Edged out by “instinct”

At Even It Up! we like applying for roles just to interrogate the process that direct employers and recruitment companies use.  We are a bit like Mystery Jobseekers. The latest one we applied for was a part-time Communications Assistant with Edge Recruitment.

The role was advertised on Seek in early August, and we applied for it by sending in our CV and a cover letter.  Then we waited.  And waited.  A couple of weeks went by and we called to follow up.  We were advised that the person who was responsible for the recruitment was out of the office, and a message was taken.  And then we waited, and waited some more.

Yesterday, we thought we’d call again.  And we got the same spiel.  But we got a call this morning, only to be told that they were sorry for that lack of response, but people were off sick, and our message must have slipped through the cracks (and yes, they got the irony considering the position that was applied for!)….

Anyway.  Back to the position.  We were advised that the position had been filled, and we were told about the background of the person who had been given the role.

Unsatisfied with the response, we dug further and found:

• They received over 70 applications for the role
• They could have interviewed 10 people for the position (including us) but decided to only go with three
• All other 10 people who could have been interviewed (including the person who had won the role) had similar backgrounds, experience and qualifications
• The recruiter had the same conversation “explaining” the situation to the other people who called and weren’t interviewed…
• The decision around who to interview was based on follow-up of the application (difficult when your calls slip through the cracks), presentation of the application and was more to do with “instinct”  than science (the recruiter told us that she had been recruiting for 11 years, and often made decisions based on this, although she didn’t want us to think that there wasn’t a scientific process behind it!)
• When we suggested that as a jobseeker, it was difficult to see how this was a fair process, given that an interview would have been where we could have showed our portfolio and communication skills , the response was:  what would you have us do? Interview all 10 candidates?  There was also a discussion about having to be “ruthless” in the culling process.  Just what every jobseeker wants to hear – not!
• We then told the recruiter that we were calling on behalf of Even It Up! to which the reply was: why would you apply for a role that you had no intentions of taking?  We said we were like Mystery Jobseekers, but we would like to take our response further: why would you advertise a position, have a number of suitable candidates apply and not interview them?
• We were then told that our feedback was welcome (and that she knew about our site) and would welcome an opportunity to review the process.   We said: engage us as consultants, to which we got short shrift!

So, the questions that we ask are these: if the so-called recruitment experts are basing their selection of candidates on “instinct” rather than a scientific process (that jobseekers are supposed to know, agree to and comply with), what hope have any of us got?   And how many excellent candidates are excluded from being interviewed because recruiters have not thought about managing the positive risks of too many applications?

We would therefore be right to assume that getting an interview and winning a position is a matter of luck rather than good management (despite all the rhetoric to the contrary).  And meanwhile the evidence keeps mounting about the subjectiveness of the jobseeking process and how systemically flawed it is…