Even if feedback was given after his interview, it's often the case that the real reasons are too sensitive or controversial to feed back.
You can't trust a candidate when they complain about why they were rejected. They really don't know.
Even if feedback was given after his interview, it's often the case that the real reasons are too sensitive or controversial to feed back.
You can't trust a candidate when they complain about why they were rejected. They really don't know.
No it's not, from my experience. I've had Google jackasses push away from the desk during interviews chuckling "how much do you program?" when you don't know their pet quiz.
(The answer to the last question "is more than you", but ashamed I've never said that)
Sure they know. One or more people didn't like them. Oh, but there's nuance, details and such, but it usually boils down to one simple - someone didn't like you as a person.
I haven't conducted a single interview where time wasn't an issue, so I guarantee you that there is just no time to like or dislike the candidate.
What kind of opinion about "likeness" do you think I can form about a person when I have to ask them intense questions over an hour?
Yeah I probably won't like a candidate that is obviously way below the hiring bar, and I will probably like a candidate that provides solid answers to all my questions. That doesn't change at all the outcome of the interview.
> Yeah I probably won't like a candidate that is obviously way below the hiring bar, and I will probably like a candidate that provides solid answers to all my questions.
So, which one is it? Do you have time to like/dislike a person, or not?
> That doesn't change at all the outcome of the interview.
It clearly does.
No, you don't, not for what you are talking about which is their personality.
You will like their skills or dislike their lack of skills, which is what is being evaluated.