Manager saw my Teams message - AIBU

[Mumatwork24]

Need some advice please! My supervisor saw a teams message that I sent to my colleague (same level as me) and I just want others' perspectives on this situation.

Last year a secondment came up within the team that I applied for. My supervisor was supportive at the time, (she always is) and encouraged me to go for it. It was a promotion and would be the next obvious step for me to progress my career.

Long story short, the team manager and his senior (both of whom were on the interview panel) gave the job to someone internal from another team who was already operating at a higher level than me. Feedback was they thought I could have done so much better, they were frustrated because "they knew me" and it was just a case for me of getting through the interview. I'm exasperated because they loved the presentation, they know I already perform way and above my duties and am effectively a ready-made manager in this field - this was also what was fed-back. The person they employed as I mentioned was a few bandings up from me already but had no prior experience at all in the field.

Another secondment came up two weeks ago and was circulated to everyone by the team manager. My colleague and I were talking over Teams about it - I encouraged him to go for it as he is very skilled and like me, wishes to progress his career. He texted me back and said no, he wasn't ready for that jump just yet and that I should go for it. I replied that interviews are a popularity contest and that people employ people they think they can best work with, and as long as they've got the basic skill-set they can make it work. This is honestly what I think and it explains why, in most cases people choose individuals who don't have any experience over ones that do. It's all about whether your face fits as my recent experience proved.

He answered that I should go for it and I just replied "nah, they don't want me." Of course I wouldn't have shared these honest thoughts with management but it's genuinely how I feel and what I think. I've accepted that I wasn't the preferred choice, and that someone else was a better fit. I've not let it impact my work - I perform to a high level, I go above and beyond what's expected of me in this role and I make efforts with team socials and contribute to meetings.

Little did I realise, my line manager was sat with my colleague throughout the Teams exchange - he later told me she was reading over his shoulder and he only realised at a later point. She hasn't said anything to me but she does seem a bit down if I'm honest and I feel guilty. AIBU to feel this way? She's a nice lady and I'm lucky to have her as my direct line manager. But I'm not going to pretend I don't feel that way about interviews in terms of them being a popularity contest as that's clearly what they are. I've worked hard in this team and at the time I was upset as the rejection hurt like crazy but I've since realised it's not because of my lack of skill. The new recruit told me she's learning the ropes from scratch which is fine - but it just confirmed that they must think I'm a total misfit in their team, so I'm not going to put myself in the arena again. They'd just shred my application probably!

Am I being silly or am I justified? Has this ever happened to anyone else?

Thank-you

Of course I wouldn't rather hire someone that is not capable, what a silly statement, but if that candidate scores higher, you have to. Surely you can't fail to see that?

Where I work the interview goes on a points system, if someone scores more points than you regardless of whether they want you or someone else to get the job they have to give it to the person who interviewed best. You should have listened to their feedback and practiced your interview skills. It literally all comes down to the interview

We do very technical jobs and our questions are very targeted around specific scenarios and gauge their knowledge and experience, but I understand that may not be the case for all organisations.

Hi OP

I hear exactly what you are saying & I agree. I have a few things to say.

Firstly, I absolute loathe the entire premise of interviews. They are all about performing, and I’m not interested in whether or not people can perform, on demand. It’s fake and means absolutely nothing. I’m interested in how good they are at their job, and if they’re competent. Anyone can lie in an interview, and they do. Your track record will tell me what you’re capable of, not an interview. I’ve seen far too many bullshitters succeed at interviews, while they’re appalling at the actual job. Meanwhile, people who are excellent get overlooked simply because they can’t or won’t perform.

Secondly, interviews are one-size-fits-all, and consequently, only certain types of people excel at interviews. People that are good at talking shit or ‘performing’. Interviews as they are currently designed are a horrendous way of filling positions. One-size-fits-all just doesn’t work because it doesn’t find the best people and quite frankly it’s lazy and unimaginative.

Sadly, ‘the interview’ represents everything that is wrong with corporate UK. If people want to pretend and tell themselves this system means the best person gets the job then leave them to their delusions.

This thread just proves how bs interviews are. They know op would be great at the job and they hired someone else because that person was better at... answering questions. Ridiculous

Cmon Now. You don’t actually believe that do your? Yes they gave the job to the person several rungs above the op simply as they answered questions better.

cmon. Apply some critical thinking.

@logo1236 you hit the nail on the head.

Ludicrous isn’t it?

