Interviewed for roles which were filled by internal candidates

Habitta8

Hi. Hope this is the right forum.

Over a period of time a interviewed for several roles with a semi state. My background fitted well, and the interviews were positive. But every time I lost out to an internal candidate. And was told that I was second choice.

Naturally I suspected that I never stood a chance of getting in. That the internal candidates were already picked and the process was just to tick a box. I invested a lot of time into these interviews so I feel a little let down.

The roles are quite specific. Turns out one of the roles went to someone internal who has no background in the area at all.

Can I complain or seek further details? Should I just forget about it?

bleepbloop7

Often there are times that advertising the job vacancy is just a formality. Unless you feel they have discriminated against you under any of the relevant grounds for discrimination, there's nothing you can do. They're entitled to choose whatever candidate they want.

floorpie

I've noticed this tendency too and find it questionable.

Having known some of the internal candidates who end up being hired, I notice that specs seem to be tailored specifically towards them, sometimes to a strange degree. E.g. "Essential: Must have managed 10-15 projects with budgets of 1-3m; Must have a postgrad cert in project management for supply chain management" etc. In other words, they seem to describe the internal candidate.

My point is that, even if it's true that the role is ear-marked, I believe the specs will make it easy to justify their selection of candidate and as such I don't know how far you'd get if you were to pursue it. Having said all that, I also believe that if a candidate comes in who's clearly stronger, they'll be hired over the internal.

If these are competency-based structured interviews, it might be good to get some coaching. It's easy to score poorly on competences because you're not hitting certain important buzzwords.

Lastly, if you were deemed to be appointable, that's good and shows that you're doing well. Don't be too emotionally invested in a single role and keep plugging away, you'll get what you want in good time.

You could see what charter each competition was down as being under and see whether that allows you to request how your marks under each category totted up against the winning candidate, presuming it was competency based that way

But having gone through a not-quite but similar experience lately id just let it go tbh. You'll be jumping through hoops and only annoying yourself

AnRothar

There is also a possibility that employers are preferring internal candidates as this can be seen internally as the company believes in its own people.

This can have a moral boosting effect.

Sometimes the "best person" for a role is not always the one with the most qualifications.

stargazer 68

See it all the time in our place and it's so frustrating for people who want to move.

An ad recently for another department went up - grade higher than me. One of the mandatory criteria was that you had to have experience with a particular IT system. The only people in the place with experience in that system work in the department itself. Basically it was an internal promotion but had to be advertised!!

is_that_so

Nothing shocking in this at all. It's been going on since organisations were forced to advertise externally. Job descriptions are often teed up for internal candidates plus they have the inside track on how the organisation works.

Iodine1

From the other side of the page: I have seen external people hired to positions that internals were not even considered for, even though they had the qualifications and much more relevant experience than the newcomer. In the case I'm thinking of, one employee left almost immediately as they saw it as a sign of no future for them, other employee stuck with it for a couple of years before leaving also to go to a competitor.

bennyineire

Similar to me on 2 roles I went for, the last one in particular I really thought I was prefect for the role and the interview went very well.

To there credit they told me the very next day that I didn't get it.

I asked for honest feedback on why, they simply answered that an internal candidate got the job.

A friend of mine who works in the Civil Service told me that all job openings have to have a minimum amount of candidates interviewed for a role.

I honestly think they should just open the interview prosses for internal candidates only and if they can't find someone to fill they role then go external.

As it is external interviews is just a tick box exercise and have little to no chance of getting the role.

In future I will no longer apply for these roles as it's just a waste of time and indeed very unfair

Caranica

It happened to me in about 80% of the roles I interviewed for over the course of 6 months. I put it down to onboarding difficulties in level 5. So infuriating but borderline understandable.

OMM 0000

Habitta8 wrote: »

Should I just forget about it?

Yes.

Perhaps apply for jobs in the private sector, there is far less of this malarky.

AndrewJRenko

OMM 0000 wrote: »

Yes.

Perhaps apply for jobs in the private sector, there is far less of this malarky.

Baahaaahaaa

Sonics2k

Happened to me once this year, and twice last year.

It was amusing because in one of the cases I actually knew the person who got the job, very very well and she genuinely was surprised to have gotten the role as I'm far more qualified in that particular area. Didn't hold it against her, she was imo an ideal candidate and she loves the work.

OMM 0000

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Baahaaahaaa

Private companies don't advertise for staff and waste their time when they already have the internal candidate they want. They just give the job to the internal candidate and move on.

fits

It’s still worthwhile to be no.2 on the panel. A lot of people get in that way.

