No Stupid Questions

There are thousands of possible reasons and many of them won't have anything to do with you. There are fake job postings. There are many jobs where the hiring manager already has someone in mind for the job (but they have to check the required boxes and pretend to open the position to any candidate). Another candidate may have gone to the same school or been in a frat with the hiring manager. The list goes on and on.

There are a few benign-ish ways this happens, based on my experience from working on "the other side". They reflect shittily on the hiring manager, but not on you:

You got no immediate rejection because they did consider you valid for the position, just not first place. Then they got a match on the first place and stopped giving a shit about the applicant backlog.

They got too many applicants and threw half in the garbage.

Upper management put a freeze, or reduction, on hiring right as they put an ad out.

They have a person already picked for the position, but they will get in legal or corporate or PR trouble if they don't pretend to do a proper hiring process.

Their application process, human or computer, lost your CV.

Giving you feedback opens them up to liability if you sue.

You don’t get “rejected”, they just hire someone who isn’t you.

I’d like to know how close I was and in what ways I can become a more interesting candidate, but nobody is going to give me a realistic answer.

I can tell you from the employer side there is nothing to gain by answering this question asked by a candidate, and everything to lose which is why you the candidate almost never hear a response.

There are some legally protected reasons you cannot be turned down for a job. Its all the stuff you'd think of: race, religion, marital status, sex, age, etc. The likelihood you were turned down because of one of these illegal reasons is usually very low in the USA. I'm proud to say for the hiring efforts I've been a part of, these have never been considered criteria for disqualifying a candidate. Its always been for things like lack of knowledge/education, criminal history (example multi-DUI for a job that requires driving or conviction of embezzling when put in charge of company finances ), etc.

However, any documented reason a prospective employer gives back to a candidate becomes a liability. Will that candidate sue the company claiming that they weren't hired because they think the position required some not married, which would be a crime of the employer?

I make sure to always assume it was nepotism and my confidence remains sky high no matter how long I stay unemployed. It just works.

sometimes even if you had the best application in the world you’d get ignored. Lets say HR has limited resources, X work hours to find a suitable candidate. They post an add and get 400 replies. After reading 100 of those, they are running out of work hours, and have already shortlisted a bunch of good candidates. So they toss the 300 others in the bin.

This happens all the time sadly.

I used to work in sales and I did a lot of cold calls. The world-weary senior sales guy would always just shake his head at me when I got frustrated. "It's a numbers game," he would say. "It's just a numbers game." In the beginning I would waste a lot of time researching each individual call, but that didn't help me make sales. The truth was a certain percentage of people that I could call would have a need for the product I was offering. Of those people who had a need, a certain percentage would choose us over a competitor, because we were the best fit.

Looking for a job is the same as sales. Your product is your labor. It can feel personal, as though the product is you, yourself. But you're not selling yourself, you're selling your work product. A certain percentage of buyers (employers) will need the labor that you can provide. A certain percentage of those will choose you over a competitor because you are the best fit. It's a numbers game. It's not personal, it's just a numbers game.

Answering you is a liability to them. They have no incentive to do so and legal liability if they do.

Since the answer is unknowable, you might as well assume the best for yourself. Imagine that the job would have sucked anyway.

For example, I once interviewed for a job, was accepted, then showed up on my first day only to find out that the position had been given to someone else. Was I angry and disappointed? Of course. I made myself feel better by deciding I was better off not working for someone so untrustworthy.

Because employers are opaque and their evaluation of you isn't something that should be important to you. They're not giving you a clear response oftentimes because they want to avoid legal issues.

I straight up ask any job I apply and interview with why they didn't proceed. One time they were actually taken back and ended up hiring me (after some convo).

If a company cannot communicate to you why you didn't make the cut, they're a shitty company and not worth working for. I realize that's easier said than done to swallow, but it's true.

Some people fell better when they find fault in others. So blame them for being too stupid to see your worth and be thankful you don’t have to work somewhere with people like that. It’s their loss. You’re waiting a company worthy of your talents finds you.

All there is to accept is the knowledge that the vast majority of employers, the wealth holding members of society, do not actually care about anyone that won't earn them more money.

And then also that not all, but most of society will also tell you that you must be doing something wrong, it must be your fault.

I think your expectations are too high. They DO indeed care nothing for you, EVEN if they DO hire you.

You cope with this by understanding that and doing your best to make sure you NEVER need them more than they need you.

This is something that, as long as you ended up getting a job, you should really just not give a fuck about.

