(Original post by threeportdrift)
As the applicant, or outside the process you can rarely tell why you have been rejected. The volume of applicants for jobs usually makes it impractical and ineffective use of staff time to give feedback. In my recent hiring experience, about 30% of applications are utterly useless, the applicant has recycled a standard CV that reflects their whole life, and has not made any attempt to demonstrate a fit with the specific job they are applying for. It is very hard to find anything polite or constructive to say about them.
Most organisations large enough to have an HR department will have two, often three people minimum that read and shortlist CVs. The usual way of doing this is to have a list (often in online software so that a record is available) of the specific skills the job spec asked for (ie the bullet point list that many adverts have). Individually, they then scan through the CV looking for the evidence of those skills. They will have some quantifiable system along the lines of 0pt= no evidence, 1pt= some evidence, 2pt= evidence, 3pt = strong evidence. They add up the scores, then the 2/3 people get together and confirm their top scorers. The only feedback you could give to those not selected at this stage would be 'just not as strong as the people we selected'.
In the case of different lists, which there often are around the edges, then they look back at the CVs. No-one is going to suggest making an illegal decision at that point, or if they are foolish enough to, then one of the other two is bound to politely remind them. So when someone says 'this candidate took 5 years to do their BSc - let's ditch them
', someone else might point out that they don't know every degree course, maybe it was a 5 year course, maybe there was a tragedy in the family, maybe there was a health issue etc. They've still got 6 chances (for one interview panel, there are about 6 interview slots per day) and if you have scored well, that isn't a positive or valid reason to drop you.
I accept the world is not perfect, and this isn't a 100% certainty, but making illegal HR decisions in front of other staff is
- Not what HR personnel are in their job to do
- Professionally, a one way ticket to the job centre
- Exposing the organisation to significant reputational and financial damage
One of the main reasons that recruitment processes have become so automated is just so that the rules cannot be bent, that a record is kept, and that staff making decisions are forced to justify their decisions.
*As people enter the professional world, they need to remember there is a significant difference between the iconoclastic world of the teenager who comfortably slags off all businesses and organisations as being up to all manner of illegal activities, and the individuals who work in those businesses, who would actually have to openly condone and work with such illegalities, if they were to be true.
If you believe that you would not
be one of those people that condoned illegal activity, why aren't most other people?
And if most other people don't condone illegal activity in an organisation, who in the organisation is doing these illegal things?
*weekend philosophy follows