Girly Gal

OMM 0000 wrote: »

Private companies don't advertise for staff and waste their time when they already have the internal candidate they want. They just give the job to the internal candidate and move on.

Some private companies do, the company I work for is currently advertising a role in a different department that I know I can do and would actually be better suited for me than my current role, but, because it wasn't advertised internally I can't really apply for the role as even if I did and got the job I'd have to give up my permanent position and come in through an agency, I made some informal inquiries with a friend I know in that department, he spoke to his boss and while they agreed I was an ideal candidate they advised me that transferring across and keeping my permanent position wasn't really possible and that my current department were likely to block any move anyway.

OMM 0000

Girly Gal wrote: »

Some private companies do, the company I work for is currently advertising a role in a different department that I know I can do and would actually be better suited for me than my current role, but, because it wasn't advertised internally I can't really apply for the role as even if I did and got the job I'd have to give up my permanent position and come in through an agency, I made some informal inquiries with a friend I know in that department, he spoke to his boss and while they agreed I was an ideal candidate they advised me that transferring across and keeping my permanent position wasn't really possible and that my current department were likely to block any move anyway.

This is the opposite of what we're talking about.

We're talking about jobs being ear marked for internal staff and the company wasting time by pretending they're interviewing externally to get the best candidate.

Your company do not think you or anyone else internal is suitable for the job so they're looking to hire someone external to the company. Yes I understand your friend has told you otherwise, but we have to deal with what reality is telling us. If they wanted you for the job and thought you were perfect for it, they'd offer it to you. Sorry.

Girly Gal

OMM 0000 wrote: »

This is the opposite of what we're talking about.

We're talking about jobs being ear marked for internal staff and the company wasting time by pretending they're interviewing externally to get the best candidate.

Your company do not think you or anyone else internal is suitable for the job so they're looking to hire someone external to the company. Yes I understand your friend has told you otherwise, but we have to deal with what reality is telling us. If they wanted you for the job and thought you were perfect for it, they'd offer it to you. Sorry.

I was told if I was an external candidate I'd probably get the role, I also know for a fact that I'd be blocked from taking the role by my company, even though my experience and qualifications are much more suited to the other role advertised, if I left they'd have to fill my role, plus they've just recently lost another person doing same role as me who they haven't replaced yet, so couldn't afford to lose a second person so soon.
Was just showing that there are examples of internal staff sometimes being prevented from applying for jobs they are qualified for because it doesn't suit the company.

Akrasia

Girly Gal wrote: »

I was told if I was an external candidate I'd probably get the role, I also know for a fact that I'd be blocked from taking the role by my company, even though my experience and qualifications are much more suited to the other role advertised, if I left they'd have to fill my role, plus they've just recently lost another person doing same role as me who they haven't replaced yet, so couldn't afford to lose a second person so soon.
Was just showing that there are examples of internal staff sometimes being prevented from applying for jobs they are qualified for because it doesn't suit the company.

Sounds like you’re in a strong bargaining position

OMM 0000

Girly Gal wrote: »

I was told if I was an external candidate I'd probably get the role, I also know for a fact that I'd be blocked from taking the role by my company, even though my experience and qualifications are much more suited to the other role advertised, if I left they'd have to fill my role, plus they've just recently lost another person doing same role as me who they haven't replaced yet, so couldn't afford to lose a second person so soon.
Was just showing that there are examples of internal staff sometimes being prevented from applying for jobs they are qualified for because it doesn't suit the company.

According to your friend though, right?

You need to go talk to the decision maker and tell them you want the role.

Stop making assumptions and go take the role.

Mrs OBumble

OMM 0000 wrote: »

According to your friend though, right?

You need to go talk to the decision maker and tell them you want the role.

Stop making assumptions and go take the role.

They are going to fill the job with an agency worker, not company employee. In most cases, it is not yo your advantage to go backwards like that.

Flinty997

OMM 0000 wrote: »

Yes.

Perhaps apply for jobs in the private sector, there is far less of this malarky.

Maybe be less. Still happens though. I've certainly experienced it with private companies. Office politics everywhere.

Flinty997

stargazer 68 wrote: »

See it all the time in our place and it's so frustrating for people who want to move.

An ad recently for another department went up - grade higher than me. One of the mandatory criteria was that you had to have experience with a particular IT system. The only people in the place with experience in that system work in the department itself. Basically it was an internal promotion but had to be advertised!!

It's certainly a common tactic to make the job description so specific is really only able to be filled by one person.