As the title states, has this every happened to anyone.
I know myself I've been on some interviews lately where I think my resume matches up great, I think the interview goes great (I give good examples, have good rapport with the person interviewing me) but I get rejected. It's one of those, "I get not me, but then who". Anyone else ever felt this?
This happens all the time. Candidates don't typically have a good sense of how they have performed because it is not entirely clear what the expectation was from the employer (what are they looking for in terms of personality, team fit, character, technicals, previous experience, ..)
Also true for the opposite, I had interviews where I thought... boy.. that was bad.. and I had an offer within a week.
Happens all the time. While it does require an honest self-reflection, I try to put interview performance into two buckets to reduce any optimism/pessimism bias and turn it into a probability game:
1) Personal performance out of 10 (within your control - things like delivery, communicating your value, making sure they feel good about you with team & role, etc. ) 2) What are the odds they could have found someone with a better skillset fit and personality fit? - this is a best guess, out of your control but you can get a sense over time (helps to know how many other candidates there are).
For personal performance I ask myself "Did I do the best I'm personally capable of? What more could I have done?". To evaluate, while it might be frowned upon, I like to record my interviews and use them for honest reflection and self-improvement. This alone got me from a 6/10 to 8/10 when I realized I was a bumbling idiot that didn't address key questions and brought an obviously fake personality (hoping I would fit a happy/pleasant mold). Meanwhile, I thought I was crushing it. Yikes, what a disconnect. It really allowed me to better understand What they were really looking for vs. What I thought they were looking for (you get better at matching these two over time).
A few examples to show how the probability game might balance: -I perform 7/10 and there are 5 other candidates = 5% chance. I'm basically fucked. -I perform 8/10 and there are 5 other candidates = 30% chance. A fighting chance. -I perform 10/10 and there are 10 other candidates = 50% chance. Feeling good but not guaranteed.
Notice I can perform mediocre and still have a shot? Or that you can perform your best and still lose out? Sometimes you just get outdone and sometimes your competition chokes harder than you did. People might have more experience, connections, etc. and you just can't compete. Control what you can control and make sure you're improving but know that even if you have a 95% chance you still lose 1/20 times.
Thanks, that was a lot of great input.
If I could ask, what do you mean when you say: What they were really looking for vs. what you thought they were looking for?
Can you break those two down?
You ever go on a date and the girl asks "Have you ever cheated on any of your previous girlfriends?". While she didn't ask you it directly, if you read between the lines she's really asking "Will you cheat on me?". This is interviewing in a nut shell - interviewers are looking for signals that you are a fit while giving you the rope to hang yourself if you don't know any better. Hint: this is the purpose of behavioral questions.
Okay. So let's reduce the probability of hanging yourself (because odds are decent you've cheated on your partner but no way you're letting this dime know). So how do you moron-proof yourself in interviews just in case you are reading in between the lines incorrectly?
Simple. You need to get comfortable asking the interviewer to clarify what they're looking for, tactfully. It's a cover-your-ass technique that has zero downside. You can't get penalized answering the question that they have steered you to but you definitely get penalized if you don't. I'm in the data world so I'll use a data interview example that 9/10 candidates fuck up (we look for the ability to parse a request effectively) but the principle should translate:
Question: How do you approach customer segmentation? (Ie. putting data into groups so it's meaningful).
Read between the lines: demonstrate you know some shit about segmentation from a high level
Goal: Show the surface level knowledge needed to approach segmentation and politely request they steer you. Do not assume or drill down into an answer just yet.
Good answer: When you say segmentation, I understand there are a few different techniques like demographic, geographic, behavioral segmentations. Statistical methods like K-means clustering after the data is grouped, as well as tools that specialize in segmentation. Before I drill down, I just want to ensure I'm going in the direction you'd like to discuss - of the approaches I've mentioned, was there a specific area of segmentation you'd like me to drill down on or was there another area you'd like me to address that I didn't mention?
Lmk if that makes sense.
Nesciunt sit maiores magni vero delectus repellat nulla neque. Qui et autem sapiente at nihil labore voluptatem. Unde sunt quis recusandae sint quas. Expedita incidunt ipsum similique in error veniam dolorem. Rerum non voluptas nisi eos debitis.
Tenetur eligendi ut ut expedita veniam. Tenetur voluptatum ut sunt ea voluptatem. Fugit vel rerum totam quis velit aut laboriosam.
See All Comments - 100% Free
WSO depends on everyone being able to pitch in when they know something. Unlock with your email and get bonus: 6 financial modeling lessons free ($199 value)
or Unlock with your social account...