161–170 of 646 posts
One time we gave feedback on request and the candidate contested the feedback, then went out on a social media rampage. So yeah, we stopped after that. It only takes one bad candidate to make it not worth the effort.
You should produce it in “I feel” phrases. That makes it known that it’s your opinion and could be wrong. Treat it like couples therapy.
Got feedback, "you didn't really know anything about Ruby on Rails". I was a Rails developer at the time, but no questions were asked about Rails during the interview (asked me nothing but JavaScript). I mentioned that to the recruiter, but when a recruiter is calling you to tell you that you didn't get the job, that's not the time to lodge a protest. Since this was an internal recruiter for the company, I thanked hi…
I applied and interviewed for an Angular position a few years ago. I was interviewed by a consultant doing work for the company while they built up their engineering team. He absolutely grilled me about .NET intricacies, including some of my favorites, "Where is the .NET GAC stored on the filesystem?" and "Why is n-tier better than MVC?". Not surprising, they declined to move forward citing my inexperience working wi…
The only time I've received real feedback was for a ruby job with a small project interview. Apparently I wasn't doing TDD because the tests and fixes were in the same commit. At least that kind of feedback let's you know you've dodged a bullet.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
+1 on this. The company has nothing to gain in delivering more feedback other than a thumbs up/down, and a lot more to lose.
I disagree with this. I've had two companies contact me and offer legitimate feedback after interviews, and I always left feeling happy and with good feelings about them. I applied to one company and got a response back which was effectively "we really like you as a candidate, but it doesn't seem like you would be the right fit for this job / it doesn't seem like the interests you expressed in your interviews [which…
They didn't hire you now, but might be able to hire you in the future because you would maybe apply again (assuming you get passed the "we already didn't hire this person" filter)?
With all the risk, that doesn't seem like much of a payoff to the company, to me.
(Though I am glad you got feedback you considered valuable, and I think it's cool that the companies did that)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Interviewing is a business transaction, not social services. They'll min-max their time just like you'll mix-max your compensation. I'll happily give advice, feedback, mock interviews, and other sorts of help on my own time in more appropriate environments. When it's company time, it's just business.
It's interesting how "it's business" has become catch-all for absolving every breach of previously accepted social norm. As a hiring manager, you're unlikely to be on the clock. And even if, I am somewhat certain that you could come up with good justifications for giving feedback if anybody asks, which nobody will. It seems to be a specific disease of middle management to feel the need to demonstrate their "professio…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you want the candidate to be more likely to reapply feedback would help. In fairness I received feedback I didn't get the position because I was too chatty from a hr person who told me to act more chatty because qualified candidates on paper were failing for being too quiet. I kinda wished they didn't provide feedback because I have an opinion on the internal culture that would make me avoid them in the future.
> If you want the candidate to be more likely to reapply feedback would help. I'd be so happy simply hearing feedback on whether I should bother with the company again. "You were barely beat out by another candidate, we hope you apply again next time!" "You are not a fit for this company, don't try again"
If this is true and if the company is half competent they'll be reaching out to you proactively next time, not hoping you might see the position and think to apply :)
One time we gave feedback on request and the candidate contested the feedback, then went out on a social media rampage. So yeah, we stopped after that. It only takes one bad candidate to make it not worth the effort.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
+1 on this. The company has nothing to gain in delivering more feedback other than a thumbs up/down, and a lot more to lose.
I disagree with this. I've had two companies contact me and offer legitimate feedback after interviews, and I always left feeling happy and with good feelings about them. I applied to one company and got a response back which was effectively "we really like you as a candidate, but it doesn't seem like you would be the right fit for this job / it doesn't seem like the interests you expressed in your interviews [which…
One time we gave feedback on request and the candidate contested the feedback, then went out on a social media rampage. So yeah, we stopped after that. It only takes one bad candidate to make it not worth the effort.
I don’t know which way it tips, but looking at just the potential damage of providing feedback seems insufficient.
One time we gave feedback on request and the candidate contested the feedback, then went out on a social media rampage. So yeah, we stopped after that. It only takes one bad candidate to make it not worth the effort.
What I’m getting at is, there will always be bad apples, or people who react in a way that damages your organization. But not providing useful feedback to people who ask for it simply because one person went crazy is punishing a lot more people because of that one. Who knows if all of their negative karma ends up being worse in the grand scheme of things?
I personally avoid applying to places that other engineers tell me to avoid because I trust their opinion more than I trust a company selling me the highlight reel in an interview. If a trusted engineer said he got a rejection in an interview, asked for feedback, and none was given, I’d avoid that place too.
One time we gave feedback on request and the candidate contested the feedback, then went out on a social media rampage. So yeah, we stopped after that. It only takes one bad candidate to make it not worth the effort.
Hot take: you could hire someone who did absolutely well in the interview, and they could find a few weeks into the job that they loathe everyone, and go on a social media rampage. What I’m getting at is, there will always be bad apples, or people who react in a way that damages your organization. But not providing useful feedback to people who ask for it simply because one person went crazy is punishing a lot more p…
Most people, ESPECIALLY people who ask you for feedback, do not want feedback. They want to get in a fight with you.
Edit: I don't remember ghosting anyone personally in either setting, but it's happened to me plenty. Getting upset about it just means you're new to the experience.