AIBU to think that something's fishy re. job opening

[LateAtTate]

inspired by another thread
Friend applied for job at a large company about a month ago. Immediately after receiving CV got emailed by recruiter, who arranged interview with a few members of the actual team (not HR themselves). Actually wasn’t marketed as an interview, just told it was a ‘chat with team to see if the role suits’.
Day of interview only one person turned up, went very well, interviewer mentioned he’d talk to colleague for a second interview.
It’s now been 3 weeks and crickets. Emailed recruiter but no response.
Today she saw that the job she’d applied for had been removed. Another, exactly identical job had been put up on website a couple of days ago. Same team, person spec, everything.

AIBU to think that something else is going on behind the scenes...they don’t really want to hire anybody and she should just accept it?

I’m very interested because I quite fancied applying for the same company myself but this has put me off. If anyone has any idea as to a reasonable explanation..share your wisdom with us

There was a time when everyone complained because they didn't get replies to applications. This new trend seems to be for recruiters to keep you dangling on a piece of string 'after' an interview. They refuse to tell you that you were unsuccessful and you are left to work it out for yourself. I have no idea why, but I find it incredibly rude.

@MintyMabel not sure why you’re using such hyperbolic language - setting targets for anything without addressing the root causes is likely to bring about perverse incentives. Diversity targets linked to compensation is one

@Mountaingoatling that’s lovely wording - will pass it on to her, thanks!
I also think that if it’s pleasant no harm in asking for the interviewers direct contact in case they have further questions about the team ... people might be less likely to ignore a direct email

@MaloInAnAppleTree thanks 😂 c) is not surprising given the mounds and mounds of paperwork.
Which in the end makes teams so flustered that they end up going for the ‘safest’ choices aaaand ... hiring based on non-objective criteria, which is what standardised interviews are supposed to prevent
Don’t get me wrong I think standards and scoring are great but hiring bias is an organisational bias issue, creating lots of rules to beat people over the head with isn’t the most effective way

setting targets for anything without addressing the root causes is likely to bring about perverse incentives. Diversity targets linked to compensation is one

Except you have absolutely no idea that this was that. Nothing suggests the fact your friend didn't get a call back has anything to do with diversity. Sounds like you have a chip on your shoulder about it. Or are looking for people to froth about it.

Personally I would find it a bit odd if someone asked me for my direct contact details after an interview, or said they would email me in a week if they didn’t hear from me.

@MintyMabel again very strong language from you, you’re one of those people who are on Mumsnet because they have rage, aren’t you?
Don’t worry dear, there’s always sun after rain 🙂

@Lumene thanks for the tip!
I wouldn’t , but only if the interview went well and they had follow up technical questions/information about something we discussed. Of course in that case I wouldn’t mind if they emailed me.
But not if we didn’t discuss anything that would remotely need an email.
To each his own I guessb