When, where, how and whether to complain about these job interviews?
December 6, 2013 6:13 AM Subscribe
I've interviewed twice now for academic jobs at my current institution. Both times during the interview it came out that they were considering me for a different job, one that I hadn't applied for (in both cases two jobs were advertised at the same time). I really hate this practice for reasons below, but is this just me, or is it actually inappropriate? And if the latter, who should I complain to? I am thinking of HR - there was an HR representative present at the interview.
Partway through each interview the questions veered off topic to ones that are only relevant to the other job that I hadn't applied for, and I wasn't prepared to answer them. It made me come across (no doubt) as confused and incompetent. I didn't get (either) job when that happened the first time. I assume I didn't get (either of) the second ones, although I haven't heard officially yet. (Usual practice would mean they would have contacted me by now if I had been successful.) I know they have done this to other people too, and I informally mentioned to the head of the committee that I thought it was inappropriate in someone else's case, so I guess they know my feelings about it, but it didn't stop them.
I don't object to being considered for a job I didn't apply for, but I do object to not being warned about it so I could prepare properly for the interview. And in the first case, when they interviewed me, it became clear that they had never been considering me for the original job that I applied for. In that case I had no interest in the other job and if I had known, I would have turned down the opportunity to interview.
So should I complain? When and to who? (I'm in Australia, in case that's relevant).
Partway through each interview the questions veered off topic to ones that are only relevant to the other job that I hadn't applied for, and I wasn't prepared to answer them. It made me come across (no doubt) as confused and incompetent. I didn't get (either) job when that happened the first time. I assume I didn't get (either of) the second ones, although I haven't heard officially yet. (Usual practice would mean they would have contacted me by now if I had been successful.) I know they have done this to other people too, and I informally mentioned to the head of the committee that I thought it was inappropriate in someone else's case, so I guess they know my feelings about it, but it didn't stop them.
I don't object to being considered for a job I didn't apply for, but I do object to not being warned about it so I could prepare properly for the interview. And in the first case, when they interviewed me, it became clear that they had never been considering me for the original job that I applied for. In that case I had no interest in the other job and if I had known, I would have turned down the opportunity to interview.
So should I complain? When and to who? (I'm in Australia, in case that's relevant).
I really don't think this is unusual. I've sat in on interviews with hiring managers who have done this exact thing - once they talk to the candidate for a while, they realize the person would be a better fit in another role. There is not anything malicious or intentionally confusing about this. They weren't trying to trip you up. Take it as a compliment that they're interested enough to think of another place for you even if you aren't right for the original position.
posted by something something at 6:39 AM on December 6, 2013 [1 favorite]
posted by something something at 6:39 AM on December 6, 2013 [1 favorite]
No where.
In your next opportunity, simply ask the person scheduling the interview, "Just to be clear, this is for the X position, is that correct?"
When arriving at the interview, when shaking hands, say, "I'm here for the X position."
If someone says to you, "we'd like to consider you for the Y position." You can either say, "That's flattering, but I don't think it's a good match for my skill set," or you can say, "Great, I did spend time preparing to discuss X today. Perhaps we can reschedule to discuss Y?"
Basically, don't let folks put you on the spot.
Treat interviews as information gathering exercises, rather than auditions.
posted by Ruthless Bunny at 6:51 AM on December 6, 2013 [34 favorites]
In your next opportunity, simply ask the person scheduling the interview, "Just to be clear, this is for the X position, is that correct?"
When arriving at the interview, when shaking hands, say, "I'm here for the X position."
If someone says to you, "we'd like to consider you for the Y position." You can either say, "That's flattering, but I don't think it's a good match for my skill set," or you can say, "Great, I did spend time preparing to discuss X today. Perhaps we can reschedule to discuss Y?"
Basically, don't let folks put you on the spot.
Treat interviews as information gathering exercises, rather than auditions.
posted by Ruthless Bunny at 6:51 AM on December 6, 2013 [34 favorites]
Seems to me that complaining will be really detrimental for you. Consider these two reasons why.
First: you will seem ungrateful.
