Feedback from intervew - was I expecting too much?

[ibbydibby]

Firstly apologies if this is in the wrong place, was not sure where else to post.

I had an interview 2 weeks ago for a v part-time university post. Made one or 2 blunders in the interview, but felt that in general it went ok, much smiling and encouragement from interview panel etc etc.

Was disappointed not to be offered the job, but am over that now (just about!)

However I did ring up the department concerned to request feedback, in an attempt to find out whether or not I had talked myself out of the job, or whether I simply did not have the skills/experience they were after. On phoning I was told I would have to write or email in my request, so did this.

Received a letter yesterday stating

"....the interview process looked at a number of particular areas which were considered essential criteria and each candidate was scored against these on the basis of the information provided at interview. The points for each criterion are totalled up..."

"Whilst you did score against each of the essential criteria there were applicants who were better qualified in the areas that were particularly important...."

I feel very disappointed that the letter contains no information that is specific to me, and wondered if all feedback is given in this way, or has anyone ever received some helpful pointers as to what they fell down on?

They won't give out any specific advice as that leaves them open to discrimination claims so easier to hide behind the generalness.

No all feedback isn't given in this way, and lots of managers are prepared to give specific advice. However some organisations do either have a policy of no feedback or only general feedback like this. Managers might not have time to sit and either speak to or write to each candidate with an individually composed letter/phone call discussing how they performed against the criteria, especially if there are lots of candidates.

Ok, thanks for your comments, was not expecting anything so soon!

I think I just feel as if I am none the wiser, really. I had hoped that any feedback would be useful to me personally. It is glaringly obvious (to me) that the "best" candidate will get the job. Was just keen to know what I fell down on, and if there is any way I could do better next time.

Think possibly my lack of experience in a key error did not help (though was not clear from job ad that this was required) but it would just be good to know!

Will keep on trying! Thanks again

I wouldn't ask for feedback any more.

I did and it was blatantly obvious that it was concocted together by somebody looking at my CV and giving their personal opinions, rather than the people higher up that had influence.

Each job is different. Each interview / interviewer is different. What one may like in you, others may not. So it's hard to generalise. I think feedback can be damaging to your self esteem and confidence. Employers can't take the time to write individual relevant feedback, so it's got to be very basic stuff, ie, best candidate took the job, etc. Take heart instead that the calibre of applicants was immense and you came close.

Also the job you really are suited for is round the corner. I've just found one and am quite amazed I have. That's not to say I haven't had a few upsets and disappointments along the way. Build on your confidence. Nothing wrong with you, your technique, your experience, etc. Just the fact that with so many candidates, only one person can be lucky. Next time it could be you, so chin up, think positive and go for it.

I wouldn't ask for feedback any more.

I did and it was blatantly obvious that it was concocted together by somebody looking at my CV and giving their personal opinions, rather than the people higher up that had influence.

Each job is different. Each interview / interviewer is different. What one may like in you, others may not. So it's hard to generalise. I think feedback can be damaging to your self esteem and confidence. Employers can't take the time to write individual relevant feedback, so it's got to be very basic stuff, ie, best candidate took the job, etc. Take heart instead that the calibre of applicants was immense and you came close.

Also the job you really are suited for is round the corner. I've just found one and am quite amazed I have. That's not to say I haven't had a few upsets and disappointments along the way. Build on your confidence. Nothing wrong with you, your technique, your experience, etc. Just the fact that with so many candidates, only one person can be lucky. Next time it could be you, so chin up, think positive and go for it.

It can be very difficult to give helpful feedback to interviewees - we do it quite a lot at work (although it's not a part of my job), and there's often little more you can say than 'you were good, but there was another person who was really good', or 'you had skills in areas A, B and C, but another person had skills in areas D, E and F, and ultimately, we thought D, E and F were more important at this point'.

I have to agree that giving feedback is of no worth at all for the company - it either leaves their choice open to question/discrimination or just takes up more of their time.

You weren't suitable for this job, something more suitable for you will be round the corner. Which is essentially what the letter said.

When we recruit we tend to have 3 types of rejection response; one for those who are simply not qualified for the post (this happens a lot when agencies submit CVs) and that tends to make it clear that they don't fit the scoring.

A second type for those who were invited to interview but fell down on some specific aspect where we tell them how they may be able to improve on it in future.

And a final type, which I'm never really happy about doing, where we have had a number of candidates who are all good enough, and who there is little to choose between them and we simply have to base it on very marginal judgments - in these cases we tend to end up sending a response exactly along the lines of the one the OP received; you fulfilled our criteria but someone else did it slightly better.

I understand that the last response must be frustrating to get, but I never really no what else to say...

It's a very difficult playing field at the moment, so I think I'd take on these comments as 'you did really well, but there were in fact better candidates'.

Sorry if that's no help, but it does sound like there wasn't anything specific 'wrong' - just that the calibre of candidates was high.

I always give full feedback, although I'm aware that some candidates don't like what they hear! Recent feedback I've given has included the following:

You talked too much, got bogged down in the weeds, lost the thread of what you were saying and didn't answer the question (and gave examples of her saying "Last Wednesday - or, no, I think it was Tuesday, yes it was definitely Tuesday because I was in London on the Wednesday. Or was that the week before....")

We would expect someone coming in at this level to have done some minimal research from the internet on which of the developing economies we are currently focusing on, and the work we are doing there. You clearly had no idea of the countries, so we did not ask you further questions about areas of work.

You were extremely rude to the receptionist. She apologised on our behalf for running 20 minutes late when you arrived. Although you were clearly nervous, this was no excuse for the way that you addressed her, which was witnessed by other visitors and members of staff, who reported this independently to us.

I also told one candidate that we couldn't fault her interview - she had scored very highly and we had had to use the intray test as a tie breaker, which is why she hadn't got the job.

If they are rude to the receptionist or to the person who brings them to the interview, no matter how well they perform at interview, I won't offer them the job.