To be completely thrown seeing a job re-advertised literally weeks after they rejected me?

[CompetentChaos]

For context, last month I was told I was the preferred candidate for this exact role, invited for an informal follow-up chat… then heard nothing for two weeks until I chased and only then was told it was a no. And now the role has been re-advertised. Not even a different version of it - same job, same salary, same fixed-term end date.

I’m genuinely baffled. How has it fallen through this quickly? Did the person they offered it to reject them, ghost them or did something go wrong immediately? It just feels so strange to see it pop back up again this soon.

AIBU to be surprised?

As a recruiter my hunch is that there was some misalignment among the hiring stakeholders and you should not have been told you were the preferred candidate as they didn’t all agree. This is terrible but I have seen it happen.
So they either offered someone else who didn’t accept or they couldn’t agree to offer anyone and are now re advertising.
The less likely option is that someone started and then left very soon, given the short timescale, but I have absolutely seen that happen too.

They honestly, push to shove could have found there as a dealbreaker in why they didn’t want you eg we really need her to be better at (a certain skill that they just felt/ you said you didn’t have). Years ago in another job we saw a list of why they didn’t hire people and it was kind melting- some money, some doesn’t seem like he’d react well under extreme pressure, personality wise definitely not a match etc. Nothing you can do if they actually told you it was a no

I really don’t see what is so odd. They didn’t find the candidate they were looking for so have re advertised in the hope that they receive more CVs next round

telling you you’re the preferred candidate isn’t ideal though

She asked for feedback and they said it would be too steep a learning curve.

Unfortunately and somewhat bizarrely OP has interpreted this to mean the role would be too difficult for anyone, rather than as it must have been intended I.e. that it it was too difficult a role for her and therefore she is not suitable.

Was the informal chat with someone not on the interview panel eg a higher executive? They may have put the cobblers on it.

My CFO wants to meet potential hires and has final say. If she says the person isn't suitable then that's it.

The fact that this is baffling to the OP does suggest she’s not that experienced. You can easily see that they’ve gone through a recruitment process and having to weigh up whether to take a risk on the OP or not and have decided she’s not right. It can be really surprising how different a pool of candidates can be over a month.

I don’t think it’s odd at all. You just sound like you’re wanting some sort of vindication and are clutching at straws.

The truth is, they don’t want YOU for the role. Just let that sink in. The rest that follows should then make logical sense.

Something went wrong in your application process and they went off you completely. You said it yourself, they didn’t think you had the experience. “Steep learning curve” is not a good thing, they’re basically saying you’re a wildcard and that perhaps you oversold your experience and that unraveled later.

Hence, they put the job back out for applicants because they had ZERO viable candidates from the first round (including - and especially -you). It doesn’t mean they need to change anything about the job listing to put it up a second time. They didn’t reach out because they don’t want you for the role.

including - and especially -you

completely unnecessary.
OP was their first choice out of the pool they received.

Exactly, OP sounds delusional.

Just because the employer had a pool of candidates who applied for the job previously, it doesn’t mean they need to hire specifically from that pool - as opposed to putting the vacancy back out again for better candidates. OP is unable to see that their application wasn’t suitable for the job, and that the employer does not have to revisit their application before starting a new recruitment campaign. It’s not a case of going to the next candidate in the list, because they already said OP is unsuitable.

It doesn’t matter, they rejected OP’s application and said there would be too steep of a learning curve. OP is trying to see signs that are not there.

They meant the job was a steep learning curve for you.

They decided to look for someone with more knowledge and experience of the role.

i don’t understand why you are baffled. They have given you a very credible explanation of why you were rejected. As well as good feedback on your interview performance. It’s normal to feel a bit dejected, but you should completely understand why you didn’t get the job and why it’s been readvertised.

Sometimes things just don't work out. We had two front runners interview for a job; I was on the second and final interview round, I preferred candidate A, my co-interviewer agreed she'd done well but hadn't been that impressive on her first interview. Colleague preferred candidate B who did seem quite impressive and appeared potentially to be a better fit for our organisation, so we went for her.

As it turned out, she really wasn't much use, no matter how hard we tried, and after we had a performance review with her after a couple of months when we set some basic targets for her to reach, she resigned. If A had been available we'd have gone back to her, but she wasn't, sadly.

