
Non-hiring Practices - diiq
http://blog.diiq.org/post/35463248560/today-im-thinking-about-hiring-practices-no-i
======
edw519
_It is not merely rude but evil that anyone accepts a status quo of ignoring
the unhired._

+1000000

I have not often been in the job market, but every time I have, I've been
stunned by this practice: Run an ad, get a bunch of resumes, ignore many of
them.

#1 Get this, all prospective employers: If you have time to run an ad, YOU
HAVE TIME TO ACKNOWLEDGE EVERY RESPONSE. The typical response I usually get:
"But we got so many resumes, we didn't have time to acknowledge all of them."
WRONG. Acknowledging resumes is your job. Just like doing x, y, and z is my
job. Your do your job. Period.

#2 Get this, all prospective employers: You may give your employees money but
they give you something far more valuable: their time. You can always make
more money, but they will never get those 8 hours of their life back. They
could have spent that priceless non-recoverable part of their life doing many
other things, but they gave it up to you. So show a little respect.

Bottom line: Employment (and the process of establishing it) is a two way
street. So treat it that way.

~~~
mattjaynes
I love 37Signals - their products and their content, but this is the biggest
issue I have with them - ignoring applicants.

I've never shared the story of my efforts in applying to 37Signals, but this
seems like a great time :)

About 6 months ago, 37Signals advertised for a dedicated Conversion guy/gal:

[http://37signals.com/svn/posts/3175-were-hiring-help-us-
sign...](http://37signals.com/svn/posts/3175-were-hiring-help-us-
significantly-improve-conversion-and-retention)

This was very exciting for me. I'd been a long-time 37Signals customer and
over the last couple years had been studying and practicing with optimizing
the customer life-cycle (conversion, onboarding, retention, etc) with my
various contracting clients.

I've been more of a backend and devops engineer for much of my career, but I
always loved when I'd get to simplify or add enhancements to a site and see
the traffic and engagement go up. It had become my side-passion and I devoured
all the books and articles I could find on the subject.

So I spent several days looking over the 37Signals product marketing and
coming up with a strong pitch. The Basecamp landing page was full of classic
mistakes and seemed like the lowest hanging fruit to address, so that's what I
picked to overhaul.

Here's my initial pitch: <http://yconvert.com/>

I kept thinking about the problem and I realized that the mockup I sent of a
new Basecamp landing page was still pretty weak, so I spent some more time
revamping it and sent this 2 days later:

<http://yconvert.com/redux.html>

I still kept thinking about how it could be improved, so I also addressed the
Basecamp funnel flow and sent this another 2 days later:

<http://yconvert.com/basecamp_funnel.html> via this link-baity tweet:
<https://twitter.com/nanobeep/status/212543236374409216>

During this process, I watched my logs carefully and geo-located every IP that
hit my application. Sure enough, the guys I wanted to see it had seen it. They
also saw every update. They also tried some of my suggestions on the Basecamp
landing page. And they also ended an online discussion with a puppy pic (if
you reviewed my pitches, you'll know why that is significant).

Now, I'm not bitter about being ignored and I don't necessarily think it's
evil or anything. I totally understand that folks get busy and things fall
through the cracks - but companies should realize that it's often your
customers and fans that apply for your jobs.

When I'm hiring for something, I'll admit that if I get an application where
the person _obviously_ cut-and-pasted a generic cover letter with no thought
for the actual job, I may ignore the applicant unless they follow-up. However,
if someone puts obvious significant effort into applying personally to my job
- I would _never_ ignore them. It's just really bad form.

I'm still a 37Signals fan, and I realize that as only one data point, I could
just be that one guy they forgot to reply to. But if it's a more common
problem, I do hope they change their hiring process to treat their applicants
with more kindness and respect.

\---

P.S. I also have to mention that during this process I emailed Patrick
McKenzie for advice and he responded immediately with some great and timely
counsel. He encouraged me to be persistent and be as engaging as possible, and
I applied that the best I could. He's a scholar and a gentleman.

~~~
dhh
I apologize for not getting back to you. That's not cool in general and triple
uncool when you've out this much effort into it. I will make sure we write
back to all applicants in the future to let them know when we've made a
decision (this does some time take a while though, we've taken 4-6 weeks in
the past to make a decision, but it will be done).

~~~
mattjaynes
Thanks David. No worries - I figured it was probably just an oversight and
moved on. Still a fan - thanks for the reply.

------
docdoc
Such an important issue. A few years ago, I applied to McKinsey & Co as a
resident. I had a pleasant time interviewing and got to the final round. I
asked many questions as I was a physician and had no prior background in
business but I was really interested and thought this was my calling in life.
Their average response time via email was 57 minutes during recruitment. I
just checked my old emails.

After my final round, I waited patiently ... and then waited some more. I
emailed my recruiter, my "buddy" and my interviewers. I really was interested
in working there but I had to make a decision on other jobs. I told them that
and they said someone will contact me. 6 weeks later, after I had already
taken another job, a recruiter called me saying that I didn't get the job
because I did not make their "bar" and a partner will call me with feedback. 3
years later and still no call.

I guess I should be happy that they did eventually contact me but it left a
very bitter taste.

Fast forward to two months ago. I was in the position of finding a consulting
company to help our hospital system with financial issues. 3 large hospitals.
Multimillion dollar contract. McKinsey & Co.'s name came up a few times but my
bad experience is what made me eventually recommend another company. One that
I got rejected from after the first round but made me feel good. They gave me
feedback and didn't make me feel like crap.

Most people claim that McKinsey has a great feedback system, but it failed in
my experience and maybe that is what led to us choosing another consulting
company.

It taught me a great lesson though. Regardless of who I interview now;
resident, attending, or any other position, I personally call them to let them
know our decision.

~~~
doctorpangloss
It is a good point to be polite to everyone. It is a Hollywood attitude: the
"Hollywood No." Super kind, polite, excited people who figure out the best way
to decline you, because nobody knows how big you could get.