You should be happy that hiring committee is reading your application closely enough to think about what skills and experience you being to the table. I'm sure they seem themselves as doing you a favor, and to an extent, I agree. Complaining would make you sound like a concrete thinker who can't understand your own skills and opportunities.
Second: you will seem inflexible.
As someone who considers applicants and conducts interviews regularly, one of the things I am looking for is whether someone can think on their toes, adapt, and be flexible. Like it or not, I think you are misguided by assuming that you have some right to perfectly prepare yourself. Interviewers often deliberately try to take things in unanticipated directions just to gauge an applicant's attitude and approach.
At the very least, if you are going to complain, I would suggest that you strictly stick to the point that you'd like to know what position you are being interviewed for, solely because this allows you to gauge your interest in continuing the interview process. But this may make you sound like you are "big-timing" the school... acting if your time is very important and they shouldn't waste it. While this is true of course (everyone's time is valuable), no manager or hiring committee likes to hear that.
So, I'd suggest you avoid complaining entirely. At best, it gets you nowhere. At worst, it paints you as a whinger and an obnoxious applicant, and you may lose opportunities. You may have already done this by complaining verbally, by the way.
I work in a corporate field, but my team essentially does academic research. To be blunt with you, if you came to interview with me now that I've read this post, you would have a few black marks that you'd have to overcome. I would perceive you as being someone who may be too concrete of a thinker, may be too demanding and inflexible, and may be unable to sense teammates' needs. You would have to go further than other applicants to wow me enough to get a job.
Do you want the hiring committee to have that same opinion of you? If so, by all means, complain away.
Apologies if I have been too blunt. Trying to be helpful!
posted by Old Man McKay at 6:53 AM on December 6, 2013 [7 favorites]
First: you will seem ungrateful.
You should be happy that hiring committee is reading your application closely enough to think about what skills and experience you being to the table. I'm sure they seem themselves as doing you a favor, and to an extent, I agree. Complaining would make you sound like a concrete thinker who can't understand your own skills and opportunities.
Second: you will seem inflexible.
As someone who considers applicants and conducts interviews regularly, one of the things I am looking for is whether someone can think on their toes, adapt, and be flexible. Like it or not, I think you are misguided by assuming that you have some right to perfectly prepare yourself. Interviewers often deliberately try to take things in unanticipated directions just to gauge an applicant's attitude and approach.
At the very least, if you are going to complain, I would suggest that you strictly stick to the point that you'd like to know what position you are being interviewed for, solely because this allows you to gauge your interest in continuing the interview process. But this may make you sound like you are "big-timing" the school... acting if your time is very important and they shouldn't waste it. While this is true of course (everyone's time is valuable), no manager or hiring committee likes to hear that.
So, I'd suggest you avoid complaining entirely. At best, it gets you nowhere. At worst, it paints you as a whinger and an obnoxious applicant, and you may lose opportunities. You may have already done this by complaining verbally, by the way.
I work in a corporate field, but my team essentially does academic research. To be blunt with you, if you came to interview with me now that I've read this post, you would have a few black marks that you'd have to overcome. I would perceive you as being someone who may be too concrete of a thinker, may be too demanding and inflexible, and may be unable to sense teammates' needs. You would have to go further than other applicants to wow me enough to get a job.
Do you want the hiring committee to have that same opinion of you? If so, by all means, complain away.
Apologies if I have been too blunt. Trying to be helpful!
posted by Old Man McKay at 6:53 AM on December 6, 2013 [7 favorites]
I think it's incompetent and unprofessional of them IF they've brought you in with the express purpose of interviewing you for position Y when you applied for position X AND IF they haven't advised you of this fact.
However, I myself have been in a job search situation (on both sides of the desk) where the candidate (which was me in one case) started to seem like a better fit for ANOTHER job as the interview went on. In other words, the candidate was brought in to talk about X and it drifted to Y. It sounds like that's what happened to you. And as happened to you, it can become awkward, in that the candidate may not be fully prepared to discuss it, and may be somewhat on the spot in considering whether s/he even wants that job. However, people are people, and a busy interviewer may not want to go back to square one, and prep for another interview on another day, without even fishing for whether the candidate is interested in job Y.