I agree. It did cross my mind that OP’s inability to understand the very simple and reasonable explanation of why she was unsuitable for the role is vindication of why they did not offer it to her.

Steep learning curve - you’re not professionally ready - don’t reapply, they’ve told you!

i know it’s not nice to be rejected but it’s clear.

Its not nice, but dont let it throw you. What's for you won't pass you.

Id ask. But I know of three companies that have been advertising my job roles constantly for 4 years. I've been invited for interview, mined for information and then told no. There is no job, it's just how they operate.

OP, you need to ask them for feedback. It sounds like something you said in the informal follow-up chat might have put them off, or maybe another hiring manager thought you didn't have the right experience and over-rode the one who said you were preferred. Either way, you won't know until you get feedback. This is something I say quite a lot on here - you need to communicate. Communication is the key.

I’m sorry op. I know this is hard. But being the preffered candidate doesn’t mean here have the job, you still need to go through the process and if it they find during that, as they did, that you are not suitable, then no job offer is made.

they simply don’t have someone so are filling the position. I am unsure why you’re baffled by it.

To me this sounds very clear:

OP was their best option from all applicants, but still not a perfect fit (‘preferred’, not ‘ideal’), so they decided not to hire anyone but to try to find their ideal candidate. And I think they’ve been quite honest with OP why she didn’t get it.

A line manager of a different team at work approached me to apply for a role whilst I was happy with the role I already had. We had an informal meeting and she gushed about how great I would be for the role.

I had the interview which went well. I found out Christmas Eve it was a no and it was given to the only other candidate. I was cross because it was a waste of my time. The other candidate then took redundancy the next year.

I was cross, she should never have approached me.

I don't understand what you're so baffled about.

You were presumably the "preferred candidate" on paper - which they shouldn't have told you, but whatever. Then they had the informal chat, and realised that you weren't suitable after all, which is why they said it would be too steep a learning curve for you.

They might have recruited someone else and it has fallen through, but the most likely scenario is that they simply didn't appoint because they didn't have any suitable candidates. It is extremely common for employers to re-advertise in this situation.

You seem to think that they should have reached out to you before re-advertising. Unfortunately, it sounds like they decided after your "informal chat" that you weren't the right person for the role.

Chalk it down to experience and move on to the next opportunity. If you have received any feedback from the recruiter (e.g. about what exactly made them think it would be a steep learning curve), then try to learn from it. If you haven't had feedback, you could consider asking for this.

Unfortunately because there is a big pool of good candidates at the minute, many employers are looking for the great white shark hire and the perfect person they think they need rarely exists, particularly on today’s reduced salaries. It’s a bit of a red or at least orange flag to me if employers have been through more than one round of interviews without finding someone, unless it’s a very senior role.

You do need a lot of resilience for job seeking at the moment. It’s common to be ghosted after interview, so in this case you at least got a response. It sounds as if you have a strong cv/linked in presence but need to work on your interview skills. It’s important to remember that a casual chat is never just that, treat it as if it is an interview and prepare accordingly- I lost a chance to progress by thinking otherwise recently.

As others have said, you’re presuming they offered it to someone and that fell through.

I agree they shouldn’t have told you you were the preferred candidate but there’s no reason it can’t be true - you were the top of the list but on further consideration decided you weren’t it, so readvertised. Agree that their comms haven’t been good but that’s not unusual.

i was on a panel last year where we interviewed 4 but didn’t appoint as no-one we felt a good fit. We readvertised a few months later (people on leave, time to shortlist etc). It didn’t occur to me that any of the interviewed candidates would be in any way baffled by this!

It’s not odd. You didn’t get the job is all and you are confusing things because it seems that’s no one got the job. Unfortunately being the preferred candidate wasn’t enough and they have decided to try again in the hope they attract more suitable candidates. I’m sorry you didn’t get the job but it’s just that simple, you didnt get it.

We had to readvertise at a company I worked for. They interviewed three candidates - two young women and a young man.

They decided to go for the man as he was less likely to go off on maternity leave (and yes that got my back up!).

He lasted a few weeks and then quit as he decided to go to university full time. I might have wet myself laughing when I found out 😂