#020 - The Most Common Feedback I Get From Hiring Manager Interviews

Introduction

Thank you for coming to the Q&A LIVE on Thursday. You asked great questions and I loved all the messages going on in the chat. It feels like we’re building a real community. That’s what this is all about. (And, you know, getting you a new job.)

If you didn’t make it, worry not: I’ll be doing this way more frequently going forward. More details at the end of this newsletter.

Also, like a jockey who falls off his horse, I hated that I couldn’t get back on. I tried, I promise. I know there were a ton of questions I didn’t get to and I felt bad I couldn’t answer them all. Currently looking into alternatives so technology doesn’t derail us again. YouTube streaming, maybe? Let’s see.

Thanks again. I hope you got as much out of it as I did.

Okay, onto the protein (shoutout Logan Roy).

The Most Common Feedback I Get From Hiring Manager Interviews

I’ve worked in recruitment for 45 years. I’ve spoken to 98,000 hiring managers.

(Roughly.)

Their feedback, although different, isn’t that different.

They’re looking for someone who can do their specific role. They want someone to have done some prep - or, in other words, someone who cared enough about doing well in their interview that they prepared for it. They want someone who wants to work not just for any company, but their specific company.

They want the next person they interview to be like Neo: The One.

They’re already primed to say yes. There’s no way they’re sitting there before the interview and feeling hopeful you’ll fail. There’s no way they’re thinking, “I hope this person hasn’t prepared and isn’t what we’re looking for. I’d really like to spend hours and hours interviewing more candidates.”

They already want you to be the solution to their problem. Use that.

Also, remember that feedback is subjective. You don’t have to take every bit of feedback to heart. You don’t have to take any feedback to heart if you don’t want to, though if there’s a pattern I’d advise against that.

And finally, feedback in this context has only been around since 1955. That’s 68 years. Emotions have been around for thousands of years and we’re still pretty terrible at dealing with those so no wonder there’s plenty of room for improvement.

Okay, here we go:

• They weren’t specific enough

Here’s some verbatim feedback from a hiring manager I worked with:

“I can tell they want a job, but I didn’t get the sense they wanted this job.”

Hiring managers have a specific problem they need to solve. A pain point. They need someone who’s going to solve that problem, who’s going to make the pain go away.

Think about it: if you had a headache, would you take some Vitamin C or some painkillers? Vitamin C is great, but it’s not the solution to the headache problem. 

(If you know of some evidence that taking Vitamin C over the long-term helps with headaches, now isn’t the time.)

They want to hire someone who wants to work in their specific role. If you talk vaguely - “gaming seems like an interesting industry” - then it’s going to be difficult for them to trust you’re the solution to their problem. Especially when there are other highly-qualified candidates out there who will get as specific as pi to 7 decimal points in their interview.

You can’t control who your competition is, but you can do plenty to mitigate it.

• They weren’t motivated to work for our company

Hiring managers want to know that you want to work in their industry and, more importantly, at their specific company. This is probably more prevalent in popular industries - tech, entertainment, gaming, etc - because there are so many people who are desperate to get into these industries. The competition is higher than Snoop Dogg, so they can afford to be picky.

A bit of research on the industry and the company will go a long way. 10 minutes on each will set you up better than a billionaire’s kids. (Well, nearly.)

Doing this research and then demonstrating that in the interview will help the hiring manager trust you want to work in their specific company. I mean, who’s the ‘safer’ candidate: the highly-qualified candidate who hasn’t done any research or the highly-qualified candidate who has? 

It’s so simple. Easy, even. Don’t let this be your interview feedback.

• They didn’t prep

I’m sure you wouldn’t do this but if you go into an interview with a hiring manager and say something like, “Yeah, is this for the [x] role?” or “Is this for the [x] role?” then the rest of the interview is probably going to be like Sisphyus pushing the boulder up the hill: a struggle ending in disappointment.

Sometimes your lack of prep is only revealed at the end when you ask your questions. For example, if you ask something like, “What are the day-to-day responsibilities of this role?” well, that’s not a great look. The responsibilities are in the job description. You should know that. A better question might be, “I can see on the job description that one of the responsibilities is [x]. Can you tell me a bit more about that?”

There’s no excuse here. Not only should you be prepping, you should want to prep. And think about if you were the hiring manager: what would you think of someone who did no prep for their interview? And then what would you think about someone who’s clearly done a lot of prep? Especially when they both have very similar skillsets?

Who’s the ‘safer’ choice?

And finally: how would you feel if the hiring manager hadn’t done any prep for your interview? If they had to spend a few minutes finding your CV at the beginning, if they forgot which of their roles this interview was for, if they couldn’t remember what was on the job description and were clearly winging it?

Would you want to work for them?

