======= Date Modified 30 07 2010 10:07:47 =======
Hi folks, I didn't get the job I've been so stressed about.

I reckon it was all planned out befre I got there: a memeber of staff who has worked for the department for over five years, and who is a friend and business partner of the head of department - who was on the interview panel - got it. That's all understandable, and since I heard she was going for it I've accepted that it was probably her job, but what really p'd me off was the feedback I got afterwards yesterday. Basically saying that I hadn't done enough research into the university and HE futures, and that they were 'concerned' about my research, that I wasn't going to include it in my teaching.

I spent the 20 minute rpresentation talking about my research and practice, and how I would use that in my teaching, I worked so hard to get that message across, but when I pointed that out to the feedback lady she said 'yes, but the presentation doesn't really count'. When I reminded her that I'd addressed HE futures and university stratedgiessubstantially in the two questions I asked at the end, and during the subsequent discussions she says 'the questions don't count towards you meeting the criteria, they are ust questions you want to ask at the end', and told me that the only part of the interview that really counts is my answers to their questions, and they didn't blooming ask me about those things. What utter B*******T, how patronising, really, you don't get on a PhD programme if you're dim enough to fall for that rubbish. I appreciate that she needs to play the game and make things look ok, but giving me misleading advice that, if I were to take notice of it, could damage my future performance is just beyond it, especially when I worked so hard!

I gave them an idea for a postgrad course (which takes into account the things she said I missed out), and they love it and are looking into putting it into action GGGGGGRRRRRRRRRrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr.

P.s. Thanks so much for the support you gave...

Ah that's unlucky. It seems you went to an interview for a job that was fundamentally designed for someone else, but there was no reason for them to try to bullshit you with their definitions of what counts and what doesn't count.

Chin up, something will come along(up). Plus, despite their bollocks, it sounds like you did well and they were forced into finding ways to discount you.

Thanks Slizor!

Damn :-( that's such a shame, and yes, we all know that jobs are advertised that are effectively already decided but they have to go through their stupid HR directed motions which cause a lot of hassle and false hopes for the other applicants, but the patronising nature of the feedback is just infurtiating. I still can't understand why, if they already have someone who they want to appoint, they are forced to go through with this charade. She couldn't give you answers because no doubt you were spot on but not 'her'. Really feel for you Eska - all experience, blah blah blah but even still :-s

Aye, university politics. I've been on the receiving end a couple of times, it's all about who you know it seems, no matter what level you're pitching at!

As for that utterly rubbish feedback, ignore it, it's obviously them having to establish an "excuse" in case you challenge the outcome - which tells me that they know they are being underhand and are trying to cover it up, but you mustn't take it personally or allow it to get you down. It's poor. You're better than that and I truly believe that things pass us by because there's something bigger and better out there for you just round the corner. So far, that's been the case with me and I'm sticking with that philosophy!

That sucks :( Sorry to hear that. But as others have said, rise above it and keep applying. My supervisor was telling me that it's often a case of volume when you first start out. Keep applying and eventually you're going to get there.

It's just wrong that a) seemingly had no intention of really interviewing for the position, and b) gave such terrible feedback.

Are they honestly trying to suggest that if you're given an interview, and asked to perform a presentation, that is doesn't matter? Could you imagine the look on their faces if you had turned up and just said, 'I'm not going to bother with the presentation. It's not going to count." Gits.

I've always been told, and thought, that the presentation and your questions are key. As much as if not more than their questions. Those alongside your CV/App give them an idea of what you're about and if they have any areas they want to look at they can question you. But the idea that it's based soley on their questions is absurd.

Why couldn't they have just said, "Your interview went well, we were impressed and certainly considered you appointable. Unfortunately though we went for another candidate with a different background/experience that we felt in this case was most applicable." ?

Did you at least get to claim travel expenses?

I am sorry to hear that Eska. I was very much in doubt when I first heard about the nature of your presentation. It was not very technical and seemed intimidating. However, you have a very good reason now to even improve your research and yourself academically. They can't even slow you down if you are unstoppable.

Bad Luck. I've always been told that the presentation is basically a test to see if you are capble of standing up and givning a presentation - if you can't then it does count against you but otherwise it has little or no impact. It is tough when jobs are advertised and interviewed for and they have someone's name on - it pays lip service to transparent proceeses but benefits no-one. Better luck next time.

Hey bad luck Eska, it sounds like it was already lined up for the internal applicant- so annoying but so common as well. Which meant that whatever you did in that interview/presentation, you couldn't have got it anyway, so certainly no reason to blame yourself or be hard on yourself about it. But to insult you by giving you crappy feedback is really irritating. I was refused a small grant a couple of weeks ago, and I didn't mind, because I knew it was so competitive anyway, but it was the rubbish irrelevant feedback about my application that really annoyed me. I guess some people don't really care- they just want to fob you off with something so you'll leave them alone. Well don't stress- just keep applying and bear in mind that the job was probably taken before you even went to interview, it was most likely nothing you did wrong. Big hugs, KB

Hard luck Eska

Sorry to hear the interview turned out how it did. Academia can be like that at times, I'm glad it's never happened to me ........yet, but it seems a lot of interviews are decided like this.

I'd like to think if i was in the position of the interviewers I would not make it quite that obvious. If these people are prepared to do something like that to another human being, knowing full well that it had taken you considerable effort to prepare etc and would probably do the job just as well as their own candidate, do you really want to work with them?. You could look at it as a lucky escape, although you may end up working with a much more subtle pack of b******s elsewhere

Gah! Sorry to hear the bad news, Eska. It's a shame that internal politics were at play. Something similar has happened to a mate of mine.

Hi Folks, thanks for the supportive comments. I spoke to someone else, with a better memory and social skills, who was on the panel today and they said my presentation was really good, the only one of the day to have fulfilled the brief, that my visuals were particularly good, and that my questions were excellent, so that's encouraging - one of the panel was 'thrilled' with my suggestion for a Masters course. Apparently, I needed to have been much more explicit about how my research would support the department - they asked me if I had a 'grand plan for my research' and I should have worked the department stuff into my answer - v. useful feedback I though it worth sharing here. He also said my application form was really impressive and was second only to the succesful candidates, so that's encouraging. Am feeling much better - the original comments were from the head of school, sometimes I really think the rubbish people in academia get promoted up.

Hey Eska, sorry to hear you didn't get the job. But the latest feedback sounds useful, so at least it wasn't a complete waste. And I always think that each time I get a job rejection, that brings me closer to getting the one I'll ultimately get...

You're on the market, you have what it takes, it's only a matter of time...

This other feedback sounds great :-) You've so got what it takes! I'm a firm believer in things happening for a reason and your perfect job is just around the corner - this one would have been c*ap ;-) Its sounds like an excellent 'performance' (for want of a better word) and that you nailed it so you're all primed and set up for the big one 8-)

Very sorry to hear you weren't given the job. It sounds like you did v well at the interview, perhaps they did have an internal candidate :( I can see why you were pissed off with the initial feedbacks - just wasn't logical!! I'm glad though that you got some useful feedbacks from the other interviewer! Thanks for sharing them on here too.

Good luck finding another post to apply for (if you haven't yet). I'm sure you'll do even better at the next interview!