On the other hand, your situation might be rare. How often, in the graph of
commercial interactions, does the dissatisfied recruit become potential
client? Outside the extremely highly compensated (like actors and CEOs),
probably very rare.

~~~
adrianhoward
_How often, in the graph of commercial interactions, does the dissatisfied
recruit become potential client?_

I've had about a sixteen year industrial career now. Most of it spent in the
web / internet space. I can think of six cases off the top of my head.

Two of those are probably causing major recruitment problems for particular
companies - since the dissatisfied people are 'names' in a fairly narrow
field, and are somewhat vocal about their experiences.

It happens a _lot_ more than you think. I talked to a guy in NYC last week who
was originally from the UK and we have people in SF and Cambridge UK among our
common acquaintances. Six degrees gets really freaky quite quickly once you've
been around a few years.

To pick an example from my own experience - I once went to do an interview
after being told that it was a position that allowed telecommuting and was of
a certain minimum salary. When I arrived it turns out neither of those was
true. The recruitment agent had lied. Wasting a day of my time, and an
afternoon of the companies.

I know this because the guy who was interviewing was somebody I hired at
another company about five years previous to that. I had a lovely time
listening to him call up the recruiting firm and rip them a new one. That firm
no longer works for him, or for me, at any company we've worked at. I know of
others that we have related this story too have shuffled that particular
organisation to the bottom of the pile.

Everybody starts somewhere. Paying it forward pays off.

~~~
keithpeter
_"Six degrees gets really freaky quite quickly once you've been around a few
years."_

Yup, not only are there former students of mine teaching Maths, but I met an
ex-student of a student of mine who is now in training.

Education _used_ to have really good hiring and feedback on interviews in the
UK in my experience but since the rise of the HR/litigation culture recently
it is about the same as everyone else...

------
helipad
I interviewed with a very well known company in these circles. I was delighted
as they are known for paying attention to the everyday aspects of running a
business & being open about it. (It was actually my 2nd time applying &
interviewing with them. I didn't hear back that time either, having had a
Skype interviewed with the founders).

However, I was more than disappointed that after two interviews with staff
members, personality test and contact from the CEO that I was in the final
shortlist - a month long process - I never heard back again. The only way I
knew I hadn't been hired was once the new hire was announced on the company
blog.

Between the creative application they'd asked for, interviews & tests, I'd put
in a couple of full days of work. Being rejected would have been fine,
understandable, but never letting me know was disrespectful & goes against the
culture they project.

A few weeks later, the same company advertised the exact same position again
on their blog, as I believe they wanted even more coverage than the first
person they hired. I decided not to apply that time.

All in all, a simple 2 line email thanking me for the effort and letting me
know would have sufficed. Over a month of waiting for an email to drop was
painful.

~~~
RivieraKid
What company was that?

~~~
helipad
I won't say because the point to me is not to out the company. All I would
like is that any reader who has been in a position to hire takes heed of what
people go through.

Lots of well-known companies on HN and around suggest a lot of how-to advice
and ways for doing business, but my personal sour experience suggests they
don't practice what they preach.

If someone reads this and suspects it may be their company, all the better. Do
something about it.

------
kevinconroy
I'd encourage everyone to take it a step further.

If the candidate is strong, then I send them links to job openings at some of
our peers, partners, and even competitors (depending on skills). Sometimes we
get people who are solid technically but just not the right fit for our
culture or team. In this case, they may be a good fit for another team. Your
meta goal is to get strong candidates to work in the larger ecosystem that
surrounds your company, not just your team.

This extra step always surprises and delights candidates, even if they don't
end following through. They'll then go on to think and say great things about
your company.

It's an incredibly nice thing to do that will pay dividends. I'm Twitter
"friends" with several candidates we passed on by took this approach with.
It's lead to several business development meetings, a partnership, and evening
a speaking engagement. They've also referred new candidates to us.

I've had nothing but win from this and strong encourage others to try it.

~~~
carterschonwald
YES.

I've done a bit of that sort of matchmaking for some great folks who've
reached out to me. Its incredibly hard for most job seekers to know which
businesses are a good fit (and vice versa) until they chat with each other.

I've done a surprising amount of that sort of matchmaking in the past 6 months
(smart folks reach out to me, I redirect them to a place that would be an
exciting fun fit for them right now). I'm pretty amazed as how awesomely its
worked out for all those folks and associated companies.

It gives me great pleasure to be doing that matching for other people (and
which I've never had the pleasure of getting myself).

[meta remark: its also been the first time I've seen how my ability to have a
really good read on how folks will get along & what their
strengths/weakness/growth areas are actually ridiculously useful. I'd long
thought those two skills of mine are useless]

------
slyall
The local newspaper printed the following just last week (possibly fake and
not sure how it was attached to the email but good publicity nevertheless):

I was an applicant for a role at Bell Tea and Coffee Company recently. In due
course I received an email advising I was unsuccessful. It read: _'We are
genuinely sorry that we couldn't offer you an interview this time, but as a
token of our appreciation for your interest in working for Bell Tea and Coffee
Company, we enclose a little something to assist you in your job search (Bell
Tea sachets). All super heroes need a little pick-me-up from time to time and
our Bell Kenya Bold tea is especially designed to do just that!'_ All too
often these days we don't even receive an acknowledgement to job applications.
So well done, Bell, for making a small kindness. It is pretty tough out there
for jobseekers.

------
larsberg
As a hiring manager, I tried to have my recruiting managers or sourcers handle
the notification of bad news whenever possible, but I made the mistake of
doing so myself a few times and will never do it again. While certainly most
people either don't reply or simply provide an extremely rude e-mail response
upon the no-offer status, I've had a decent share of stalkers. The behavior
has varied from:

\- Women crying.

\- Men telling me I was going to starve their family to poverty if they don't
get this job.

\- Men harassing me repeatedly.

It goes on. Admittedly, even back then (~2005/2006) I was too easy to contact
(phone number in resume online), but dealing with the no-offer responses from
candidates was by far the most stressful thing I've ever done related to
hiring, and I have the utmost respect for the usually young folks in
recruiting who have to deal with it on a daily basis. I personally found the,
"we may have to let you go if your performance does not improve" conversations
easier.

So, yeah, the comments responding to this post make it sound like all kittens
and baby smiles if you give the, "no hire" mail, but it's pretty far from that
in reality.

~~~
diiq
Absolutely. If it's an imperative for the hire-er to say "no thanks", it's
_just as important_ for the unhired to be polite, too, to say "thanks for your
time" and move on.

~~~
omnisci
Agreed. Also, at some level, hearing those responses is a good thing. If I was
hiring and someone started crying/complaining about my non-interest, I'd keep
their name on file as someone to never, ever hire. Don't want that kind of
person working with/for/around me. Sometimes bad replies are helpful,
especially if you are in a very small field.

