It's been brought up that people who do the hiring or serve on the hiring committee would not be hired themselves based on their own hiring criteria and bar.
That's pretty amazing. The hiring manager's judgement wasn't trusted by his manager, whose judgement was in turn not trusted by his manager. None of these people delegate!
You can twist this all you like, but that is not a functional organization.
I've been the person who had to be interviewed just because they had to interview multiple people and I've also been the person who was favored because I'd spent six months (unemployed!) working with people inside the organization to justify finding the funding to create the job and hire me.
That last case was not nepotism but the fruit of hard work which was by no means guaranteed to pay off.
That story could have been taken directly from my own brain. People like this get hired not infrequently and it's always frustrating to get one on your team.
He's hiring someone to do account management. The candidate has experience in account management, the rest of the team thought he'd be able to do it.
The autor vetoed hiring for a customer facing position because the candidate spent more time with people than books during college.
With the information provided I'm pretty sure the hypothetical alternate hire, who does have a favorite century of literature and who does have favorite poems at the top of his mind turns out to be a worse hire.
"Snobs exist. Don't let them make hiring decisions"
Or here's my favorite: let someone go through the entire interview process at subcompany (Shipt) only to have your former, embittered, manager (Fuck you, Dave) at the parent company (Target) torpedo your offer.
Don't work for Minnesota companies, kids. Optum, CHR, Target, etc, they all suck with shite culture, bad pay, and poor career prospects.
https://youtu.be/r8RxkpUvxK0?t=531
reply