171–180 of 230 posts
But if it turns out to be a pattern, then it's time to move on.
Are there any meaningful career advantages to focusing on internal roles over all roles? The standards seem higher, you have to overcome your flaws and mistakes (rather than just hide them), you need to get your manager to get over his first impressions and think about you differently, you have to fight for a raise other companies will throw at you, etc. Other than stock and maybe a pension, why is sticking in the co…
In those cases you can move as fast as the "rising star" and not deal with the massive chaos/uncertainty of switching jobs.
Every new job is a sea of uncertainty: you don't know underlying power structures, and for techies, your technical ability is strongly constrained by the intricacies/NIH nature of build systems, frameworks used, libraries, and existing code bases.
This just happened with me, applied for a few internal positions I was told I was qualified for, then later found out they had changed their minds. No other opportunity for growth internally otherwise, so my only option is to look outside of the company.
It happened to me too a few years back. A posting cropped up with the company hiring for two positions right above mine to fill out direction needs, I was a technical lead already. I wanted the position, because I was already filling the role they were hiring for. I was shut down right when I inquired, and told that the company wanted some outside talent. Wow okay, even though my performance reviews were dazzling. So…
"Their interest in me was clear."
Exactly this.
Enlightened and effective leadership would pair a "not this time" response with a series of career development meetings, resulting in a tailored path for advancement; not as detailed as "this job, then that job, then that," but informed enough to show the candidate that they were heard and valued.
An additional bone in the form of a small raise and or training would also be effective.
And of course the plan needs to be reviewed periodically and sincerely, for adjustments and progress on the part of both parties.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Plus the barriers they put up to apply. You're already in the organization yet 90% of the time you get sent to the exact same application process as an external hire so now you need to waste time filling out your work history, updating a resume, etc just to get an interview with people you already work with.
Well. I didn't get the new role, but I did send my updated resume to the 5 different recruiters I'm cool with.
After 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…
Also, do you trust your manager? Just because they checked some boxes in some system doesn’t mean they are actually advocating for you.
It sounds like you probably need to understand the process better.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's the natural consequence of a world where performance is difficult to measure, people are largely fungible, and next to nothing that you personally do will move the needle in whether your employer will be successful. In that situation, why wouldn't you hire and promote your friends? All of the incentives are aligned for doing just that.
How much of it is "hiring friends" vs just hiring someone you have better information about? A lot of people interview exceptionally well but it's always something of a crapshoot how well they will do in the actual job. But for an internal candidate you should have a lot better information on how well they performed in other roles. You can have actual frank conversations with their managers/coworkers instead of getti…
This just happened with me, applied for a few internal positions I was told I was qualified for, then later found out they had changed their minds. No other opportunity for growth internally otherwise, so my only option is to look outside of the company.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
For my first ever job, I was hired from an internship, and one of my last tasks was to write the job description I'd be applying for, such that I would be the only viable candidate. What a pointless exercise. I think that might have been my introduction to how dumb the world of working for a living was going to be!
If that's the case, then maybe it wasn't a pointless exercise. Just an annoying and silly exercise.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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 repea…
No need to be sexist.