~~~
slurgfest
What is "that kind of person"?

~~~
omnisci
Someone who tells a hiring agent that they won't be able to pay their rent if
they don't get this job.

THAT kind of person.

------
munin
I have been instructed by legal affairs that non-contact after rejection is
the safest choice for avoiding discrimination lawsuits. whether or not this is
true, too much direct disobedience of management and legal usually results in
starting ones own job search...

~~~
suresk
I wonder why this is seen as being an effective way of mitigating the risk of
discrimination lawsuits? At some point, whether you explicitly tell them or
not, the candidate knows they didn't get the job.

I can see where it might be problematic to go into reasons why they didn't get
the job, but I'm having a hard time seeing what risks a simple notice
informing them they didn't get it causes?

~~~
hso9791
It's quite simple: Wording. Somebody might have gotten sloppy writing
requirements for the new position, or HR may have misunderstood the
requirements.

This may be enough to give the rejected applicant ammunition for a law suit.
I've been to several interviews where I've had to dig out that what they say
they're looking for doesn't match the position they actually want to fill.

I'm a straight, white male in my thirties, so discrimination is far from my
mind. Other people may form different ideas, though..

------
qeorge
Devil's advocate here (and an employer)..

Its common for thousands of applicants to respond to a posting, many of whom
are not vaguely qualified. So when a position is filled, its not uncommon to
be turning down several thousand people.

Honestly, do _you_ want to send a disappointing email to 3000 people and then
deal with the responses? More importantly, do you have time? Remember, wasting
time on the wrong problems is a sure-fire way to kill your business.

That said, if you've responded to a candidate at all, much less had an
interview of any kind - then absolutely, you must follow-up. Those people have
good reason to believe you might be an opportunity for them, and you owe it to
them to respond one way or the other ASAP.

Sidebar: the current situation is _awful_ for employers. Some start-up, PLEASE
fix this. A job board where candidates can only submit 1 application per day
would be a tremendous step in the right direction.

~~~
FiddlerClamp
I can say that it's been fairly standard for me to be interviewed (a few times
in one case) and then having the firm never contact me again, and not even
answer a brief email asking about progress.

This in marketing departments for high tech firms, mind you.

Clearly, they a) don't care, and b) know they can get away with it.

------
alenam
Silence after sending the resume in and especially after in–person interview
kills every motivating molecule in me. I wish there was some kind of metrics
based on feedback attached to my profile, so that after interviews, I'd bounce
to that perfect position, as "one man's trash is another man's treasure".

Best rejection letter I got so far:

"We're sorry to say we couldn't accept you for a position at XXX. Please don't
take it personally, it was a hard decision. The applications we receive get
better every day, and since there's a limit on the number positions, we have
to turn away a lot of genuinely promising people.

Another reason you shouldn't take this personally is that we know we make lots
of mistakes.

We're trying to get better at this, but the hard limit on the number of people
we hire means it's practically certain that people we rejected will go on to
do something amazing. "

~~~
vacri
I spent a few months looking for work recently, and this style of rejection
email seems to be a form letter these days. 'heaps of quality applicants' kind
of thing. It feels made up, but the important thing is that now you know you
didn't succeed and you can strike it off your list.

------
rizzom5000
While I agree that it is the decent thing to do, the whole ''
Reply>Copy>Paste>Send. 5 seconds.' is probably not entirely accurate. Many
organizations spend weeks going through hundreds of applications before
contacting the candidates that they _are_ interested in.

Also, in general, if you've applied and haven't heard anything back by the end
of the week, it's probably safe to cross them off your list. If it turns out
they are a dinosaur that takes longer to get back to you - then their response
simply gives you another option, or perhaps your first option. It's really not
that big of a deal overall.

~~~
anon987
> While I agree that it is the decent thing to do, the whole ''
> Reply>Copy>Paste>Send. 5 seconds.' is probably not entirely accurate. Many
> organizations spend weeks going through hundreds of applications before
> contacting the candidates that they are interested in.

I think the stories about effort required to look at applicants is a load of
hooey and is an excuse to make HR departments and managers seem busy. It's
very hard for for me to believe that a hiring manager has to eyeball a resume
for more than a minute to see if the candidate goes in the "maybe" pile or the
"no" pile, and no more than 5 minutes to take a good look at each resume in
the "maybe" pile and continue to subdivide from there (each division would
take more time to look at the meat of the resume). I seriously doubt even huge
organizations like Google have humans look at hundreds of resumes for a single
position.

The absence of reply is human nature: No matter how nice you put it, you're
actively rejecting them, and that's a hard thing to do. When you think about
all the times you've been rejected it's usually by being ignored whether it be
a friend not picking up the phone, a girl not replying to the message you sent
her on the dating site, or by an employee who pretends to not hear you. Yes,
it's painful at times, but much less painful than a verbal "I don't want to
talk to you."

The other aspect is that by replying it initiates (or continues) an
interaction. HR employees or hiring managers would like to say "thanks but no
thanks" but then the applicant will want to argue, make their case, beg, or in
the worst situation get angry.

Another reason they don't send replies is because they want to keep their
options open. Sometimes their first pick declines the offer and it would be
very awkward for them to send the letter and then come back and make you an
offer, or even more awkward if the number one pick accepts, they send out the
letters, then the number one pick backs out.

Companies should send the "thanks but no thanks" replies to everyone that the
hiring company has responded to and they should send them from a "no reply"
type address where replies are blackholed or deleted.

On a side note: With the explosion of technology HR is no longer qualified to
screen technical resumes. For almost every other profession it's easy to see
who's qualified and who's not, but when you have a group of non-technical
people dealing with thousands of technical terms and buzzwords they aren't
qualified to make the decisions, and if they're simply matching keywords then
they're an obstacle to the process and can be replaced by machines. Yes,
calling for machines to replace humans isn't pretty but in this day and age
it's the way the world works and people in HR need to up their game.

> Also, in general, if you've applied and haven't heard anything back by the
> end of the week, it's probably safe to cross them off your list.

I send em and forget em, it's much less stress that way.

The only time you should actively pursue a position is when you have a direct
line to the decision maker or their boss. Recruiters are powerless because
they can't ask for updates too often and are at the mercy of the hiring
company. Good luck getting someone in HR on the phone directly to make your
case. It's even harder to find out the name of the hiring manager when you're
applying at a megacorp.

