
Getting feedback when a company declines to make an offer - alephnullz
I recently interviewed for a position at The Atlantic Monthly as part of their data team.  After two hours in person, a phone screen, and a two hour coding test, I was told I was &quot;in contention&quot; -- and then they went radio silent for two weeks.  Finally I heard back from the recruiter that they had declined, but provided no other feedback.  I contacted the hiring manager, who I&#x27;d already exchanged several emails with, to ask if he had any constructive feedback, but did not receive a reply.<p>I understand the potential reluctance of a firm to provide feedback to candidates they decline to hire, even ones they feel are reasonably strong: they are probably concerned about legal ramifications.  But still, this feels unprofessional, especially when you&#x27;ve spent a day or so invested in the interview process.<p>I&#x27;m curious what the HN crowd has to say about this.
======
jiveturkey
It's not unprofessional at all. It's the standard. Nobody on the receiving end
likes it, and many on the hiring end don't like it either, but it is what it
is. For a company the size I imagine The Atlantic is, you're lucky to have
even gotten a no from the recruiter. Many companies just drop you without
further contact. ( _That_ is a bit unprofessional.)

Sounds like this may have been your first job interview ever, TBH.

Move on.

At your next interview, ask the final tech interviewer _before you leave_ ,
what their impression is. I wouldn't do this with every interviewer because
the response (good or bad) will change your psyche and affect the rest of the
interviews through the day.

Don't bother asking the HR person (usually they are the final person you speak
to before you leave), they won't tell you anything useful. For smaller
companies, where the HR rep will have some useful feedback for the hiring
manager, do make an impression on them before you leave that you like the
company and the folks you met and hope that you'll be a good fit, etc. A
compliment about some aspect of the company wouldn't hurt either.

And look at it this way. It doesn't matter what the feedback is. If you're not
a good fit, you're not a good fit. If you feel the reasons are wrong, you'll
just get mad about it (and frequently their reasons are wrong, but the
interview format doesn't allow for deep exploration of any candidate). If they
are right, they are right. You shouldn't change your presentation of yourself
based on some company's personal, biased impression. You should find a company
that wants to hire _you_.

~~~
CodeWriter23
I wouldn’t ask during the interview because I believe the asking could be
mistaken for insecurity.

~~~
partisan
The right way is to position it as a learning opportunity. You ask if they
have any reservations about your background. It gives you a chance to get some
negative feedback and also gives you the opportunity to address their
concerns.

------
fjones11
In many cases, a company is concerned about opening itself up to potential
legal action. It sucks for candidates who really just want to know how to
improve, but the safest action for a company is to simply not provide any
information, rather than provide something that could be used against them
later.

It's not dissimilar to why many companies can't provide more info on reference
checks than the dates of someone's employment.

If you don't recall any major red flags, it really might just be an issue of
fit. Maybe you didn't have a specific type of experience or expertise that
they decided would work best for this job (and another candidate did). It
doesn't mean you're not a great candidate, just that you're not the right
candidate for this job at this company.

~~~
mabui91
Is this specific to US? Since I have never had any issues with receiving
feedback in Europe. Fun fact: The current job I'm at, I was declined at first,
but after asking for feedback and having a follow up discussion about it, they
changed their mind and offered me the position.

~~~
brudgers
It is typical in the United States. In part due to the nature of employment
law. In part due to employment law making the legally conservative approach
normative. I would say your experience is not entirely beyond possibility here
when dealing with a small company and an unadvertised position. It is unlikely
at an organization of substantial size with an advertised position.

------
mbfg
It's absolutely status quo. If something other than this happens you should be
shocked. There is the concern over lawsuits etc, which is real, but really,
the issue (I believe) is that many companies really can't articulate valid
reasons why they took the person they took over you. It's rarely about
ability, experience or drive, but more squeemish things like cultural fit,
personalities, and other 'like us' decisions like ageism, sexism, tribalism,
etc.

Frankly, you should be honored that they actually contacted you to tell you
they didn't want you. It is very common for companies to just hope you forget.

