Please or to access all these features

Add post

Watch this thread

Save thread

Start a new thread

Flip thread

Hide thread

My feed

Active Unanswered threads

Getting started FAQ's

Unanswered threads Acronyms Talk guidelines

Hide shortcut buttons

Talk

Chat

Join the discussion and chat with other Mumsnetters about everyday life, relationships and parenting.

Flip

1 2

Original poster

Is it right to interview to be kind?

38 replies

Athleticpotential · 09/05/2022 18:38

A vacancy where I work.

It has been filled internally on an acting up basis for 3months. We had hoped that would work out and he'd be appointed permanently, but it really hasn't.

Job has been advertised externally and acting up person has applied.

He won't get the job, but some of the panel feel it would be kind/polite to interview him anyway.

I disagree because:

it's a waste of everyone's time, but especially his. He may even buy a new suit! It's a full day selection thing which, if he's serious, he'd need to do a lot of prep for.
there are sensible reasons not to shortlist him based on his application. It's unlikely, but possible he could perform very well at interview, which them places us in a very difficult position.
if you want to be kind, sorry there were better qualified candidates is easier to hear than you gave a bad interview/we don't think you're right for the job.

Or would it be better to give him the "opportunity" and interview practice?

OP posts:

TokyoSushi · 09/05/2022 18:40

It sounds like a lot of hassle for him if he has no chance of getting the job...

BarbaraofSeville · 09/05/2022 18:46

If you can legitimately not shortlist him, then don't and let his manager/someone else senior explain why, so he's in a better position should another opportunity come up in the future.

As you say, if he ticks all the right boxes at interview but you know that other aspects of his performance/personality/approach to work makes him unsuitable for the role, it makes it difficult and a mockery of the system if he ends up as the 'best' candidate according to the interview process.

HeyManIJustWantSomeMuesli · 09/05/2022 18:52

I have been in his position and was interviewed for a job that someone else was definitely going to get. I was quite annoyed and humiliated when I found out.

Interested in this thread?

Then you might like threads about this subject:

Jobs

FortasseRequiris · 09/05/2022 18:59

I once spent two whole days at a selection process (and stayed overnight in a terrible B and B which they booked for me) only to find out afterwards that they considered me under-experienced - which was true - and I was invited because otherwise the whole pool of selected candidates would have been male.

I’m still cross about it more than a decade later. I did so much work for it and bought sensible boots. Don’t do it OP! In any case won’t you need to justify your shortlisting criteria?

Jellycatspyjamas · 09/05/2022 19:14

If he’s not done ok doing the role for 3 months and his application isn’t strong enough I wouldn’t interview him. I was in a similar position at one point and was basically told I had to interview, knowing the senior management’s team had absolutely no intention of appointing and the fall out from them not getting the post was incredible. It would have been much kinder to not interview and explain why.

bluesky45 · 09/05/2022 19:14

Tell him. It's awkward and difficult but really, don't interview him if he has no chance. I've been to interviews where they had already decided on an internal candidate and it's so annoying, a total waste of time.

Original poster

Athleticpotential · 09/05/2022 19:28

bluesky45 · 09/05/2022 19:14

Yes, this is how I feel.

He is under qualified for the job, which is why he wasn't permanently appointed in the first place. It's much easier to tell him that now than to tell him others were better qualified after putting him through the interview.

OP posts:

Useranon1 · 09/05/2022 20:43

Don't you have shortlisting criteria though? He either meets it or he doesn't. You can still prepare him but he my value the experience of interviewing

Neverreturntoathread · 09/05/2022 23:59

It would be cruel to make him to all the interview prep / get suit etc for a job he can’t get.

It isn’t kind to interview him, it’s lazy and gutless because let’s face it it’s only been suggested because no one wants to tell him he has no chance.

SkiingIsHeaven · 10/05/2022 01:03

This happened to me once.

They said that they just wanted to meet me because I sounded interesting but they didn't have a job for me.

It was really annoying because I had wasted time finding out about the company and wasted time and petrol going there.

Let them down gently but leave them with a positive comment.

Paawi · 10/05/2022 01:09

It's horrible to interview him if he's a no before he even walks through the door. A manager needs to talk to them, say he won't be going through to interviews and explain how he can improve for next time, telling him what he can improve upon for future jobs e is nice, stringing him along in pretend is not.