Find the decision maker if you want to pitch directly or to follow up, but if
you can't, just spray and pray.

~~~
adrianhoward
_think the stories about effort required to look at applicants is a load of
hooey and is an excuse to make HR departments and managers seem busy. It's
very hard for for me to believe that a hiring manager has to eyeball a resume
for more than a minute to see if the candidate goes in the "maybe" pile or the
"no" pile, and no more than 5 minutes to take a good look at each resume in
the "maybe" pile_

I've been on the hiring side and have spent time with hundreds of resumes and
it can take _days_. Especially in times of economic woe where you tend to get
a lot more qualified applicants.

Even with strong well defined hiring characteristics anything past the first
couple of passes takes time - or is arbitrary/probability driven.

Let's take your strategy with 250 applicants (and I've _way_ larger numbers on
occasion);

* 250 - 1m per resume into yes/no. Let's be generous and say that cuts out 150. At your one minute per-resume that's over 4.1 hours gone already. (I can tell you that 1m is a hopelessly optimistic number. 1m for the people who totally suck. 2-5mins minimum to deal with the amazing number of really quite talented people who completely suck at communicating those skills in a resume.)

* 100 left - at 5m per resume. That's another 8.3 hours gone (and again 5m is way optimistic for a vaguely deep look). Let's say that cuts it down to 25.

* 25 - deep look. That's time spent googling, poking at their track history. Discussing pros and cons with team. That's at least 10m per resume. Another 4.1 hours minimum.

... so thats _more than sixteen hours doing nothing but reading and reviewing
resumes_. Which translates, once you take doing actual work around that,
screen breaks, lunch, etc. into probably nearly three days of actual time. For
time estimates which are, in my experience, optimistic...

Not that this is an excuse for not getting in touch after a 'no'. If you're
getting hundreds of applications you set up a process that can deal with
hundreds of applications - but the selection process itself can and does take
time and effort. It's damn hard and, in my experience anyway, technical folk
foul it up just as much - if not more than - HR professionals.

------
danbmil99
Big difference between responding to every resume (not really practical) and
responding to someone who has put time and effort into a grueling interview
process and has reason to believe they are on some sort of short list.

Quite some time ago I was recruited by Apple for a mgmt position (team of
~50). I flew from NYC to CA (they paid of course), went through 8+ hours of
interviews with people I would be reporting to, parallel with, and managing.

Long story short, after waiting two weeks and hearing nothing, I had to pester
the recruiter with 3 or 4 phone calls (unanswered messages) before I "caught"
him answering his cell, whereupon he said something very brief and off-putting
about not being a good fit, and acting like I had breached some sort of rule
of etiquette by insisting on a direct response.

I had no way of knowing what their process was, whether I was still in the
running (of course I had a hunch I wasn't, but you really never know with this
sort of thing). I had decisions I had to make that were impacted by this
trailing variable of probability that I might have a big-shot job in
Cupertino.

Anyone who gets to that point in the process deserves the respect of a formal
indication that you are not the chosen one.

------
bithive123
I'm amazed advice like this needs to be given. I was contacted and asked for a
resume by someone at Rumblefish who wouldn't divulge how he got my contact
info and complained about how hard it was to hire good developers. The
position looked interesting and I consider myself a pretty good developer so
sent him my resume and told him I would call in a couple days to chat.

Before I called, I spent some time going over the job description writing down
notes so we could make the best use of our time.

He didn't answer his phone, my last email, or his voicemail and I never heard
from him again. Maybe he just knew after reading my resume that I was the
wrong person for the job. Because of his lack of professionalism we'll never
get to have a conversation about why, and I'll never refer anyone to them.

With such powerful analytical skills and immaculate professionalism I'm
baffled as to why they're having trouble finding good developers.

------
swang
I've had various experiences of good and bad HR/internal recruiters but the
one that really deflated me was with one of the larger Ruby companies in the
Bay Area.

I applied through a resume website, applying to 4 positions that I thought fit
what I could do.

I got a email/call from their recruiter, then I did a technical phone screen
and passed. Due to scheduling I was in the Bay Area a day later so I had a 45
minute pair programming assignment onsite instead of doing it over the
phone/internet.

After I passed that they emailed me asking me to come into their offices the
next day for the full onsite interview. During the full onsite interview, I
did pair programming with 2 different people on 2 different programming tests,
and did two 2-person interviews.

The first clue that should have alerted me to something being wrong was that I
was suppose to talk to the CTO but because of "conflicts" he could do the
interview. My recruiter shook my hand, thanked me, and then I left.

I wasn't sure whether or not I was going to get the job. I had felt pretty
good about the programming tests but during the 2-on-1 interviews I felt they
were forcing me to answer questions where the only correct answer was the one
they had set out in advance in their head. I didn't really know which way it
would go.

So how did I find out I got rejected? Essentially they changed the status of
my application on the resume site from 'In Progress' to 'Reject' and the
resume site sent me a notification tell me I had been rejected for the
position. Just to be sure I got the message the person also rejected me from
the three other positions I had applied for. So in the end I got 4 Rejection
Letters from the company. They couldn't even be bothered to e-mail me directly
and tell me, "No."

Considering the reputation of the company as one that "cared about its
customers" and was considered one of the "darlings" of Silicon Valley, I felt
pretty crushed being treated this way by them.

~~~
wjamesg
Sadly, I have found this to be standard procedure these days.

------
linuxhansl
I agree. I have been on the side of not receiving any update after an
interview, and also on the side of having to poke the recruiters about whether
they got back to the interviewee when we decided to pass on him/her; and
finally doing it myself.

It is absolutely the decent thing to do. I feel sorry for people who only have
interest in you as long as they can potentially get something from you.
Typically I avoid associating with such people, as that says a lot about their
ethical standards.

Edit: Spelling

------
dmd149
So having just gone through the job search process, I agree it's frustrating.
However, I'm not that frustrated if I don't hear anything from a company if
the only thing I've done is apply. Applying is a very impersonal thing.

However, if I attended an interview and didn't hear back, that is incredibly
frustrating.

It's important to manage expectations; ambiguity is the enemy of mental health
during the job search and you'll be immersed in it so learning to cope is
essential.