• They lacked humility

When it comes to talking about your skills and achievements and your fit for the role, best to stick to the facts.

Perhaps you are ‘remarkable’ at social media or software engineering or whatever. But if you just say you’re remarkable, it’s probably going to come across as arrogant.

If you really are a remarkable social media person, you’ll have the results and achievements to back it up. Focus on those. I mean, what sounds better to you:

• “I’m a remarkable social media manager. I’ve achieved huge engagement and growth across multiple platforms, and I know I could do the same for you.”

• “I grew [company] TikTok account’s engagement by 30% while growing the following by 27%. I also started their Instagram account and grew it from 0 to 2,500 in a couple of months while maintaining [x%] engagement. I know the job description mentioned TikTok and Instagram specifically and I’m confident I could deliver similar results for [company].”

An easy choice.

Not asking any questions can also come across as having a lack of humility. I’m not saying it means you don’t have humility; I’m simply saying this is feedback I’ve had from hiring managers. Perhaps it infers you don’t really care and you think you’ve got the job in the bag? Perhaps it suggests you think you know it all and don’t need to learn more? Worth reflecting on.

Finally, you could include an example in your interview that demonstrates your humility. “In my last role, I wasn’t exactly an expert in [x] but I also knew it was going to be part of my day job. The hiring manager trusted me to learn, which I’m grateful for, and I went out of my way to speak to other people in the business who were experts so I could learn. That resulted in [x].”

• They lacked confidence

I know it can be hard to speak about what you’ve achieved. It can feel weird and uncomfortable, like trying on your jeans after a summer of indulgence. But think about it this way: if the tables were turned (“how the turntables”) and you were the hiring manager, wouldn’t you want the person to tell you about what they achieved? Wouldn’t you need them to? How else would you know if they could do your role?

So, if it helps, make it not about you. Make it about the hiring manager and what they want and need to hear. (As per usual when it comes to the job search, appeal to the self-interest of others.)

Plus, what you achieved is what you achieved. (Love a tautology.) It’s fact. It is what it is. (See?) Inarguable. Not up for debate. That’s why it’s best to focus on achievements over adjectives, which are subjective.

You achieved those results. You did it. And even if you had help, you drove it. You’ve earned the right to be proud of it. To own it.

Real, genuine, rock-solid confidence comes from where? Evidence. And you have plenty of that.

• They asked poor questions (or no questions)

If you ask something like, “What are the responsibilities of this role?” then it’s going to seem like you haven’t read the job description and maybe even that you haven’t been paying attention in the interview. It’s like Shaq taking a 3: not a good look. (I love you, Shaq.)

A better question would be: “I can see on the job description that one of the responsibilities is [x]. Can you give me an example of how that looks day to day?”

If you’ve interviewed well up to that point, asking poor questions probably won’t be a dealbreaker. It might leave the hiring manager a bit disappointed, but I don’t think I’ve ever heard a hiring manager say they were going to put someone through to the next stage but then they asked poor questions so they changed their mind.

But.

If someone else interviews well - and they will - and asks great questions? That could be a separator.

• They were great. If I had two roles, I’d hire them. For this specific role, we’re just going with another candidate.

I know this can be tough to accept but sometimes there’s nothing you could’ve done. There was simply another candidate who was a better fit for this exact role at this exact time. 

I’ve had hiring managers say they wish they had two open roles so they could hire two great candidates instead of one. But they don’t. And so they have to choose. And the other candidate might have a bit more experience in one area, or an additional skill the team could use, or they might’ve happened to have worked on a particularly relevant project.

It is, of course, possible the hiring manager isn’t telling the whole truth about why they’re choosing the person they’re choosing. It’s possible they think the other candidate will fit better with the team for whatever reason. It’s even possible they just like one candidate more than the other. I’m not saying this happens all the time or that it’s the right way to choose a candidate; I’m just saying it’s possible.

Just one more reason to not take it personally.

If you’re getting to final stage interviews, you’re doing a lot right. Sometimes it’s your time, sometimes it’s not. And finally, myself and other recruiters I know have hired plenty of candidates who made it to final interview with us previously.

Please, for your own sake, stay in touch with us.

In Conclusion

So, the Q&A Live events. I’m going to do them every first Thursday of the month at 5pm GMT. That means the next one is on Thursday 7th December. Put that reminder in your diaries. NOW!

Or later. Later is fine. But NOW! is better.

Also, they’ll be longer than 40 minutes. I’m talking at least 41 minutes. I want to get to as many questions as possible next time and all the times after that.

Thanks again for being part of this community. Here’s to a great week of job searching.

Cheers!

PS Here’s last week’s newsletter: How To Ace Your Recruiter Screening Call

PPS Anyone else watching Bodies on Netflix? That s*** is wild. Me and my gf are 6 episodes in. No spoilers, please.