challenging roles, they actively wanted to hire less ambitious people, or people that this job was a bit of a stretch for, so they would be happy and stay.
Call centre work can be incredibly boring and pressured at the same time, PERSONALLY I would be relieved and move on to look for something else

I also had to answer a questionnaire on how i'd react in certain situations and how I feel about certain things etc.

Maybe this is where your application fell down? The situational judgement test. They can be tricky blighters.

Best to ask for feedback. They might not tell you but it is always worth asking.

If it makes you feel better, I had a similar situation once They sounded delighted with me and said they'd call me soon and were looking forward to working with me but I never heard from them again.

@manicUnicorn I share your experience. Unfortunately it's my experience that despite having recently gained graduate and postgraduate degrees I'm struggling to find appropriate employment because I'm going up against candidates of a similar skillset and qualifications but with experience in the field.
I always ask for feedback and unfailingly am told you were an excellent candidate, but on the day another candidate had experience in the role. Recently I was told "on another day we would have appointed you but we had such strong candidates today we went with someone currently working in the field"

Like you I'm fortunate enough to be in a job but it's not a graduate role, and after working so hard for my qualifications I'd love to finally be in graduate role.

Are you referring to positive action @adamnichol ?

www.xperthr.co.uk/faq/what-is-the-difference-between-positive-action-and-positive-discrimination/108522/

op, i hire a fair few people in my role

for me its availability every time.....if they can't fit the work pattern i need then its a no!!

despite their skin colour,,its still a no

@slightaggrandising - yes. I hadn't realised the nuanced nomenclature had remained after it became clear that efforts to engineer diversity regardless of talent/suitability (quotas, etc) were not the expectation placed upon businesses

@4cats...what sort of thing are you looking for?

Aspects of the CV can be used to select between equal candidates eg degree Vs no degree irrespective of need, relevant Vs irrelevant employer, employed Vs unemployed By contrast, I have a hard science but admittedly rare PhD and during the recession, for similar reasons that someone mentioned I didn't even get interviewed for basic jobs. So I stopped applying and only went for ones that needed PhDs/ degrees. Oddly it's much easier to get an interview when your in a job which I think is unfair on people who need a job. For my current job, the sort of preparation I did was mainly technical. They asked ALOT of arcane questions which thank God after 1.5 yrs unemployed I answered sufficiently well and maybe they had no other candidates? (It's only 3 day pay/ week ...). I found the thing about jobs is to try find one you,re interested in, that, ll lead somewhere and you,ve a got a chance of getting. I,d rather employ an enthusiast. Good luck.

Was the typing test for accuracy? Because if so, 94% would mean you got 6% wrong. That’s a high error rate in any document.

I mean this nicely, but given your very strong reaction to the practice of positive discrimination (something that has been used for a long time, and for very good reasons), I’m wondering if the answers you gave about how “you feel about certain things” gave them concern about how you’d react by phone.

You seem very confident that you did really well and that the assessment was very easy. Perhaps it wasn't as easy as you thought. You may have got a lot of questions wrong. They may not think your phone voice is as wonderful as you do. It's great that you have confidence but don't be too arrogant to presume you didn't make enough mistakes to rule you out of the running.

I don't know what sort of call centre it is, but some of them do look for a very specific type of character and perhaps that's the reason.

Gosh, that's really bad. I've worked in call centres and it's usually a case of making sure you are quick enough with the system. I'm nearly computer illiterate and managed it ok.

It must be a very detailed job for them to go to such extremes at interview.
Is it better paid than min wage?
I'd call and ask for some feedback.

I also had to answer a questionnaire on how i'd react in certain situations and how I feel about certain things etc.

As the other bits went well I'd guess it was something to do with your answers not tallying with what they want from an employee.

I mean this nicely, but given your very strong reaction to the practice of positive discrimination (something that has been used for a long time, and for very good reasons), I’m wondering if the answers you gave about how “you feel about certain things” gave them concern about how you’d react by phone.

I was wondering how to phrase this tactfully, ha. I was thinking along the same lines.

The General Knowledge questionnaire was easy though, think along the lines of 'What is the capital of France'. That wasn't one of the questions, but they were about that level. You'd have to be really thick not to know the answers to them put it that way....

I suppose I'll just chalk it up to experience.

I was talking about the situational and attitude questionnaire, not general knowledge. Your attitudes and strategies for dealing with unexpected situations will have far more impact than your general knowledge.

Also if the typing test was for accuracy 94% would probably not be a pass.

Candidates for admin posts where I work fail if there is a single typo in a letter writing test, even one letter out in a word.

Are you Pam Doove?

Ask them for feedback. It sounds as if you think a job in an inbound call centre is really easy and you’d easily get the job. Maybe the interviewer disagrees with you and your abilities. Most interviewers are polite and enthusiastic at the time; it’s much easier all round that way for everyone.