------
rogerbinns
The other benefit of being civil, polite and responsive is the candidate may
not be the best match now, but they will know other people and meet people
when they do get a job. They are far more likely to recommend your company to
those people. It helps sell your company and they will remember it in their
future career and business dealings.

My only qualms have been what to do about the people who made no effort - the
folks who borderline spammed every email address they can find. So far we have
also responded to all of them too.

------
TeMPOraL
There are many examples here, both positive and negative, but I keep
wondering, why people anonymize the unfavourable ones? I'd really love to know
which company was that "company X", "company [HNer] won't publicly name", or
"well known company in these circles". Those are important data points in
order to know whether or not one should get involved with a particular
company.

~~~
objclxt
Because often they're very anecdotal. Companies like Google employ hundreds of
recruiters. It stands to reason that out of those hundreds there are a few who
are not particularly great (downright bad, even). I also hear that big names
make people sign NDA's when interviewing, although this has never happened to
me.

Additionally, naming and shaming often isn't very beneficial for your career!
People move around a lot, especially in recruitment.

------
deviloflaplace
I interviewed with both Google and Microsoft when I first graduated. MS one
was way more smooth but it was largely because they've sent a team out and we
did face-to-face interviews. At the end of the day I was told that I was not a
good fit. The only thing I was pissed about is that they haven't told me they
wanted a Software Tester right away. Since I wasn't interested in such a
position, it'd save both parties a huge time.

Google one was quite a story. First of all, they reached out to me. Then it
took them 3 weeks to schedule an over the phone interview. I've changed like 4
recruiters along the way, and no one told me way. This is a bad practice since
for international hires, recruiters are way more important.

This is where it gets interesting. My interviewer failed to call me at
appointed time, I mailed my recruiters, got a big lie, they scheduled for a
week after. It was ok since accidents can happen. Over next to weeks I did two
interviews (why on earth can't they schedule them one a day?) and I was told
to wait for a committee. Ok, no problem. After 10 days, and a pissed off
email, they told me that I had to get a 3rd one. Another week of waiting, and
interviewer failed to call again! I was raging by that time. Another week. The
interviewer failed to call again. I wrote an email telling them to not to
bother with excuses. Right before I hit send, interviewer calls. I was raging
so the interview was a bust. They waited 2 weeks to give me a response.

Moral of the story: If you need to have 3 or more interviews do them in a
short time. In that 2.5 months time I've did so many things, Google became
irrelevant, a joke for me. I do get that hiring is hard, as I'm doing it
myself; but I always try to return to an applicant in a weeks time. Still now
and then Google recruiters ping me over Linkedin. I've told every single one
to send an offer right away and skip the interview process. I get the silent
treatment =)

------
ChristianMarks
Once after an interview I wrote an email to thank the group I interviewed with
for their time and to say that I did not think it would be a good fit. About a
month later they wrote to inform me that I wasn't a good fit for their group.
So there are cases when hearing nothing negative would be preferable than
hearing something negative.

------
donretag
Over a year ago, I applied to a job that I considered a great match with my
experience and interests. Never heard from the company after applying. I had a
couple of offers from other companies and I choose one.

Many many months later (7-8?) the company contacted me that they thought my
resume was great and if I was interested in an interview. Even if I did not
have a job, I still would not have gone through the interview due to the
company's previous behavior.

What were they thinking? Either they are incompetent or they stockpile resumes
for when they actually need to hire. There is nothing wrong with saying that
you are not a good fit right now, but they will keep your resume on file. It
really does happen. My wife was hired at a company a few months after she was
rejected for a different job. They hired someone else, but came back to her
when something else opened up.

~~~
rajivm
Applying for a job doesn't necessarily guarantee a response in many cases.
This is mostly a case of companies getting way more applications and resumes
than they can handle. Many companies handle this by storing the incoming
resumes in a database and searching for potential hires when they have an open
position. It of course would be nice if these companies at least sent an
automatic reply indicating that they would contact you if they were interested
sometime in the future, but an automatic contact doesn't mean much either and
sets the expectation that if you reply enthusiastically, you'll get a reply
(which is unlikely given the volume for some companies).

------
luu
Many years ago, I applied for a Google job that I was totally unqualified for.
I didn't even get an interview, but they sent me a nice _snail mail_ paper
rejection letter anyway. I've heard mixed things about their interview
process, but I still get a have a nebulous warm fuzzy feeling when I think
about possibly sending a resume in again one day, because of one simple,
probably automated, $.29[1] response.

Conversely, at a company I won't publicly name, I got the silent treatment
[2], _after getting an offer_ , for asking if I could take two months off
between jobs. I can only imagine what would have happened if I tried to
negotiate salary.

I understand and appreciate the blogger's comment that people should behave
decently, by the simple virtue of being human. But, that's not going to
convince anyone who doesn't already want to be a decent person. But what ever
happened to unenlightened self-interest, naked greed, and pure avarice? Not
only did they sour me on the company, they lost two other potential hires into
the same group, when I told them how their potential future boss treated me
when I didn't take the offer without negotiating, after being asked why I
didn't take the job.

There's pretty much no benefit to treating people shoddily, and a huge
potential downside, when the candidate pool you're trying to employ hears
about it. Why do it?

[1] Probably less, since they doubtless qualify for bulk mail rates.

[2] I sent a couple of emails to follow-up, and tried calling and leaving a
voicemail once. I had the hiring manager's number (and that's the person I
would have been directly reporting to), because he gave it to me in case I had
any questions. Months later, I asked a friend of mine at the company what
happened, and he told me "Yeah, X is pretty busy". The funny thing is, it was
a huge microprocessor project that was staffing about 40 circuit designers /
logic implementers, and the hiring manager told me they were expecting to
continue hiring for another six months. It actually took them longer than that
to fill all the positions they wanted, and I would have started before they
were finished with the arch/perf simulations and moved onto real logic work
anyway, even with a two month delay. I would have saved them paying me two
months salary without having any work for me to do!

