Not too long ago I remember an accepted way of treating candidates who attend interviews with a hiring decision outcome. Not written down or a general policy, just an accepted way of behaving treating people with professional courtesy If its not a positive outcome its either an outright no or you are a secondary candidate back up if the primary choice falls through. What used to happen is you would be told promptly with suitable feedback in the first case, or a carefully worded statement along the lines of “you are a backup candidate so go focus on securing something else in that context, but we may be in touch if the primary doesn’t work out”.
Industry norm now? You are left dangling and swinging in the wind until the contract is signed and then you might (if you are lucky) get told it’s a no. What do the entities involved (client/first tier/ second tier Agency) think they are gaining from this shoddy approach other than creating unnecessary stress and bad feeling?
If you are on the bench what are you finding?
Industry norm now? You are left dangling and swinging in the wind until the contract is signed and then you might (if you are lucky) get told it’s a no. What do the entities involved (client/first tier/ second tier Agency) think they are gaining from this shoddy approach other than creating unnecessary stress and bad feeling?
If you are on the bench what are you finding?
Comment