------
thelastidiot
No feedback when you get rejected seems to be the rule these days. No one
wants to take responsibility to carry the "bad" news. Radio silence for a few
days and you know you are out anyway. The market is so competitive, they
wouldn't let you free otherwise. I take it a sign that it's not a company I
would want to work for and move on. F'em!

~~~
alephnullz
Agreed regarding the "radio silence." This at least seems very unprofessional,
especially if a company (as in this case) has indicated that you are "very
much in the running."

------
brudgers
Suppose there are four fully qualified candidates for a single position. To a
first approximation, three of them did not get the position because there were
four candidates and one position. The reasons why one or another candidate was
chosen are much much less relevant to the outcome experienced by other three.
The difference is mostly luck. Sure the hiring committee may have found
reasons for picking one and not the others. But that's the nature of their
job...rejecting three candidates and/or choosing one. And all this assumes
that there actually was a position and not just the possibility or hope or
wish that there might be one in the future.

------
muzani
Most of the time there are plenty of people we would be happy to hire, but
some other guy was just slightly more qualified or slightly cheaper for the
same qualifications.

There are some cases where it's just attitude. Like I feel this person was
just blasting her resume to everyone and picked someone whose cover letter
felt a bit more sincere.

There are plenty of cases where someone is simply not qualified. Or that I'd
get the impression that this person is not very smart and choose not to move
forward with the interview process.

Weak English is another major reason. We rarely need someone good with
algorithms or a specific tech skill. This is all learnable. What we really
need is someone who can build what we want the first time, and not spend 2
weeks building the wrong thing. Or having to hire someone else to read the
manual for them. It's really hard to explain why you'd think someone has poor
English. Grammatical errors and a few typos are okay. But sometimes it feels
like some effort to simply communicate with the person.

Also do note that the person on the other end is human. We don't really want
to say why we reject someone, as the reason is often unfair and false. It's
very uncomfortable to explain it. Easier to just ghost someone.

------
alephnullz
I notice a lot of value judgments on here with respect to the original
posting. In no way was it a comment on the job, frustration with the interview
process itself, or a comment on my or the interviewer's proficiency. I was
merely curious whether feedback is common.

I've had a reasonably long career and have been blessed (and perhaps lucky) to
have gotten almost every job I've interviewed for, so I wasn't quite sure
whether feedback is the norm or not, as I haven't been in the position to
assess that.

The summary, though, seems to be not to expect feedback, at least not post-
interview, if you are not made an offer. This is understandable from a
liability perspective. More professional companies will, after an interview,
at least notify you (or your recruiter) that they have decided to pass on your
candidacy. And finally, lack of feedback is not necessarily indicative of a
poor, nor a great, interview. Any number of factors may have come into play,
including, as far as one knows, say, that at the last minute the CTO decided
to hire his cousin.

------
partisan
I had a similar experience with my first interviews in a very long time. I had
two phone screens and a long in-person interview. And nothing ever again after
that. It left me with a very sour taste. I was told I was one of two
candidates and I would be notified by the end of the week either way.
Literally the one thing I asked from them was to hear back either way. I won’t
work with either the recruiter or that company again.

------
avitzurel
We provide that feedback if the candidate asks for it. In engineering or any
other role (product, project management etc...).

It's never comfortable, but it's something that I think you deserve to get.

Just as a side note, I think a lot of people know why they were rejected. It's
rare that people think the interview went great and they still did not get an
offer.

~~~
mbfg
>> Just as a side note, I think a lot of people know why they were rejected.
It's rare that people think the interview went great and they still did not
get an offer.

i don't think this is true at all. Being on both sides, i know most people i
interview have a higher opinion of the interview than i do.

But also the interviewer might truely like you, and so you feel good about
things, but someone higher up nixes the hire, for nebulous reasons.

------
mlthoughts2018
If a firm asks you to invest time in the interview process beyond the initial
application and maybe an initial HR call, then it’s deeply unprofessional if
they don’t give you some feedback about their decision.

It does not matter if they want to have a no-feedback policy for legal risk
mitigation reasons or anything else, it is just simply an unacceptable way to
treat a person after taking up their time. And it becomes more egregious as
they take more time with more interviews or assessments.

The hard truth is that most companies are bad, in a Moral Mazes sense, and the
fact that these inhumane practices get adopted by the majority is not an
endorsement that they are in any sense OK or tolerable. They aren’t.

When a company fails to give sincere feedback after taking up your time, just
be thankful you get to avoid them, as it seems clear it would be a toxic
workplace culture.

------
paulcole
If you absolutely need feedback when you don't get an offer, be clear about it
up front. If a company won't agree to it, don't interview with them.

Otherwise keep playing the game according to their rules.

------
ApolloRising
Don't spend another second thinking about it or them and move on to better
pastures. It could be as simple as someone was ahead of you in the queue and
you were a backup interview.

------
borplk
Don't bother they will never mention anything concrete.

------
CodeWriter23
They don’t owe you anything.

------
Blackstone4
I would call the hiring manager (directly if you have his number or through
the switchboard/reception i.e. just ask for him).

When you communicate, be clear that you're a grown-up and are look for
constructive feedback.