EDIT: Sorry for adding something after there have been replies, but it's been
a long time since this happened. After looking through old emails to jog my
memory, I see that they sent me a standard form with a bunch of info they
wanted filled out, before I interviewed. One of the fields was availability,
which I listed as 2+ months out. It's a big bureaucratic company, so it's
understandable that there are standard forms which get sent out that hiring
managers never look at, but ignoring this particular thing this particular
time is a bit funny, ex post.

~~~
rizzom5000
While you might disagree, asking to start in two-months is not exactly the
same as salary negotiation. Most places have schedules and deadlines and the
reason they are hiring is often due to the fact that they have a project that
needs to meet some deadline on schedule.

Two months in the project lifecycle is a long time for any project. I'm not
surprised they gave you the silent treatment. On the other hand, had you asked
for more money, I'd be surprised if they balked -- _if_ their offer was
genuine.

~~~
suresk
Asking to delay the start date by two months might not be standard, but it
isn't incredibly unreasonable either - if they are already employed, they are
going to be delaying by 2-3 weeks by default anyway, and finding another
candidate may end up taking just as long anyway.

It's probably something that should be brought up before an offer is made, but
I don't think it is a good reason for a company to simply ignore someone
they've made an offer to - a polite "no, we need you to start within 2-3
weeks" is an acceptable response.

------
ssharp
One recent experience I had left a bad taste in my mouth. I applied for a
position, did a quick screen interview, took a 2-hour online IQ and math test,
did a one hour phone interview, and then did an in-person interview where I
had to take another test and then meet with 3 people for one hour meetings.

I got an automated email the next week letting me know they were not
interested. At the very least, I would have at least like the email to come
from the corporate recruiter I had been communicating with, not
noreply@companyname.com. I think it's rude to not give some personal
acknowledgement and I put in close to 10 hours of my personal time working
with them. Though a company that behaves this way is probably not one if like
to work for.

------
throwaway_app
I'm a 3+ year HNer, using a throwaway because while I'm looking for work, I'd
not like others to know this publicly (should we form a club?)

What the OP describes truly does seem to be almost standard operating
procedure today. In one instance this happened even after I had substantial
contact with the company:

* phone screen with recruiter;

* technical phone screen;

* completed a _substantial_ pre-interview coding project;

* multi-hour interview with 6 technical interviewers, including on-the-spot coding tests;

This process took _a month and a half_. I was assured by the recruiter that I
did awesomely on all of these, and then, silence...

Only after pressing them for weeks did I finally get a reply: "sorry, we're
not hiring for that position after all". It's incredibly rude to put someone
through this kind of process, only to insult them at the end (if you
acknowledge them at all).

I've been on the opposite end of the interviewing table many times, and I
understand that there are all kinds of reasons to reject a candidate
(technical skills, people skills, personality, just plain "bad fit").

And sometimes it's best from a legal standpoint to not even explicitly say why
a candidate is being rejected. But a simple "sorry, we feel you're not a good
fit for this position" _as soon as you know you will not be making the hire_ ,
will save an incredible amount of worry and anxiety, and let people get on
with their lives.

------
delinka
In the US? Liability. That's why this doesn't happen. Actually having to tell
someone "we're not hiring you," regardless of polite spin, puts you in the
crosshairs of a lawyer.

Much like discussing former employees in my "right-to-work" state. "Yes, she
did work here from P to Q. No we can not discuss her work performance."
Doesn't matter if she was the model employee or an incompetent moron, saying
_anything_ is a potential liability. If you express your opinion that she was
that incompetent moron, you're stifling her ability to find work and a jury of
her peers will find against you, the former employer.

So back to the topic at hand. Say you get the generic "not hiring you" email.
Are you going to leave it at that? If so, great, everyone can move on. Or are
you going to try to appeal to the HR staffer's humanity and harass them with
questions like "why not?" And then some candidate gets all pissy because
"that's not what the job ad said!" and lawyers. So we send the email from a
generic address that ignores replies ... and someone fouls up and sends it to
all current candidates.

Should companies adopt a "we're not hiring you" generic message to send out
and just never reply to replies? Sure. I'd love that. It's easier to ignore
people.

------
SoftwareMaven
The one that I hate more than any other is the "You look great; I'll contact
you in a couple days" to then never hear from them again, even after you try
multiple follow-ups.

My favorite was the one where I got flown out to the Bay Area for an interview
at Apigee[1]. They dropped the ball by not having everybody there to interview
me, meaning they couldn't get all the information about me they would have
liked[2]. When I left, it was all roses (including a said follow-up comment
like above), and then complete and total silence. I get you may not think I'm
right for the job, but flying somewhere takes a lot of my own, personal time.

1\. I'm naming names for two reasons: one, I, like the author, think it's
deplorable. More importantly, if you are going to take a potential employee's
time without the courtesy of a simple reply to one of multiple questioning
emails by saying, at least, "No, thanks", others deserve to know what to
expect as well. I couldn't even get a response on how to get reimbursed for
incidental travel costs without tracking down somebody outside of HR.

2\. I don't think this had any impact on their decision to ignore me. It
didn't even concern me, but, taken with the other events, it points to a lack
of respect for candidates.

------
tokenadult
The author of the submitted blog post begins with

"I’m looking for work right now; and I have looked for work in the past. It’s
something everyone does, now and again."

There is indeed an ongoing interest in finding paying work among the many
participants on Hacker News. That's why I have devoted time and effort (with
the kind help of several other HN participants) to writing up a FAQ about
company hiring procedures,

<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4613543>

which gives job applicants tips on what to get ready for at companies that use
the best procedures.

"It is bizarrely standard, if you’ve decided not to hire someone, to simply
never contact them again.

"Don’t accept this. Don’t behave this way."

It's easy to tell other people to do work you are not going to have to do
yourself. You have no idea how many other applications were sent in for the
same position.

HN participants luu

<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4768830>

doctorpangloss

<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4768999>

munin

<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4768864>

and hso9791

<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4769295>

all have pertinent comments in this thread that appeared overnight in my time
zone, at various comment levels.

The key idea is that companies get unimaginably more applicants, some with
very poor fits to the advertised job requirements, than most job applicants
suppose. I strongly sympathize with the idea that if someone has applied for a
job I advertise, I might as well be polite enough to reply. As Winston
Churchill said (hat tip to the HN participant who recently mentioned this
quotation), "After all, when you have to kill a man it costs noth­ing to be
polite."

