How my life was changed when I began caring about the people I did not hire

Re:How my life was changed when I began caring about the peo... by smacktoward on Thursday January 08, 2015 @05:43PM (#8859536)

I would say you absolutely do owe them #1 -- since you've asked them to give up their time working with you to see if they're appropriate, you owe it to them to not waste that time by stringing them along with endless irrelevant meetings and document requests and "we're still working on it" non-responses. Respect their time: evaluate them, make your decision, and move on.

#2 is more discretionary. Letting someone exactly why you chose not to hire them is a nice thing to do, since it helps them sharpen their prospects for the next gig they go after. But the bottom line of what they're looking for from you is (as you state) a "yes" or "no," not a comprehensive review of their life choices to date.

#3 is even more discretionary, to the point where (to be blunt) I find it completely baffling. Interviewing a job applicant is entering into a very specific business transaction with them -- they agree to present their qualifications and answer your questions, you agree to review them and decide if they meet the needs of the open position. They're not entitled to anything beyond that from you, and I doubt any reasonable person would expect anything beyond that from you. At this point you're just creating work for yourself.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:How my life was changed when I began caring about the peo... by midnightclubbed on Thursday January 08, 2015 @09:14PM (#8860376)

Yes yes and yes. On #2 if a candidate gets to a technical interview they are fairly likely to know if they crashed and burned or not. If they are not right for some other issue (they didn't communicate clearly, were rude, dwelt on negatives about previous employers) then there is not always a professional way to say it other than a straight NO.

A decent candidate will learn from difficult questions and things they tripped up on. If you are acting professionally, asking pertinent questions and responding to the candidates answers then you are providing all the help they should need to nail their next opportunity.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:How my life was changed when I began caring about the peo... by namelezz on Friday January 09, 2015 @02:58AM (#8861215)

"providing all the help they should need to nail their next opportunity". Too bad most interviewers do not care that much to go that far due to legal risks, especially here in US.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:How my life was changed when I began caring about the peo... by midnightclubbed on Friday January 09, 2015 @10:03AM (#8862468)

The interviewer generally doesn't need to explicitly tell the interviewee what went wrong (and yes there are possible legal implications if you do). As an interviewee if you are unable to answer technical questions (and unable to work through to the answer without being told the solution) then it should be obvious what you need to work on. If the interviewer asks a question that you stumble on or give a vague answer to then that should also be flagging something to work on.

Of course you can seem to nail the interview and get no-where but in that case you're being rejected for something out of your control (another better candidate, internal politics) in which case you have a good chance at your next interview. Or you are delusional about your own skills and experience, not sure what to do there though!

[ Parent | on HN ]