I think it’s those who swear by the rigour of the interview that need to apply some critical thinking.

missed the quote - reposting in 3, 2…

But that’s what OP said her management told her. Not a lot else to apply our critical thinking to, unless you have some inside knowledge.

It's true. There is another thread on here called most incompetent person you have worked with and every single comment mentioned that the incompetent person was amazing at the interview. Being good at interviewing and being good at the job are two VERY different skills. Of course the interviews are there for a reason, people shouldn't be hired off the street, but op's case proves they should not be everything

All the PP saying that this proves interviews are rubbish and pointless etc - very possibly you're right, but it doesn't matter, does it?

In this world, OP needs to pass an interview if she wants to progress. So is it best to spend her time complaining how unfair it is, or to pick up a few tips and pass next time?

Been where you are - it sucks. It's unfair and demoralising.

Advice my executive coach gave me - don't over perform so much. Dial it back 10%, then another 10%. Stop doing extra. If you're too good where you are, they won't want to lose you from that role as they couldn't get someone to replace you at the same level.

If you are irreplaceable, you are unpromotable.

Now you are in that situation, the only option is look outside if you want to progress. Took me ages and more knock backs internally to less capable candidates to finally get the message and leave.

Guess what. I'm a high performer in my new role too. I acted in a higher role again within my first 6months. My new employers recognise my skills and capabilities. Plus I'm paid more. I'm keeping in mind not to be irreplaceable. I don't take on high responsibility unless I'm paid for it. No more show them what I can do and I'll be rewarded for it. I do what my role requires and when I act up, kick it up a gear and perform well there too.

I'm not going to tell you to suck it up. You shouldn't have to. You're capable and skilled and the lesser skilled, "networked" person got appointed. That's shit. It's based on popularity not ability to do the role. Yes, fit is always important to get a team that work well together. But it should not be at the expense of capability.

The fact that she saw your message might affect how she views you but it doesnt sound like it's going to be an issue.
Tbh though it does sound like sour grapes. In larger institutions particularly where there's bandings/grades (eg Civil service, nhs, teaching etc) there's generally a panel at interview to ensure fairness. I'm not naive enough to think that people aren't influenced at all by their own biases, but it's usually the person who performs best at interview that gets offered the job. Your interview is your opportunity to demonstrate how you meet the person spec and what personal qualities you can bring. If you did that badly and the chosen candidate did it well that's why they chose them.
I'd concentrate less on the teams message and more on your interview skills. Sounds like it's holding you back.

OP youre making a lot of assumptions about the process. You think you did great etc - but how do you know what the other person did? This is ridiculous. You are looking from only your perspective.

I'm going to disagree with a lot of people here. I think the supervisor that was overlooking your comments to your coworker might be reassessing how they handled your interview.

I hit post before I was finished. She may be feeling guilty as that is exactly what happened.

I’ve been in your situation and it was hard to take. Best thing I did was have a 1:1 asking for help to improve and also my organisation offers coaching which has helped how I approach things now. Every task I’m on I’m collecting evidence for when I next have an opportunity to go for promotion.

I've interviewed people who think that because they are an internal candidate the job is theirs without much effort at interview. Always comes back to bite them.

Why are you using MS Teams for personal conversations?

I remember interviewing someone within the team I managed for a senior position within the team. I wanted her for the job and was confident she would perform well. Unfortunately she really didn’t. And just came over so poorly … almost as if she’d assumed she was a shoo in and hadn’t prepared. I was interviewing alongside someone from HR so I couldn’t have fiddled the points even if I’d wanted to. It was really, really upsetting for her, me, the rest of the team - even the HR person! Next time round she’d done her preparation and got the job.

Interviews are scored to make sure everything is done properly and I don’t think your “if your face fits” theory really holds water.

100% agree.
In some companies and industries it's definitely very cliquey. And if the face fits....
However, be determined enough that nothing will stop you from succeeding. Become the business chameleon. Be relentless.

But the other candidate was also internal, so whatv is the point you are trying to make here?

Interviewing is so important to getting a role. A lot of big companies follow a strict tick box exercise with HR present to make sure they can’t be accused of favouritism. Even more so if you are in the public sector.

Work on your interview technique!

And this is why u grt so many incompetent people hired just be ause they said those keywords. It doesn't matter fark all about your experience but if you say that word ...tick you got a point!

But the other candidate was also internal, so whatv is the point you are trying to make here?

Presumably the point is that OP maybe coasted a bit in the interview as she thought she was guaranteed the job as an internal candidate, but the other internal tried much harder/didn't coast and was therefore successful.