<http://richardlangworth.com/when-you-have-to-kill-a-man>

It costs nothing to be polite, but it costs a little to send out a response,
even by email. A company in hiring mode is looking for people to respond to
its paying customers. It is GROSSLY impolite to ignore a paying customer. When
forced to prioritize by press of busyness, most companies devote more time and
effort to responding to paying customers than to job applicants who in many
cases are taking a shotgun approach to applying for jobs. I assume that all
the HN participants here who have recently applied for jobs have done careful
research and only applied for positions for which they are a prima-facie good
fit and well qualified. But at all the workplaces I have ever worked at, the
company has received many out-of-the-blue applications on a cold-call basis,
and many responses to advertised openings with an extremely poor fit to job
requirements. And meanwhile there may be people on staff whose job it is to
HIRE new people who fit, but there is no one on staff who is assigned to have
time and resources to answer absolutely every job application that comes in,
even for advertised positions. The inexpensive availability of word-processing
software on personal computers, beginning in the 1990s, has deluged most
companies with many more applications than most companies have procedures in
place to answer individually. That's tough on the job applicant, but that's
reality. I agree with everyone here who says it's the decent thing to do, and
can even in some cases be the expedient thing to do, to answer a job
application with a definite result in a polite tone, but all companies have
higher priorities, and at least one of those priorities is decently answering
actual paying customers.

~~~
jakobe
I assume that most recruiters keep a list of applicants for a given ad. Is it
really asking too much to copy that list into an email client and send them a
polite response? We are not talking about 5 minutes per applicant, we are
talking about 5 minutes total.

All that talk about paying customers is bullshit. This kind of attitude, to
only do stuff that directly results in more revenue -- paying customers are
turned off by that attitude as well.

------
prostoalex
This is an unfortunate side effect of recruiter compensation. Most internal
recruiters are paid a somewhat low (for Valley at least) base with a nice
bonus when a certain quantity of hires is reached.

Thus internal recruiting is a sweatshop assembly line where it's always
juggling between closing the candidates who passed the interview round and
moving on to sourcing the next batch.

Almost no company puts effort (or pays bonuses) for nice rejections. Depending
on the status of the recruiter himself (full-time vs contractor brought in to
boost the company to a certain headcount), your rejection might generate a
reply. Internal recruiters won't bother (they simply don't have time for it
and are not compensated in any way), but contractor guns-for-hire will reach
out and be nice about it, since in 6 months they'll move on to another
company, and you'll still be in their rolodex as a potential candidate they
can hit again to reach their quota.

------
wjamesg
I feel strongly about this. As a relatively recent college graduate who has
has applied to dozens of jobs over many months, I can confirm that non-
response has definitely been the status quo in my experience. Until I got numb
to rejection and because accustomed to the status quo, I would feel compelled
to seek out hiring managers or HR and ask, "Why don't you have the decency to
even acknowledge my application status?" Instead, of course, I would simply
inquire about "following up" on my application in the event that this was even
possible to do.

"Go to our website" is the new mantra for hiring employers. And that's fine,
but I'm stunned that many can't be the least bit bothered to set up some sort
of response system. "Overwhelming number of applicants" is no excuse in the
day of email...even an automated message, if phrased thoughtfully, would
suffice perfectly fine.

------
mast
Times have changed I guess. The last time I applied for work was over twenty
years ago. Back then resumes were printed on paper and mailed (or hand
delivered) to prospective employers. It was very rare to never hear back. You
almost always received a rejection letter if there was no interest in you.

------
pandaman
I cannot speak for other industries but in mine, video games, this practice
seems to be formed by the 3d party recruiters in order to collect fees.

Applying to any company's ad for an engineering position rarely produces any
response while in the same time every engineer is hounded by recruiters even
while not looking for a job. You can apply, wait for weeks with no response
then call an agency recruiter of your choice and have a phone interview
scheduled in 2 days tops.

Looking at recruiters in my Linkedin network I can see how most of them move
between 3d party agencies and contract/staff HR positions at the studios so I
imagine there are many connections between internal and external HR. With the
recruiting fees being 10s of thousand dollars and HR people paid peanuts it is
statistically unlikely that most of them stay honest.

------
armored_mammal
I so concur with this post. How hard can it be to send an automated email:
'We're sorry to inform you that you have not been selected for position X.
Thank you for your time and consideration.'

------
mattblank
i recently just changed jobs, so i can give a first-hand opinion on this.

firstly, the fact that many companies, after interviewing candidates, don't
bother to contact interviewees afterwards is a big problem. it reflects
personally on the people who run these companies and hire their workers. if
your someone they want, they will kiss your ass to no end, but the second they
don't want you, you're treated like a worthless piece of shit.

as i went through the recruitment process, i interviewed with a bunch of
companies, from startups to larger, more established companies. i have to say
that the situation was a lot more improved than a few years ago. a few years
ago, i would talk to companies like ebay, and even getting all the way up to
discussing salary, both ebay and the recruiters stopped talking to me
abruptly, for unexplained reasons. i was pretty much put off paypal and ebay
for those reasons.

this time around, it was mainly the startups that were pretty rude in
notifying me that i was no longer being considered.

when i finally decided on a job, i was still in talks with several companies.
i was sooo tempted to just stop responding to their emails, but instead i did
the right thing and emailed them all personally, telling them that i had
accepted another offer. most of the companies responded back congratulating
me, and only a single startup didn't bother responding.

i am hopeful that we have turned the corner, and that being professional in
one's correspondence, especially during the hiring process, is important.

~~~
illuminate
"if your someone they want, they will kiss your ass to no end, but the second
they don't want you, you're treated like a worthless piece of shit."

I'd like to be given more graceful declines, certainly, but you can't
seriously expect them to devote the same amount of time dealing with
rejections that they do on acquiring talent. That's not a reasonable request
to make of any employer that goes through hundreds of applicants for every
firm hire.

------
eldavido
As someone in a position to hire, I make a point of telling people no -- but
only if I've taken the time to interview them. No way I'm taking the time to
write back to every candidate that applies over the transom.

Important people have enough crap to deal with every day, and it's just not
reasonable to expect a response to every piece of communication they receive.

~~~
thisone
"Important people" also have assistants who are tasked with sending out these
letters.

Takes about 20 seconds to say, "hey, we're hiring Jane Smith, send out the
'sorry' letter to the other interviewees, and the 'thanks, it's on file'
letter to all the other applicants"

------
pmb
People posting here should name names of their negative experiences. How else
can we learn who the problem actors are?

------
ryall
This. A thousand times. Not only is it the decent thing to do, it's incredibly
fucking rude not to.

------
alalonde
Naturally, this goes way beyond non-hiring. Invited to do something but
can't/don't want to? Don't ignore the invitee; let her know. Send that text.
You can tell a lot about your relationship with someone by this.

------
bryan11
Thank you. This seems to be the practice for many recruiters now, too. For
more than ten years I've wondered what's happened to common decency and
professionalism.

