Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Rejected internal job applicants are twice as likely to quit

news.cornell.edu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 230 posts

Re: Rejected internal job applicants are twice as likely to quit

#191

Post by hinoki »

tomtheelder wrote: post #146
plutonorm wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 loat…

Are you working at a large org? If you want internal mobility, particularly for IC -> manager in software eng, I would highly recommend moving to a startup. My experience at startups has generally been that the company can't convince enough of the engineers to move into management so the transition is extremely easy for those who are willing.

Even large orgs can be like this, as long as they (the whole company, or more likely just the small part you work for) are growing. It’s usually much harder to hire managers. Just go anywhere that’s growing, prove you’re a competent tech lead by organising/coordinating your IC work, and you’ll get the manager twisting your arm to become a lead.

Ask how many reports the hiring manager has, and how many it was a year ago. If it was 10 and now it’s 20, that hiring manager is probably desperate to hire a lead to take care of some of the people managing.

I’ve seen this at Facebook and Google, so it’s not just small companies.

With startups, it’s much easier to determine if the team hiring is growing, because the answer is yes.

Edit: typos

Re: Rejected internal job applicants are twice as likely to quit

#192

Post by 908B64B197 »

abalashov wrote: post #108
bdowling wrote: post #101

Earlier 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…

It's even more fun in public institutions, e.g. universities, where a higher amount of perfunctory humouring of external candidates is required in order to create a somewhat more convincing appearance of an equitable search.

What's funny is when it backfires.

ie, there's an alumni who now works at a top 5 lab in the field and is now looking for an opportunity to move back to his hometown (for whatever reasons). Job description was obviously written with someone within the institution in mind, but then this person shows up.

Re: Rejected internal job applicants are twice as likely to quit

#193

Post by perl4ever »

jollybean wrote: post #162
SavantIdiot wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

Well now you've quite clearly demonstrated why you were turned down for the role. As a someone who has done a lot of hiring: 'I know the type'.

You wrote a lot of stuff in response to one sentence, and seem to assume that if it triggered someone it must all be true.

Has it occurred to you that stereotypes tend to annoy people whether they are false or true?

Also, if you, off the cuff, evaluate someone you don't know at all as unsuitable for something, quite possibly they have information that tends to rule out your hypothesis, like that they were able to do in a different environment what wasn't possible in a previous one.

Re: Rejected internal job applicants are twice as likely to quit

#194

Post by waterpitcher »

If you are unhappy with your current team or role, you are likely going to look for another opportunity. The difficulty of getting into another team within the same company is lower than getting into another brand new company.

If the interview does not go well, then the next step is to look outside.

Re: Rejected internal job applicants are twice as likely to quit

#195

Post by maerF0x0 »

yaacov wrote: post #79
lvspiff wrote: post #76

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…

If you can’t get promoted internally, try getting promoted externally :)

As someone who has never been promoted internally, and has been promoted externally on about half my new roles , I can tell you that taking a job elsewhere is the easier path.

I wonder if anyone with success getting promoted internally can chime in on what are some good tactics/resources?

Re: Rejected internal job applicants are twice as likely to quit

#196

Post by grepfru_it »

abalashov wrote: post #108
bdowling wrote: post #101

Earlier 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…

It's even more fun in public institutions, e.g. universities, where a higher amount of perfunctory humouring of external candidates is required in order to create a somewhat more convincing appearance of an equitable search.

I experienced this when a job req was opened specifically for me. It was odd having to interview knowing good and well I was getting the job. I used the time to talk with the professors like a real interview and then used the last 15 minutes to ask for advice for how I could interview differently in the real world.

Re: Rejected internal job applicants are twice as likely to quit

#197

Post by maerF0x0 »

arcticbull wrote: post #158
lvspiff wrote: post #76

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…

Aren't folks unhappy at their current roles likely to seek other roles internally before looking externally? It sounds like they are more likely to (a) already be unhappy (b) become extra unhappy when a transfer is denied and (c) that leads to them setting off into the sunset. I suspect that these aren't the folks companies want to keep in the first place. On average of course, there will be exceptions. Not trying to…

> I suspect that these aren't the folks companies want to keep in the first place.

Why not?

Re: Rejected internal job applicants are twice as likely to quit

#198

Post by grepfru_it »

monkeybutton wrote: post #151
bdowling wrote: post #101

Earlier 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…

In Ottawa the federal government is required to post jobs publicly like that and people were still gaming it by opening the posting for just a short period of time and telling the preferred candidates when to apply. Now there's a minimum number of days they have to be up.

Usajobs.gov, is that you?

Re: Rejected internal job applicants are twice as likely to quit

#199

Post by nomoreplease »

closeparen wrote: post #100
jonfw wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And in the longer term- it builds stronger incentives for employees. Most devs, if HN is any indication, believe that jumping ship every 1-2 years is the best way to move up. But if you have senior devs who were juniors at the same company just a few years ago, you'll probably be more likely to stick around.

One problem with sticking around is that the number of things you had a hand in, and will therefore be consulted about, grows unbounded. Being peripherally involved in a wide range of initiatives can give you a kind of global view and influence that dovetails nicely with certain visions of a "senior" or "staff" role. But it does come at the expense of being able to go deep on something new. I've been with my employer…

This is my exact problem right now!

Re: Rejected internal job applicants are twice as likely to quit

#200

Post by ashtonkem »

bdowling wrote: post #101
lvspiff wrote: post #76

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…

> 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…

Immigration law also requires it too, which is sometimes why some job postings are hyper specific; they’re tuned to fit literally one person.
Post reply on HN