They probably had 1 position to fill, but got many times more applications than that, maybe 10, maybe 20, maybe 50, maybe 100. That means that they had to reject 9 or 19 or 49 or 99 people and they have better things to do with their time than to explain this to all these people, however many they may be.

My current company makes the effort to at least tell whether you’re still under consideration but I don’t think they’re allowed by legal to give any details.

At least in the US, it’s fine to not give a reason but if you do give a reason you’re liable for it. What company wants to risk that?

You should send them one of those annoying feedback surveys.

1. On a scale from 1 to 10, how do you rate the overall quality of my application?

2. How well did my qualifications match the requirements for the position?

Very well matched

Somewhat matched

Not well matched

3. On a scale from 1 to 10, how would you rate the clarity of my resume/CV?

4. Was there any specific skill or experience you felt was missing from my application?

Yes (please specify)

No

5. On a scale from 1 to 10, how effectively did my cover letter convey my interest in the position?

6. Were there any areas in which my application could have been improved? (e.g., resume formatting, better alignment with job requirements, etc.)

7. On a scale from 1 to 10, how well did I communicate my strengths during any interviews or communications?

8. Would you consider my application for future opportunities within your organization?

Yes

Maybe, depending on the role

No

9. On a scale from 1 to 10, how likely are you to recommend me to another employer?

Don't take it personally, applying for a job is a game of chance as much as a game of merits. It's simply a numbers game and luck whether your resume even gets looked at in the first place, even if you're résumé how all their keywords. Hundreds, maybe thousands, of other resumes also hit their keywords.

If you're lucky enough to get through the first sifting and get an interview with the hiring person (not an HR screener who doesn't know anything about the job), then you can ask and maybe get a response on how you could have improved. (Don't ask why you weren't hired.)

Employment is like dating, there are frequently things that happen outside of the process that impact the process and there are often reasons to avoid direct rejection even if the reasons are different.

Jobs might be posted and then the position itself is made redundant during the interviews, so they are no longer hiring. Or they liked your interview, but want to offer you something else and have to do the HR circus to make that offer happen and the whole thing falls through. Or during the interviews they decide they want to change the position into something else. Orbthey are incompetent and HR forgot to follow up on the job offer. I have seen all of these happen!

Then there is the all too common scenario of finding out the candidate is a woman or a minority and sone jerk killing the process. Can't admit that so they ghost. They might have a valid reason not to hire, but don't want to be sued for giving a reason. They might also have posted the thing to meet a requirement although they know who they were going to hire from the start. I have seen all of those as well.

Or they don't want to tell a candidate they didn't meet the position for fear of violence. This is likely being over cautious and not specific to the applicant!

Or the applicant reminded an interviewer of someone they don't like.

These often line up with dating because they are all things that have no real specific explanation that can be given as what the csndidate can even do to change. Knowing they are possible won't really impact how the interview/dating should go in the future either, because they are all external to the interview or dating process.

So the best way is to come to terms with the fact that there is likely to be someone who is a better fit, or the position wasn't really stable, or you didn't want to work or date them anyway if they didn't follow up.

Send out so many applications and keep busy, so that every response is a surprise. Only after a response can you set a reminder to reach out after a week. After a reminder, send a message and do not set a reminder. Keep applying to other jobs.

I just lose track of jobs I applied to in my head. If they aren't responding, they don't care and neither should you.

I had applied for a job in a busy area a long time ago. I followed up a week later, nothing. I called a few days later. Nothing. I went to the office in person and *spoke to the receptionist, who was pre-screening resumes. She picked up a box the size of a case of paper, and showed me another, half full. The full one were resumes she'd not looked at yet; the half full was what she had.

I just was rejected from 5 jobs in a row. I straight up asked how I could have been a more competitive candidate. I got some specific feedback about software I didn't know (fair), an answer on a questionnaire that was milquetoast (also fair), but mostly kind things said. They're not going to drag you but it can be a productive conversation.

As someone who's been on the hiring side there are some legalities involved on what to answer here. But I've always made a point of telling people who asked why. However I'm not in HR, so lots of people might get filtered before I even got a chance to interview them.

Also we asked candidates to do a take home and we talked about their solution during the interview, so most people got a good understanding of why they were rejected, but a couple of times people asked afterwards and I replied to them with the reasons we considered they were not at the level we were looking for, but that we would keep them in consideration for a more junior role if there ever was an opening.

Life is all about probabilities, you can do everything right and still lose (however doing everything"right" is nigh impossible). You lose if they have a better candidate, you lose if their department is suddenly not in need of the position, etc.

With that mentality, I don't bother with CVs, and just use the time saved to apply to more jobs or maybe some kind of relevant project.