It's easy to tell someone the truth if she didn't get a job
when she is clearly lacking some technical requirement.

Sometimes, however, the candidate will push back even on this.

This is when the generalist recruiter is at a loss.

She doesn't specialize in the field and doesn't know enough
to rebut the candidate's claims.

All she can do is pass the buck to the client - because she really is ignorant.

When the reason for rejection is a personality issue,
most recruiters just don't want to tell the truth.

Instead, they opt for a vague remark like, "It's just not a fit."

Reformed bully, Becky Metcalf explains the logic here:

you may not mind when someone tells you
point blank that they just don't like you,
I'm not sure everyone else has such thick skin.

I'm all for not sugar-coating to keep from providing for false hope,
but a little something sweet mixed in isn't hurting anything.


Becky thinks a recruiter should have the guts
to call the candidate with the bad news
but she doesn't think it's right to give them the full Monty.

So, the general rule about turning off candidates is:
Transparency, yes, but only so far.


Which means, for those who are thick-headed,
no transparency at all.

a. Have the guts to make a personal call and tell the candidate
that she didn't get the job but

b. If she didn't get the job for a personal reason
(as opposed to a technical one) don't tell her

See also:
Candidate Control by Rayanne
Respect vs Transparency by Becky

Views: 96

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Now I gotta tell you this.

I had a weird experience this week. I had a candidate with whom i did a favour interview for. Why? you may ask... well my CEO asked me to, as the guy had apparently worked for us 10 years ago, and he rang my CEO personally and asked for a meeting. He very kindly accepted the meeting... for me.

So I sat down with this guy, for over half an hour. He hadn't worked in my industry (IT) since he left my company, that decade ago, his communication skills were below average for a Consultant, and to be honest, he was just plain annoying.

After the small talk, etc I went over his cv with him.

DANWhy are we meeting.
Candidate X I want a job, and I like this company
Fair enough.

DAN: As what?
Candidate X Anything.... I can do it all! I have heaps of experience
hmmmmm thunked I, I'm not quite convinced.
Dan: Such as?
Candidate X:Project Management, Testing.. that's easy anyone can do that, sales, anything really.

DAN: That's great, and I like you style, insofar as getting this meeting and stating your case, however I have to tell you.... It isn't going to happen here! i will not hire you into my organisation.
Candidate X: Dont rush your decision, go and think about it and then get back to me.
DAN: I don't need to, truly. Your cv will not carry water in this organisation any more. And unfortunately, unlike years gone by there is no room to carry anyone as they come up to speed.

Candidate X: How about in your team then, I'm sure I can do Recruiting. Or maybe another part of the business. Why don't you call the CEO, Danny, my friend and see what you can work out.

DAN: (Getting annoyed), Firstly I don't think Danny is your friend, and secondly Danny pays me to look over everyone who enters our organisation to ensure there is a fit at all levels. I'm afraid Candidate X, your skillset is not even close anymore.

Candidate X: OK I'll come back Monday and have my second interview then...... I'm available at 10am
DAN: I'm thinking you aren't hearing me. I'll try to be clearer.... YOU will not get a job at DWS in the near future. There will be more appropriate people for me to hire and I would be being irresponsible to my Board and fellow employees to bring you on. Do you understand? My answer is NO we wont be offering you a job.

Candidate X: OK OK OK.. blah blah blah.

We then entered into some small talk as I gave opportunity for more questions and offered support for job search etc (as this guy needs it) and he asked me a few personal questions, which I answered honestly and openly.

Then I get a long winded email (like this post... sorry) using that information I told him to try and sway my opinion.

Maybe if I'd stroked his ego, given false hope, told him that when the market changes we could be in the market for someone of his rare skillset. But that didn't seems fair or right. But being honest, transparent and blunt didn't work either. (Please note, also ONLY time I have nearly sworn at a candidate)
Dan, This guy was an oddball. Your CEO didn't have the guts to turn him away so he got you to do the dirty work.

The reason you gave for the rejection however was not the full truth.

You said: You don't have the skills we need and we aren't going to carry you until you acquire them.

In fact, he was such an obnoxious personality that you would have rejected him for that reason as well.

So, what would you have said if he had the technical skills you needed?

PS: Would you let yourself be the CEO's fall-guy again? Or would you tell him to man up and reject the guy himself.

BitterMan.
I like that. Sounds like a SuperHero to me.
;)
"You can either do one of two things to remedy your faux pas – you can get “better” at your presentation or you can get “bitter.” Which do you choose?" ~ Maureen Sharib, Sacred Cows or Sacred Vows, RBC March 18, 2009 at 5:52am
Hey Animule, do you realize you wrote...

She doesn't specialize in the field and doesn't know enough to rebut the candidate's claims.

She? She? What are you - the Recruiting Misogynist?

You are soooooo boorish, you know that?
"pbakeronline" has been one of your aliases...

"Michael" - I just think you're misunderstood. Need a hug?

KarenM said:
You know"Michael", I have the CLASS to totally represent who I am in Full Form.. People know who I am, what I do and where I am going, and I don't hide behind a little pseudonym or try to avoid being seen and anonymous
Karen Mattonen
Hey Animal,

I think full "transparency" is a myth. There are no "Naked Conversations" in business.

Nekkid time is for my personal life.

As a professional I manage every conversation and interaction. That is what I get paid to do, and sometimes I manage people off the phone so I can get back on that most important instrument and find the candidates that will make me a buck. When I can add constructive criticism I do, but I am not Don Quixote jousting at windmills all day long

If all I wanted to do was fix people I did I'd be a therapist or social worker. I'm not, I am a recruiter (who, as Barb Bruno often says, is a social worker who likes nice things) so I can only do so much social work before I get back on the phone and make a buck.

My personal search to stay in touch with my Buddha nature may help me spend more time helping than I would otherwise, but ultimately I have to serve those who pay my fee.
As Maureen and I like to say, you're one of those who make life worth living. By the way, isn't pbakeronline a pseudonym?


KarenM / Hirecentrix.com said:
LOL, steve, that is the best you come up with.. .
An alias - the email address that i ALWAYS use is bold and up there to see.. and interestingly enough, you did not demonstrate the other posts where I demonstrated full disclosure... LOL
karen mattonen..

Steve Levy said:
"pbakeronline" has been one of your aliases...

"Michael" - I just think you're misunderstood. Need a hug? KarenM said:
You know"Michael", I have the CLASS to totally represent who I am in Full Form.. People know who I am, what I do and where I am going, and I don't hide behind a little pseudonym or try to avoid being seen and anonymous
Karen Mattonen

Reply to Discussion

RSS

Subscribe

All the recruiting news you see here, delivered straight to your inbox.

Just enter your e-mail address below

Webinar

RecruitingBlogs on Twitter

© 2022   All Rights Reserved   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Privacy Policy  |  Terms of Service