~~~
illuminate
"For more than ten years I've wondered what's happened to common decency and
professionalism."

Monster and Craigslist, I assume.

------
mokash
diiq, you should have made the font a bit smaller.

------
ForFreedom
The theme has got the style of 6wunderkinder.com

------
throwy2
EDIT: The below is correct and I stand by it. Please read the argument
carefully.

Let me ask you, as you have opened six tabs and are applying one by one to
them, would you like to have your inbox interrupt you with a message you have
to spend time on, but which actually has the same effect (after the 2 minute
interruption) as if you didn't get it? Because if you get 10 such emails,
that's 20 minutes that could have been what it takes to get job (one of the
six you were currently applying for) but you don't because the day is over and
you go home or do something else.

The below is correct and I stand by it. Obviously if it is a position such as
a high-level directorship where it is quite normal to do one such application
for 2-3 weeks, then this does not apply.

\-----

I don't really get this perspective. It's a funnel. (For both you and them).

You're sending out 30-200 applications per day - do you really want your inbox
cluttered at the first stage of the funnel with "Email undeliverable"? How
about "Thank you your application has been received"? Well, I don't!

Maybe if I didn't have a funnel but was applying to ONE job at a time for 3-11
days. This is literally 1/300th of the rate you should be going at. 0.3% of
the full-time job that looking for a job entails. Sorry, but at this rate how
suprised can you be that you don't have one? The proper rate is to apply for
30-100 jobs every 8 hours you are actively on the market, which shouldn't be
long.

If none of the 100 applications gets to the next stage of the funnel, it's
better to have 0 responses. As opposed to, say, 7 undeliverable emails, 93
"Thank you, your application has been received" and another 93 saying,
unfortunately your application was not a good match. Think about it. This is
186 spam emails you have to read insstead of having 0 emails to read before
you can continue the work of sending out applications. It's noise coming into
your inbox to interrupt your process.

Can you imagine if every single IP that went to your site generated an email
to you unless that IP became a paying customer in the same session? But
actually, the analogy is more like: every IP that comes to your site generates
an email to you saying your sales pitch has been received. And it generaets an
email to you if the IP starts filling out the form but does not complete it.
Maybe if you have 3 visitors per month. But that is not a viable strategy.

The ONLY possible effect of that 186 spam emails (7 undeliverable, 93 thank
you, your application has been received, 93, we won't be calling you's) is
that MAYBE you miss one of them that ACTUALLY asked for more informatino (i.e.
where you progressed through the funnel).

The ONLY time I want to hear back is where I am proceeding through the
process. I have actually, legitimately, missed such emails because I thought
they were automated or I missed them a long with a bunch of automated
responses I also got.

It's the same at every stage. Getting 20 responses to 20 interviews would be
spam. I don't care about places that don't give me a job offer, since I should
be spending the same time sending out the daily 20-100 applications.

If you do progress to getting 2-3 job offers, choose the best one, or name
your price. If you don't hear back, it didn't work.

If you don't get to here, keep repeating the 200. People, there is ONE of you.
ONE. But there are probably tens to hundreds of thousands of companies you
could be working for.

do you really want the fact that you can't work for all of them (which is a
mathematical guarantee) spamming your inbox?

Let me ask you this: would YOU like to LITERALLY DOUBLE the number of emails
you send at EACH funnel step, by writing another email to everyone you
previously sent an email to, saying you won't be pursuing it? Do you want to
halve the signal-ratio by having the next funnel step include not only signal
(ones going forward) but noise (rejections).

This would be like building a web app funnel where half of your "conversions"
are in fact thoughtful no-thankyou. That's not a signal, that's noise. If the
customer doesn't sign up, that's all the signal you need.

~~~
hso9791
Maybe it would be better to spend some time on: -certifications -further
education -market/company research -polishing applications -part time job at
neighborhood kiosk

Instead of just going automatic shotgun all over every position you see?

~~~
throwy2
if the response rate is 0%, sure. but you find that out pretty quick, if
you're actually sending applications instead of, as suggested here, reading
automated responses. Sure, send out 100 emails and if you don't get 17-20
responses, you've got a problem.

But the "solution" suggested here is far worse.

It suggests to me that this person DOES have a 20% response rate, but then is
waiting around for that 1 application per week that they send.

This is insanity itself (unless it is a ceo or high level director or other
extremely, extremely scarce position with a hugely different funnel. same if
you know someone, obv.)

I mean, just think it through. Imagine that the OP here is really lucky,
because it turns out statistically that he has a 15% response rate (his phone
rings 15 times every time he sends 100 applications), an 80% interview rate
(80% of the time his phone rings, they ask a few questions and call him in)
and a 75% second interview rate, and a 100% offer rate at the end of the
second interview, and a 20% great-offer rate out of those offers - really, top
of the market.

This is a great position to be in. All you have to do is send enough
applications in, and the only thing stopping you is the fact that you are
sifting through all this crap that the funnel gives you.

If I didn't have a job, which I do, I would not mind sending thirty emails
today, thirty tomorrow, and thirty the day after (in the mean while the phone
has rung 15 times), going in to 12 interviews and 8 second interviews, and
getting a selection of 2 fantastic jobs to choose from.

Meanwhile, the OP can have the very same response rate, 15%, and spend 5 weeks
on 5 applications, waiting to hear back. In fact, this results in only 55.62%
chance of hearing back from a single person at the end of all 5 weeks (the
formula is 1-0.85^5). And that's just step 1 of his funnel.

so of course he will be frustrated if he doesn't hear back from that one
person. oh well, he's going about it wrong.

as the OP stated his case, I do believe his only problem is too small reach.
Not, as you suggest, a 0% response rate.

Of course, if you do find that (after 3 days nobody gets back to you out of
the 28+37+26 applications) instead of the 10-20 that you expected, then you
change your strategy. This also reduces your down-time, because you are never
"waiting", and if on day 4 the three previous days turn out to have had some
lead time but you get 20 calls, so much the better. :)

