Promotion given to a younger man

[Whatiswrongwithme1979]

Am I being unreasonable to be angry, feel worthless and to wish I didn't have to go back to work?

Ive worked 20 years in a senior role and was strongly encouraged to apply for a promotion going in my department. As context, I get excellent performance ratings and have won awards in the last year for that as well.

I apparently did very well at interview, with no feedback given. The job was given to a man with less than half my experience, no professional qualifications and who is junior to me in position at work. He is a smooth talker but is rarely seen at work and has an uncanny ability to do very little whilst getting his team to work to the bone - perhaps a leadership quality in itself.

Im angry, dejected and feel rubbish. I'm not quite sure what to do next as it is a clear signal of how I'm valued.

The decision makes me feel like the executive lack integrity and dont live up to the values the company espouses, though I can't put my finger on why.

How do I process this and move on, how do I not feel so angry, am I even reasonable to feel angry about their decision!?

Or it is sexism - you can't say either way

I would imagine that age and sex did pay a part, because they often do. Also, some people are incredibly good at talking bollocks and are able to talk their way into jobs.

whilst getting his team to work to the bone - perhaps a leadership quality in itself.

Someone who can get a lot out of a team is very valuable in a lot of organisations

Sometimes it is connections rather than the right person for the job. A man in our team who was on a PDP was promoted into a role he had no experience of but he played golf with the senior leadership team. Needless to say it was a bit of a disaster but to be fair to him he worked all the hours to get up to speed but lost valuable members of this team as they moved onto other roles/ companies as they felt demoralised.

OP, take your time to decide what you want to do. Ask for formal feedback in writing to give you time to consider your next move. When he does come on board, be very clear on where your role starts and ends, you do not want to be in the position of doing his job for him. Then watch the chaos ensue but do not step in to fix it. If it was me I would be quietly getting my CV out there until the right role come up. Unless it’s a big organisation and you can move departments?

I completely disagree

Yes age and years worked there specifically might not be relevant but what is relevant is that this guy is less experienced than her and less senior than her - so must have done something exceptional to warrant being given the job. It's not like there were 2 equally qualified candidates. it's hardly normal for someone to leapfrog several levels of promotion plus the
lack of feedback for OP - if she did "very well" then they need to justify (obviously within the boundaries if data protection) why she didn't get it.

Also very dismissive to call it a "big reaction" - first of all its disappointing to not get a job in any circumstances and fine to react to that, but it does sound dodgy here.

This is the whole reason interview decisions require documentation and aren't just based on whose face fits circa 1964 - because otherwise you're opening yourself up for a discrimination claim.

It's perfectly plausible that this guy was a better candidate but the interview panel need to explain why.

@Whatiswrongwithme1979 well most certainly look for something else. in the meantime, let him drown in the things which he is supposed to be able to do without anyone helping him!!

Or ageism

Be very careful of being used to mentor and train him into the position.
Not your job to do this.
Take a look at your options while you process this.

Don't be used by them.

You can move jobs without making a fuss though. Making a fuss would be making a subject access request for the notes on your interview performance! I mean, if you don't want to move don't, but don't not move for fear of being seen to be making a fuss.

True

I just think no one on her can say "he obviously did better" - there is no obvious about it.

I think your experience may have counted against you OP. You were probably seen as too hard to replace in your current role. If this guy doesn’t do much (in your words), he’s easier to move.

(Although him being cheaper and having connections could have played a role too).

Something must be wrong with your understanding of the scoring. You cannot be ranked more favourably just because you have more experience, otherwise the most senior (and usually oldest) candidate would almost always be a shoe-in.

I expect you all receive "top marks" in the experience bracket if you meet a threshold of a certain amount of experience and a certain level of experience.

If your interviews are as formulaic as you say, how would his age and sex have been taken into account so heavily that it had an impact?

You say you were made director at 28, I expect with roughly the same number of years experience you're belittling this fella for. I also presume you probably beat older, more qualified candidates at that point in your career? Just sounds like the same thing is happening here. They must have felt he was more motivated, or answered questions in a higher scoring manner.

Ugh I’ve seen this happen more times than I can count to more qualified and experienced women who are overtaken by men whose main skill is being able to talk a good game. Unfortunately that seems to be the skill that is most valued at a senior level.

I would make a bit of a fuss but discretely. I have done that in the past and it’s worked to my favour as they feel they needed to placate me.

This.

Don’t be ridiculous! Of course you can be ranked more favourably for having more experience!

It could be on OP’s part too.

Could be, my point really is that some posters have stated categorically that eg "I agree with PP, age and sex is irrelevant and he was obviously better suited for the role" - it's not obvious in the slightest.

Sometimes with a skills and experience criteria scoring system there is a minimum required tick box. So if the minimum required was eg. 6 years then you and he would have scored the same. Then it may have come down to motivation where he may have scored higher. Perhaps he had a more innovative approach with regard to future proofing the industry whereas maybe you were advocating for tried and tested old methods.

OP has no evidence to the contrary. He was offered the role - therefore, they obviously think he’s better suited for whatever reason. OP’s speculation is groundless.

When using objective scoring criteria in an interview you absolutely can't, unless you want to open yourself up to an ageism discrimination claim. You can go with the candidate who has more experience in subjective interviews but when using formulaic scoring methods (per the OP) you are almost always awarding the oldest candidate the highest score in that category, meaning younger candidates are starting with a disadvantage. With objective scoring (such as 10/10) based on experience there should always be a minimum benchmark to ensure age doesn't become a factor, such as all candidates who have X number of years experience at Y level receive 10/10. Having 20 years experience doesn't make you better than someone with 19.

It's the same reason companies are supposed to stay away from advertising jobs with language such as energetic, or youthful enthusiasm. And vice versa, asking for excessive numbers of years experience unless explicitly required. Both discriminate against either ends of the working age spectrum.

In reality once you get up to senior levels in a sizable company internal promotions are often down to personal relationships.

It's not fair, its often not the best for the company - but it happens and is hard to prove.

I would look for a transfer to another area in the company where you can be valued , or externally.

Help him as you would any other new starter but looks to transition asap.

Don't burn bridges as you may need them later.

I think you could potentially have a case for ageism & sexism here . Was there some unconscious bias here?
to start, seek written feedback from interview & how you scored on each question etc
dont give them any reason to worry, you don’t want to tip them off

on other hand the younger guy could leave in a year for promotion elsewhere
perhaps you’d then get the role
sometimes worth waiting it out

Time to move

There is no obviously

Should she seek a payoff for leaving ? Worth a solicitor negotiating settlement?