So at least a little conversation is in order. "Jones, I know we brought you here today to talk about bagging groceries, but our CEO position is open, and I wonder if you've thought about that role at all?" And both sides should be a little human with each other, as both sides have departed from the script and are now giving off the cuff answers.
Here's an ugly truth about hiring interviews - they want to see how you think on your feet sometimes. In my mind there are varying degrees of ethics around this, and I've heard of some truly hideous things done in the name of inducing this situation. However, if I were talking to someone about a job and this situation came up, I'd say it's a fairly rational, reasonable opportunity to see how the candidate can do. Has s/he familiarized themselves with the organization enough to understand what that other role might involve? Unless it's a completely wild pitch (like my example above), has that candidate even looked at our job board and glanced at that other position? You're already an employee of this organization; that causes me to lose a little sympathy if you were completely flat-footed about the other job. I understand: shit happens. I myself may have lost an opportunity once because I took maybe 1 second too long to get my thoughts together to answer a vague question in a job interview. Them's the breaks.
As to how to handle it, I'd be in the "asking" mode, not the complaining mode. As in, you might have some luck going to HR and sitting down with that manager and saying "Hey, the other day the talk turned to job Y and I had thought I was there to talk about job X." Don't access blame; don't blame yourself either. Just try to have a conversation. It may (or may not) result in some opportunity for a next interview where there is better understanding on both sides as to what job you're there to discuss.
posted by randomkeystrike at 7:07 AM on December 6, 2013
However, I myself have been in a job search situation (on both sides of the desk) where the candidate (which was me in one case) started to seem like a better fit for ANOTHER job as the interview went on. In other words, the candidate was brought in to talk about X and it drifted to Y. It sounds like that's what happened to you. And as happened to you, it can become awkward, in that the candidate may not be fully prepared to discuss it, and may be somewhat on the spot in considering whether s/he even wants that job. However, people are people, and a busy interviewer may not want to go back to square one, and prep for another interview on another day, without even fishing for whether the candidate is interested in job Y.
So at least a little conversation is in order. "Jones, I know we brought you here today to talk about bagging groceries, but our CEO position is open, and I wonder if you've thought about that role at all?" And both sides should be a little human with each other, as both sides have departed from the script and are now giving off the cuff answers.
Here's an ugly truth about hiring interviews - they want to see how you think on your feet sometimes. In my mind there are varying degrees of ethics around this, and I've heard of some truly hideous things done in the name of inducing this situation. However, if I were talking to someone about a job and this situation came up, I'd say it's a fairly rational, reasonable opportunity to see how the candidate can do. Has s/he familiarized themselves with the organization enough to understand what that other role might involve? Unless it's a completely wild pitch (like my example above), has that candidate even looked at our job board and glanced at that other position? You're already an employee of this organization; that causes me to lose a little sympathy if you were completely flat-footed about the other job. I understand: shit happens. I myself may have lost an opportunity once because I took maybe 1 second too long to get my thoughts together to answer a vague question in a job interview. Them's the breaks.
As to how to handle it, I'd be in the "asking" mode, not the complaining mode. As in, you might have some luck going to HR and sitting down with that manager and saying "Hey, the other day the talk turned to job Y and I had thought I was there to talk about job X." Don't access blame; don't blame yourself either. Just try to have a conversation. It may (or may not) result in some opportunity for a next interview where there is better understanding on both sides as to what job you're there to discuss.
posted by randomkeystrike at 7:07 AM on December 6, 2013
I can't think of any concrete positive result you would achieve by complaining.
posted by Sticherbeast at 7:08 AM on December 6, 2013 [3 favorites]
posted by Sticherbeast at 7:08 AM on December 6, 2013 [3 favorites]
Also, echoing what Ruthless Bunny said. It always pays to be REALLY REALLY clear about what the subject of the interview is. It's like when the prof comes in the first day of class and says "This is English 150, I'm Dr. ___. This is 4th period. The year is 2013..."
posted by randomkeystrike at 7:09 AM on December 6, 2013
posted by randomkeystrike at 7:09 AM on December 6, 2013
I wouldn't think of it as something planned but not disclosed. Sometimes a candidate appears on paper as a fit for Job A, so they're invited to interview for that. But anything can happen during the interview, including HR getting a sense that Job A needs someone with more of skill X than you have, but Job B is a better fit because of your skill Y. So they change gears & ask you B-related questions. They may throw you for a loop but it's unlikely they're designed to. They're trying to fill both positions.
