Giving feedback after interview

Iwona,

In your opening post you said:

"We felt that he was a great cultural fit, he had relevant experience; however he was nervous throughout the whole interview and didn't ask enough questions about the role itself, the team etc."

Those of us who responded did so on the basis of the information you gave us.

Later on, in your response to David, you added...

"The fact that the candidate was very nervous was not the main reason why he was rejected."

I can only then assume the main reason was the fact this person didn't ask enough questions (in the view of the hiring manager).

I think the very short answer to your opening question is therefore - yes, you should say so in your feedback to the candidate. 'It was a very close thing, we felt you would fit in well, but another candidate just edged it... good luck, etc.'

I still think Samantha's suggestion of "getting them back in for a brew with the team/co-workers to see how they are when they are relaxed" is a good one... but it sounds like you've made a decision.

Iwona,

In your opening post you said:

"We felt that he was a great cultural fit, he had relevant experience; however he was nervous throughout the whole interview and didn't ask enough questions about the role itself, the team etc."

Those of us who responded did so on the basis of the information you gave us.

Later on, in your response to David, you added...

"The fact that the candidate was very nervous was not the main reason why he was rejected."

I can only then assume the main reason was the fact this person didn't ask enough questions (in the view of the hiring manager).

I think the very short answer to your opening question is therefore - yes, you should say so in your feedback to the candidate. 'It was a very close thing, we felt you would fit in well, but another candidate just edged it... good luck, etc.'

I still think Samantha's suggestion of "getting them back in for a brew with the team/co-workers to see how they are when they are relaxed" is a good one... but it sounds like you've made a decision.

I think the other point that has to be made is that many managers become irritated by candidates asking many questions, other than those relating directly to issues raised, on a "who's interviewing whom?" basis. (Although a good interview should be to some degree a two-way street) It may also have been that issues he had pre-prepared to ask about, relating to the company and its activities, had been answered by the interview and associated discussions.

I would be the first to admit that I used to hate being interviewed, set alongside other listed candidates, since I found most interviews poorly focused on the role and more often about the "halo effect" likes and dislikes of the interviewer than the job. (Give me a three or four-person panel every time). I even once had a situation (for an six-month interim position) where I ended up explaining in some detail to the interviewer what information they needed to know from me, as many of their questions related to longer-term issues and strategies I would not be involved with.... and yes, I was offered the role).

So your candidate may simply have been, like me, someone who was awaiting the "How would you carry out external cardiac massage on a baby elephant?" smart-question, or had already "done their homework" extensively regarding the company and its activities; so had no relevant questions to ask.

The first qualification for appointment should not be: "To read the mind of the interviewer." :-)

P