So confused why I didn't get an interview

[Digdeep79]

Hi
I'm so disappointed at not being offered an interview for an ideal post for me. I don't understand it at all as I genuinely meet all the criteria and even have a Masters in the subject and years of experience. I have asked for feedback (it's within a council) but they said it can take 2 weeks and the lady I spoke to in HR seemed to think I was full of myself for questioning it (I really am so not full of myself but am so interested to know)

It was an interview that I was so sure I'd get that I'd booked the afternoon off work!!

Was I wrong to ask for feedback? I feel really dejected and like giving up!!!

It's likely they got numerous applications for the job or am internal candidate was earmarked. You don't know who you were up against and their experience. It's great you can get feedback as most companies won't. Good luck with your job hunt! x

It's rare not to get an interview if you genuinely meet all the essential criteria

It really isn't. The standard is to interview six candidates per vacancy. If the ad is well worded and it's an attractive job you might get 100 candidates who all "meet the essential criteria". No way would they all be interviewed.

am not interviewinga couple of people who are way over qualified for the job and wouldn't stay with us 5 minutes

And this is a ridiculous prejudice that might lose you the best person for the job! You can't tell from a CV what someone's aspirations and requirements are. Many people choose to work in roles they are over qualified for purely from personal preference - they like the company, enjoy the job, like their colleagues, it's good conditions etc etc etc.

Job hunting is a bit of a numbers game. There's a lot of competition out there and you need to have a good application strategy. It's not just about the paper qualifications. It's about how you present yourself, what story your career history tells, and hugely importantly, the interest and understanding you demonstrate of the position.

I interview in the public sector. Very much selection by matching criteria, a very strict and objective process. Applications are anonymised too.
We also have a policy of only offering feedback to interviewed candidates and not to all that applied. .

Presumably if a job has had a very large number of applications, you could still feedback to someone not shortlisted that "there were 100 applications and we were only able to shortlist 6, this was done on the basis of matching the selection criteria", or something similar.

Most councils would use an application form so answers to questions are all on the same sheet and they don’t usually have letters or cvs as part of the process. Therefore applicants are easy to compare. I have no doubt the op attempted to meet the competencies required.

There should be essential attributes they are looking for, so, educationally, did they want a Masters Degree? Did they need more relevant experience? What experience did they want and did you match it?

There could have been other applicants that ticked more boxes. A Masters isn’t everything if other requirements are not met. You should be able to ask for guidance regarding applying for other posts. If you are not already in local government, how relevant was your experience and knowledge?

If you actually wanted to be a social worker, they would have bitten your hand off. However they possibly had loads of ex social workers or even actual social workers wanting this role! They all want out don’t they?

100 applicants to sift through in local government, this would be unheard of!!! Never! Also, the quality of detail in the accompanying info should make it clear who the employer is looking for. A good HR dept will want less than 100 applicants to cut down the reading time needed! All those rejection letters!