Ruthless Bunny has great, appropriate responses should this happen again.
posted by headnsouth at 7:19 AM on December 6, 2013
Ruthless Bunny has great, appropriate responses should this happen again.
posted by headnsouth at 7:19 AM on December 6, 2013
One option would be to post a review on Indeed.com, or other employer-review websites. Personally, I consider reviews a form of community service, so I would do it (if there were an anonymous option of course). You could just describe what happened and leave it to the reader to conclude whether your interviewers crossed the line or not.
posted by rada at 7:20 AM on December 6, 2013
posted by rada at 7:20 AM on December 6, 2013
You're gonna hate this advice: relax.
I totally get why this is frustrating. You want a job and, presumably, you are *very* interested in the job that they brought you in to do. I'll tell you a frustrating story from my own fractured career...
In my first professional career, I worked as a website designer and coder. [stuff happened] Then I went to grad school for Architecture. At least a half-dozen times, maybe more, I have been asked by an interviewer for an architectural staff position at a firm/small office/sole practitioner if I would be interested in also doing their website. Emotions inside my head: infuriating. Emotions shared with the interviewer: "oh my goodness! How flattering! You know what, I could be a big help with your website though I do consider my skills pretty rusty there, I'd be happy to help you find someone to do the work and help the firm get the best result."
And, when I got desperate for work in the most recent downturn: "Sure! I can totally help you!" That last one was working for a sole practitioner and no, I did not end up building her website but I did help her because marketing for her meant more work for me. And, thus far, she has been my best boss ever.
So, you just need to roll with it. Keep your eye on the prize -- if you're absolutely not interested in the other job, the best you can do is display good humor about it. If you need to get your foot in the door no matter what, maybe really try to humor them. There's nothing to be lost by just sticking through it and being open to what they are suggesting. And, hey, if it doesn't work out then just try to move on. Try not to get mired in "yeah, I totally went into huge amounts of debt and am trying to claw my way up the architectural ladder because I secretly want to code websites, asshole" mentality. Brush yourself off and move on. Good luck!
posted by amanda at 7:30 AM on December 6, 2013 [1 favorite]
I totally get why this is frustrating. You want a job and, presumably, you are *very* interested in the job that they brought you in to do. I'll tell you a frustrating story from my own fractured career...
In my first professional career, I worked as a website designer and coder. [stuff happened] Then I went to grad school for Architecture. At least a half-dozen times, maybe more, I have been asked by an interviewer for an architectural staff position at a firm/small office/sole practitioner if I would be interested in also doing their website. Emotions inside my head: infuriating. Emotions shared with the interviewer: "oh my goodness! How flattering! You know what, I could be a big help with your website though I do consider my skills pretty rusty there, I'd be happy to help you find someone to do the work and help the firm get the best result."
And, when I got desperate for work in the most recent downturn: "Sure! I can totally help you!" That last one was working for a sole practitioner and no, I did not end up building her website but I did help her because marketing for her meant more work for me. And, thus far, she has been my best boss ever.
So, you just need to roll with it. Keep your eye on the prize -- if you're absolutely not interested in the other job, the best you can do is display good humor about it. If you need to get your foot in the door no matter what, maybe really try to humor them. There's nothing to be lost by just sticking through it and being open to what they are suggesting. And, hey, if it doesn't work out then just try to move on. Try not to get mired in "yeah, I totally went into huge amounts of debt and am trying to claw my way up the architectural ladder because I secretly want to code websites, asshole" mentality. Brush yourself off and move on. Good luck!
posted by amanda at 7:30 AM on December 6, 2013 [1 favorite]
Response by poster: Okay, well that's a pretty clear consensus. I'm not going to complain.
