Obviously they thought that "none of the other candidates from the
first round were suitable," since they relisted the job. It's the
process behind that conclusion that I'm curious about.
Given the current job market, I'm sure there were at least a dozen
qualified people to choose from in the pile of resumes. Relisting
within a few weeks is going to result in few if any new qualified
applicants, and in this economy, few if any of the original applicants
will have found jobs.
I've been in a similar position myself. We did a round of interviews,
our first choice took another offer, and we hired our second choice. A
month later, we had another opening, so I just went back to the pile.
(Actually I ended up hiring our first choice, since she wasn't
thrilled with the job she took.)
What kind of process are they using to filter out highly qualified
candidates? Seems like something dysfunctional is going on here.
On Fri, Jul 3, 2009 at 10:32 AM, Gene Kim-Eng<techwr -at- genek -dot- com> wrote:
> Direct-hire listing, or recruiter?
>
> If direct-hire recruiter, my guess would be they picked a candidate,
> brought the person in on a temp-to-hire basis, it didn't work out and
> none of the other candidates from the first round were suitable or
> suitable and available. ...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Free Software Documentation Project Web Cast: Covers developing Table of
Contents, Context IDs, and Index, as well as Doc-To-Help
2009 tips, tricks, and best practices. http://www.doctohelp.com/SuperPages/Webcasts/
Help & Manual 5: The complete help authoring tool for individual
authors and teams. Professional power, intuitive interface. Write
once, publish to 8 formats. Multi-user authoring and version control! http://www.helpandmanual.com/
---
You are currently subscribed to TECHWR-L as archive -at- web -dot- techwr-l -dot- com -dot-
