I’ve seen a lot of job postings for a team lead developer, and I’ve always wondered why those positions wouldn’t be filled internally by default. I would never want to be in charge of a team whose project and code I had literally never seen before! How could you make any sort of decision without knowing the first thing about the technology or infrastructure?
Rejected internal job applicants are twice as likely to quit
131–140 of 230 posts
Re: Rejected internal job applicants are twice as likely to quit
#132I can certainly relate to this. I spoke with the hiring manager of a new role for which I ticked all the boxes in terms of the sort of skills and qualifications needed. I'm talking years of relevant experience with the hiring manager agreeing I was more or less perfect for the role. Except one thing, the role was posted at a higher level than I currently was and they just weren't willing to expend the political capital needed to sidestep that. I mean he was nice enough about it and offered to talk again in a couple months once they had more headcount at lower levels but the annoying thing was, if I was an external candidate that wouldn't have been a problem. In any case, I quit shortly afterwards and found a new role elsewhere.
Re: Rejected internal job applicants are twice as likely to quit
#133Makes total sense: the use of choice to move implies some sort of a mismatch. If not resolved, the worker will elect to use choice to quit.
Re: Rejected internal job applicants are twice as likely to quit
#134After reading the article one thing that struck me was the " internal candidates who were rejected after interviewing with the hiring manager were half as likely to exit as those rejected earlier in the process." Working at a fortune 100 top 10 company I've applied for multiple higher level positions after 5 years and multiple high marks on my reviews and not gotten 1 recruiter call. I did get with one recruiter and…
Surely Fortune 100 firms want a docile workforce. People who will stay with the firm even when passed over for promotion and opportunity multiple times. These people tend to be easy to manage badly. You are better off finding your next job at a new firm and that firm being grateful you accepted versus staying at your current firm and you being grateful they promoted you.
Re: Rejected internal job applicants are twice as likely to quit
#135After reading the article one thing that struck me was the " internal candidates who were rejected after interviewing with the hiring manager were half as likely to exit as those rejected earlier in the process." Working at a fortune 100 top 10 company I've applied for multiple higher level positions after 5 years and multiple high marks on my reviews and not gotten 1 recruiter call. I did get with one recruiter and…
If you can’t get promoted internally, try getting promoted externally :)
This is very very hard to do if you want to go from software engineer to manager. Almost impossible - I have tried sending out hundreds of resumes over periods of years. You need to be promoted internally - but that is impossible unless you know someone. The internal job postings are a sham. I absolutely HATE software development but have been stuck in this role for 15 years and 5 years since I genuinely started loathing it. But there is no escape unless I want to go work in Tescos. I've not seen a promotion into management in my 15 years in the industry across 7 different companies. For all intents and purposes it does not happen and if you go into software, you aren't getting out.
Re: Rejected internal job applicants are twice as likely to quit
#136Earlier quoted context omitted.
Same thing happened to me. It was like my company was guiding me out the door, passive-aggressively.
Or the signals you're getting is that you're good at what you are doing, and not as well suited to other jobs as other candidates, at least in that context. I don't think 'passive-aggressive' is the appropriate term, because there's not likely any conscious action by the company in these circumstances. You've applied, someone else was selected and that's it. There's a tiny bit lack of self awareness on this thread wi…
This is an armchair psychoanalysis, and it is quite pretentious.
> assuming that there's some kind of implicit right to move up higher in the company.
This is so far from the truth in my situation, but yet you feel self-righteous in your judgement that it is laughable. I know your type.
The company I worked for deliberately used the "reorg + redeploy = attrition" strategy to avoid lawsuits because they had been repeatedly sued for their focal procedure over several decades, and this was a known method for avoiding getting rid of people who didn't want to work 80 hours a week.
And thanks for mansplaining how management works. A "pyramid?" Wow, insightful, that never occurred to me after 30+ years. "Market value?" You don't say! I'm overwhelmed by your astute, 101-level observations of business practices. I guess you got that from the VP's you reported to, weirdflex but OK.
Re: Rejected internal job applicants are twice as likely to quit
#137Earlier quoted context omitted.
> one of the positions was actually only posted for someone internally This is extremely common. A company can't allow for nepotism or favoritism, so it requires a public posting for any open position. Qualified external applicants see the posting and apply. The managers hire the internal candidate they wanted to hire anyway. It's all a huge waste of everyone's time. I'd bet that a large percentage of job postings ar…
I've been on the other end of this. The person in charge of hiring me took my resume and qualifications and used that to template the job posting, so I would be the most perfectly qualified candidate too.
Ditto. I've had my a set of requirements that generalized one level of abstraction over my niche resume so it wasn't nearly as obvious. The org wanted to hang on to me because they knew I'd leave if I didn't get a significant raise and no good mechanism to give me raise except advertising a new position at a higher starting salary (my raise) than closing my old position. Their retention strategy worked and I stayed another 2.5 years.
I went through hiring committies and even had to recompete for my own position, of course the cards were stacked in my favor.
Hiring processes are a joke across the board. I feel sorry for anyone who applied to the position wasting their time. I'm confident I've been on the other side of this before where a position matched so well the chances a real competitive qualified candidate that wasn't already targeted seemed low considering how good a fit I was for the role.
Re: Rejected internal job applicants are twice as likely to quit
#138After reading the article one thing that struck me was the " internal candidates who were rejected after interviewing with the hiring manager were half as likely to exit as those rejected earlier in the process." Working at a fortune 100 top 10 company I've applied for multiple higher level positions after 5 years and multiple high marks on my reviews and not gotten 1 recruiter call. I did get with one recruiter and…
> one of the positions was actually only posted for someone internally This is extremely common. A company can't allow for nepotism or favoritism, so it requires a public posting for any open position. Qualified external applicants see the posting and apply. The managers hire the internal candidate they wanted to hire anyway. It's all a huge waste of everyone's time. I'd bet that a large percentage of job postings ar…
> A company can't allow for nepotism or favoritism, so it requires a public posting for any open position
It's not even just a feel-goody policy by dysfunctional HR depts. The US DoL literally requires a company to advertise a role for a position that is currently filled by a PERM labor certification applicant (which is required for green card applications).
Re: Rejected internal job applicants are twice as likely to quit
#139The moon is made of cheese
Re: Rejected internal job applicants are twice as likely to quit
#140Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you can’t get promoted internally, try getting promoted externally :)
Believe it or not, it can be easier. Often you're seen as a certain type or level in your current job. They can't imagine you doing a different one. Plus, if they promote you, they just have to fill a lower position. A new company doesn't have any of these biases. A friend in night school said he fully expected to have to move to a new company to get promoted. His current boss didn't see him as someone with a masters…
And even if you manage to convince your manager to consider you for the promotion/transfer often they'll ask you to start doing the new job on the side for a bit to prove yourself. Now, how good are you going to be at something new that you are doing part time with nobody taking you seriously and supporting you? It's much easier to get the title first and grow into the job afterwards.