And to be clear, the other complaint i made verbally and informally was when my colleagues were talking about plans for interviewing another set of candidates for a different job entirely and said they planned to see if they could get one of them to cover a different unadvertised position, and I just said i thought that might be hard on the candidates if they were not expecting it and also unfair to potential applicants if the other position wasn't advertised.
I think I was letting my disappointment get the best of me when i was thinking about complaining on my own behalf. I hadn't applied for the second job because I thought they wouldn't consider me, and then in the interview when asked what
I would have written in an application if i had applied for it, I couldn't think straight and blew it.
posted by lollusc at 7:32 AM on December 6, 2013
And to be clear, the other complaint i made verbally and informally was when my colleagues were talking about plans for interviewing another set of candidates for a different job entirely and said they planned to see if they could get one of them to cover a different unadvertised position, and I just said i thought that might be hard on the candidates if they were not expecting it and also unfair to potential applicants if the other position wasn't advertised.
I think I was letting my disappointment get the best of me when i was thinking about complaining on my own behalf. I hadn't applied for the second job because I thought they wouldn't consider me, and then in the interview when asked what
I would have written in an application if i had applied for it, I couldn't think straight and blew it.
posted by lollusc at 7:32 AM on December 6, 2013
Response by poster: Oh and for more context, unlike Amanda's example, this was more like as if I'd gone for an interview for a web design position at an architecture firm and they start interviewing me for an architect job instead. And when I say I have no architecture training, they say, "oh go on, just draw a house". and when I do, they laugh at it and decide not to hire me for the web job either. And no matter how well I know the company or how flexible I am, I don't think anyone should be surprised that I don't do well in an interview for a position I have no qualification for our that however many times i roleplayed the interview in preparation (and i did), that no one thought to test me on "architecture"questions. I felt like I was in one of those dreams where you accidentally show up for an exam naked.
But I get it: I'm not going to complain now, and I realise I'm just being defensive in this response too so I'm going to step away from the computer now for a bit.
posted by lollusc at 8:07 AM on December 6, 2013 [4 favorites]
But I get it: I'm not going to complain now, and I realise I'm just being defensive in this response too so I'm going to step away from the computer now for a bit.
posted by lollusc at 8:07 AM on December 6, 2013 [4 favorites]
Using your example I think it's ok to gently point out you notice this is a different line of questioning and it's totally legit to ask, smilingly, when they ask you to draw a house: "Oh, I have no architectural training but sure I'll give it a shot. Can you tell me by the way... is drawing houses within the roles and responsibilities of your web designers and is that a standard expectation you have for this role?"
posted by sestaaak at 8:50 AM on December 6, 2013 [1 favorite]
posted by sestaaak at 8:50 AM on December 6, 2013 [1 favorite]
It made me come across (no doubt) as confused and incompetent.
Stated as gently as possible: this is something you need to be able to accept and deal with, because it's highly likely you will again be in a situation where you seem confused/incompetent. It's simply part of life. In the particular case of employment, it is inefficient for employers to expect employees only to work on tasks where they are 100% competent. Unless a task requires an entire full-time-equivalent employee, the employer needs to use an existing employee, because hiring less than a single person is (in general) difficult/impossible. Further, it's useful in an interview position to stretch a potential employee past their "comfort region" to determine what else they are qualified to do. For example, if an employer can find someone that fits a 80% FTE "hole" in expertise in one area (which is probably worth hiring someone for) and a 20% FTE "hole" in expertise in an unrelated area (which is probably not worth hiring someone for), then the employer has made a very good hiring choice.
Partway through each interview the questions veered off topic to ones that are only relevant to the other job that I hadn't applied for, and I wasn't prepared to answer them.