Snugglepumpkin · 10/05/2022 01:09

It's not kind to interview him if it has already been decided he will not get the job.

Kind would be saying something like "We are looking for an external candidate to fill this post at this time" (which is obvious bs but better than saying he's not up to the job or he'd have had it without an interview)

bananaskinny · 10/05/2022 01:12

If he's applied and meets the selection criteria then you have no option but to interview him. I agree with it being a waste of time but you don't want a tribunal case on your hands otherwise. Is he aware that he's struggling in role/under experienced?

Popsicle33 · 10/05/2022 01:19

What a waste of time and quite cruel to him!

Original poster

Athleticpotential · 10/05/2022 07:34

Neverreturntoathread · 09/05/2022 23:59

It would be cruel to make him to all the interview prep / get suit etc for a job he can’t get.

It isn’t kind to interview him, it’s lazy and gutless because let’s face it it’s only been suggested because no one wants to tell him he has no chance.

I know but "someone" will still have to tell him he didn't get the job.

Surely it's easier to say "sorry there's a strong field of qualified candidates" rather than "we didn't like your interview".

It's role where we do sometimes take unqualified but not usually if there are suitable qualified candidates. Hence the shortlisting isn't cut and dried.

OP posts:

Original poster

Athleticpotential · 10/05/2022 07:42

Snugglepumpkin · 10/05/2022 01:09

It's not kind to interview him if it has already been decided he will not get the job.

I don't think you can say that? If he's a suitable candidate he should have equal opportunity with external candidates, but he's not.

OP posts:

Rollercoaster1920 · 10/05/2022 07:45

I hope your HR department are all over this. It has potential to get ugly.
Are you Public or private sector? I'd guess public, which will mean competency based interviewing. He may get the job.

donquixotedelamancha · 10/05/2022 07:48

Kind is to tell him the truth with constructive, precise feedback about how to improve.

Anything else is unprofessional and childish.

Having been in the receiving end of this shit I never understand why people play games like this.

fellrunner85 · 10/05/2022 07:49

You've had some appalling advice on here, OP. If this guy has been acting up to the role for three months, but isn't up to filling it permanently, he needs to be told why. It isn't fair to fob him off with a "We want to go external" with no explanation - even though that would be the easy option for the organisation.

His line manager needs to have a meeting with him and explain he doesn't meet the criteria, explain why, and point to training/development opportunities so he has the chance to meet the criteria the next time a post comes up.

Unless his application does meet the criteria of course, in which case he deserves the chance to be interviewed along with everyone else. Renember, at this stage you don't necessarily know that anyone better will apply. In many sectors, recruitment is very hard at the moment. So don't completely discount the idea of appointing him but putting a clear development plan in place.

donquixotedelamancha · 10/05/2022 07:50

I hope your HR department are all over this. It has potential to get ugly.

Only if people are dishonest. Given there are very clear, valid reasons he hasn't got the job it should be a straightforward situation.

UpcycledToenail · 10/05/2022 07:53

Don't interview him. Just don't. I have had too many pointless, awkward interviews as the "candidate who ticked the disabled box so had to be shortlisted" - a waste of everyone, everyone's time, especially the actual candidate. Don't interview him. Don't interview him.

LoveSpringDaffs · 10/05/2022 08:00

Someone needs to be doing THEIR job better than they are! No, you don't interview someone in that situation, you have balls/ovaries to tell them 'no' & why not.and if at all possible a progress path

FFS.

LoveSpringDaffs · 10/05/2022 08:02

Rollercoaster1920 · 10/05/2022 07:45

I hope your HR department are all over this. It has potential to get ugly.
Are you Public or private sector? I'd guess public, which will mean competency based interviewing. He may get the job.

Which just goes to show the madness of the process.

AngelinaFibres · 10/05/2022 08:14

HeyManIJustWantSomeMuesli · 09/05/2022 18:52

I have been in his position and was interviewed for a job that someone else was definitely going to get. I was quite annoyed and humiliated when I found out.

Me too. Waste of a day, waste of the hope that goes with applying for a new job. He will have nerves and stress for absolutely nothing.

PatchworkElmer · 10/05/2022 08:17

Had he had feedback on his performance in the role he’s been acting up to?

Flip

1 2