I have, in at least two cases, been faced with interviewers that questioned me from a different area of expertise than I'm familiar with. In both cases, I've responded, truthfully, that I wasn't particularly competent in that area and that if they were looking for someone with that background, they should hire someone else. In both cases, I attempted to answer the questions with what limited knowledge I had about the subject, and they seemed at least appeased. In both cases, I was offered a position. As others have noted, it is entirely appropriate to question what the position entails and whether or not you are appropriate for it because interviews are a two-way process (hence the "inter" suffix). It's no good for them to hire someone who will not be comfortable in the position and similarly it's no good for you to work in a position you're not interested in.
posted by saeculorum at 9:01 AM on December 6, 2013
Stated as gently as possible: this is something you need to be able to accept and deal with, because it's highly likely you will again be in a situation where you seem confused/incompetent. It's simply part of life. In the particular case of employment, it is inefficient for employers to expect employees only to work on tasks where they are 100% competent. Unless a task requires an entire full-time-equivalent employee, the employer needs to use an existing employee, because hiring less than a single person is (in general) difficult/impossible. Further, it's useful in an interview position to stretch a potential employee past their "comfort region" to determine what else they are qualified to do. For example, if an employer can find someone that fits a 80% FTE "hole" in expertise in one area (which is probably worth hiring someone for) and a 20% FTE "hole" in expertise in an unrelated area (which is probably not worth hiring someone for), then the employer has made a very good hiring choice.
Partway through each interview the questions veered off topic to ones that are only relevant to the other job that I hadn't applied for, and I wasn't prepared to answer them.
I have, in at least two cases, been faced with interviewers that questioned me from a different area of expertise than I'm familiar with. In both cases, I've responded, truthfully, that I wasn't particularly competent in that area and that if they were looking for someone with that background, they should hire someone else. In both cases, I attempted to answer the questions with what limited knowledge I had about the subject, and they seemed at least appeased. In both cases, I was offered a position. As others have noted, it is entirely appropriate to question what the position entails and whether or not you are appropriate for it because interviews are a two-way process (hence the "inter" suffix). It's no good for them to hire someone who will not be comfortable in the position and similarly it's no good for you to work in a position you're not interested in.
posted by saeculorum at 9:01 AM on December 6, 2013
To add another viewpoint: I had the experience of being ambushed partway through an interview with a job I hadn't applied to- complete with a group interview with the other 4 people in the department I knew nothing about! I was totally blindsided. The interviewer explained that when she saw my résumé, she thought I'd be a much better fit for this other role that they hadn't posted yet. They hired me for the unlisted job - turns out it WAS a better position for me. I get that this is annoying, but sometimes it really does work in your benefit as an applicant. You can always turn a job down if you get it and you aren't interested.
posted by snarfles at 9:29 AM on December 6, 2013 [4 favorites]
posted by snarfles at 9:29 AM on December 6, 2013 [4 favorites]
"And to be clear, the other complaint i made verbally and informally was when my colleagues were talking about plans for interviewing another set of candidates for a different job entirely and said they planned to see if they could get one of them to cover a different unadvertised position, and I just said i thought that might be hard on the candidates if they were not expecting it and also unfair to potential applicants if the other position wasn't advertised."
Just out of curiosity, what are labor laws like in Australia? At a lot of institutions here, academic and even more so public, doing things like interviewing for an unadvertised job or switching positions during an interview can open you up to substantial liability for discrimination lawsuits. And in government jobs, it's often flatly illegal because of job posting requirements (in order to diminish cronyism).
I don't know about Australian law at all, but that's why your description of this stuff sounded fishy to me — there was a lawsuit over this at the university I attended, where a black woman felt that she was unfairly shunted into an unadvertised and less prestigious role and sued (and won, if I recall correctly).
posted by klangklangston at 2:54 PM on December 6, 2013 [1 favorite]
Just out of curiosity, what are labor laws like in Australia? At a lot of institutions here, academic and even more so public, doing things like interviewing for an unadvertised job or switching positions during an interview can open you up to substantial liability for discrimination lawsuits. And in government jobs, it's often flatly illegal because of job posting requirements (in order to diminish cronyism).
I don't know about Australian law at all, but that's why your description of this stuff sounded fishy to me — there was a lawsuit over this at the university I attended, where a black woman felt that she was unfairly shunted into an unadvertised and less prestigious role and sued (and won, if I recall correctly).
posted by klangklangston at 2:54 PM on December 6, 2013 [1 favorite]
I suspect that US academic hiring compares to Australian from what I have heard from friends. In that respect it is different from corporate hiring.
Hiring committees consist of academics who don't manage people or "teams." They regard the hire as a junior "colleague" who is a bit more intimate than a team member. You might not ever collaborate or work with the people who hire you. They are interviewing you and judging you based on their passing knowledge of your sub-discipline and their perception of what you'll accomplish for the department, or how you hold your fork, not what you contribute to the team.
I feel like it is far more informal than corporate hiring rituals I've been subjected to from both sides. The people who run searches don't necessarily know what they are doing, what they are looking for, and they are not out to maximize profit or efficiency.
So like many have said complaining will get you nowhere. It is good to keep in mind that this practice signals this is not a particularly well-run department. You should consider yourself to have dodged a bullet and look for opportunities elsewhere. I have heard from friends that those are limited in Australia. Still, what you describe is not really normal in academic hiring and you're better off working with more professional or thoughtful people.
posted by vincele at 3:09 PM on December 6, 2013
Hiring committees consist of academics who don't manage people or "teams." They regard the hire as a junior "colleague" who is a bit more intimate than a team member. You might not ever collaborate or work with the people who hire you. They are interviewing you and judging you based on their passing knowledge of your sub-discipline and their perception of what you'll accomplish for the department, or how you hold your fork, not what you contribute to the team.
I feel like it is far more informal than corporate hiring rituals I've been subjected to from both sides. The people who run searches don't necessarily know what they are doing, what they are looking for, and they are not out to maximize profit or efficiency.
So like many have said complaining will get you nowhere. It is good to keep in mind that this practice signals this is not a particularly well-run department. You should consider yourself to have dodged a bullet and look for opportunities elsewhere. I have heard from friends that those are limited in Australia. Still, what you describe is not really normal in academic hiring and you're better off working with more professional or thoughtful people.
posted by vincele at 3:09 PM on December 6, 2013
This thread is closed to new comments.
Reporting to HR, in my opinion, makes it slightly more likely (though by no means certain) that HR might talk to someone, but very unlikely that they'd get in trouble. However, complaining to HR, in my opinion, makes it substantially more likely that you'd be branded a troublemaker that people wouldn't want to hire in the future. This is especially true if you've already complained to the head of the hiring committee, because it sounds as though this is standard practice for them, and they disagree with you that it's a bad thing to do. If your goal is a new job at this institution, I would not escalate this any further. If they've decided to do things this way (and I agree with you that it's sub-optimal, for many of the reasons you've mentioned), there's likely nothing you can do to stop them, and complaining will only make you look like a person who is hard to work with or a complainer.
I think your best bet is to ask about this when you're granted an interview. Say something like, "In order to prepare for the interview, I was wondering whether you can tell me if there are any other skills, other than the ones specific to this job description, that would be important for a person in this or any other positions you might be considering me for?" Basically, give them the opportunity to tell you in advance about other sorts of questions you'll be asked about.
But beyond that, I think the biggest skill you can develop is the skill of not getting flustered when something unexpected happens. In a job interview, someone is always going to ask you a question you didn't specifically prepare for, and you need to be prepared for what you're going to do if you feel unprepared. It might help to role-play interviews with a friend or someone in your field, and specifically ask them to ask you questions you might not know the answers to, so that you can practice answering them with poise, asking relevant follow up questions, or talking about how you'd go about finding the answer to a question you don't know the answer to. The goal isn't to get the right answer to every question on the spot so much as it is to assure the interviewers that you'll be able to figure it out if it comes up at work.
So no, I wouldn't complain. I can't see how it does you any good. I would try to clarify this in advance in the future, and I'd start now preparing what you'll do if or when it happens again.
posted by decathecting at 6:34 AM on December 6, 2013 [2 favorites]