tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5558939360732260529.post4100187779070333827..comments2023-09-29T06:09:21.089-04:00Comments on Ask a Manager: being given only 4 hours to decide on a job offerAsk a Managerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05281942480230532899noreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5558939360732260529.post-45520671476140521872009-09-21T23:30:45.642-04:002009-09-21T23:30:45.642-04:00Oh, you're right, I think I did misread it.
...Oh, you're right, I think I did misread it. <br /><br />I think the commenter's premise is wrong -- it's not considered burning bridges to turn down a job offer (assuming you haven't earlier accepted it).<br /><br />But if you're asking about a candidate turning down an offer and then later wanting the offer back (assuming the job is even still available), I think the answer is that the dynamics are slightly different on each side. If I offer a candidate a job, she declines, and then later she calls back and says that she's interested after all, she hasn't burned any bridge. But I'm going to wonder why she had the change of heart -- does she really want the job or is she just desperate and going to leave in a few months when a different offer comes along? So I'm going to want to hear an explanation for her change of heart that makes sense -- and there are such explanations, so it's doable.<br /><br />Now, if I decline a candidate and then later go back to them with a job offer, the explanation is a bit more obvious: The candidate wasn't the first choice but she's still someone we're interested in hiring. I end up having to reject fantastic candidates all the time, because there's only one position and many of them. And the candidate, of course, can say no, just like the employer can say no in the example above. Again, no bridges burned.<br /><br />Now, you could say that that the candidate too should need a compelling explanation about our change of heart (and ask if we really want her or if we're just desperate). But a good employer won't offer a job to the wrong candidate out of desperation (not to say all employers are good employers), and it's commonly understood that employers are forced to reject great candidates because there are more of them than there are job openings. So perhaps it goes to basic convention -- the fact that it happens a lot gives people a basic comfort with it, whereas the first scenario is much less common.<br /><br />Anyway, I'm not defending the logic of one over the other as much as I am just explaining what most hiring managers' thinking is on it.Ask a Managerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05281942480230532899noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5558939360732260529.post-35795376666025934952009-09-21T23:19:44.030-04:002009-09-21T23:19:44.030-04:00Well, actually AAM, I think you may have misunders...Well, actually AAM, I think you may have misunderstood Anon's question. The way I read it gives a parallel between the company and the candidate. I will ask again in a way that is more clear. Or, perhaps, I have a different question than the OP. <br /><br />It seems to be a double standard that dear Company can call Jane Doe and say "Thank you for the application, we decline you," and then call back later and say "Just kidding, we'd love to offer you a position." <br /><br />Yet, Jane Doe cannot say "Thank you dear Company for the job offer, but I decline" and later call and say she wants the job she was previously offered or at a later date apply for a new position with "no hard feelings."<br /><br />This is not accepting an offer and then declining. The question is about rejecting an offer or a candidate and then wanting the offer back. It seems its a one way street. Your thoughts, please?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5558939360732260529.post-52103200759610662412009-09-21T14:03:40.520-04:002009-09-21T14:03:40.520-04:00Charles: Actually, the first choice candidate woul...<b>Charles:</b> Actually, the first choice candidate wouldn't have started yet, as we were still halfway through the university year when interviews were happening. My guess is that he initially accepted, got a better offer from elsewhere, and pulled out several weeks down the line, leaving them in the lurch, which of course is a not a particularly professional move to make, assuming that they didn't pull this same move on him.<br /><br />Although whatever position he put them into, I don't think that gave them the right to shift that pressure directly onto me in order to quickly fill the hole that was left behind; and as people have pointed out, it's caused them more problems than it solved, especially if their third and final candidate wasn't qualified/didn't want the position.<br /><br />I think that the scary thing is that this is a huge company, who make literally billions every year, yet their HR department leaves a lot to be desired.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5558939360732260529.post-40801314617947062672009-09-21T13:33:20.466-04:002009-09-21T13:33:20.466-04:00Anonymous, it's actually two different things....Anonymous, it's actually two different things. In one case, a candidate is making a commitment to do something that they later break. In the other case, the employer is saying "we're NOT going to commit to you" and then later coming back and saying that they're willing to. The first case breaks a commitment, the second one doesn't. The second one also just extends an offer, which the candidate is free to turn down.<br /><br />The issue is one of breaking commitments.Ask a Managerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05281942480230532899noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5558939360732260529.post-40133170151307126682009-09-21T13:02:33.083-04:002009-09-21T13:02:33.083-04:00May I ask a question that might sound naivette but...May I ask a question that might sound naivette but still I would like to know - why is it OK on the company's side to reject the candidate and then call them back yet turning down their job offer is considered to be burning bridges for ever?? Is it not a WAY TOO HARD LINE?? I'm sure, they all understand that the candidates are appyling to more than one company and why is it that coming back in a future and seeking working relationship with them again would be inappropriate in the company's eyes? It's not marriage, for goodness sake, it's just a working relationships and we all know of employees leaving and coming back. <br />So why can't a new candidate do the same, given they have all the expertise and skills that are required?<br />I just want to know what's the thinking behind this thing is.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5558939360732260529.post-42249817277439336472009-09-21T10:24:51.049-04:002009-09-21T10:24:51.049-04:00Given four hours to decide, especially since they ...Given four hours to decide, especially since they "rejected" you in the first place, is a indication that they are not a good organization to work for. <br /><br />With that kind of poor planning, what would working for them be like? (Why, on earth, do you think that you would ever want to work for <i>them</i>? They sound like complete idiots!)<br /><br />I can just imagine that at five o'clock on a Friday they would suddenly ask you to work all weekend; or some other such nonsense. You really don't want to work for them; really you don't.<br /><br />BTW, I do NOT believe that the first choice rejected the offer. I wouldn't be surprised if for some reason the first choice did not work out; either they fired him or he quit. Seriously, they gave you <b>four hours</b> to decide; yet they took <b>several weeks</b> to let the first choice decide? That's not believable to me.<br /><br />So, I don't think you should be worried about burning this bridge - consider yourself lucky to have dodged a bullet and now have a better job/work environment.<br /><br />P.S. I have never accepted any position under such pressure; I have always asked for, and been given, at least one night to "sleep it over." If they refuse; then they are not folks I want to work for anyway.Charleshttp://home.earthlink.net/~nooriginalthought/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5558939360732260529.post-1410297498896553022009-09-20T20:13:24.128-04:002009-09-20T20:13:24.128-04:00Thanks for the response: I'm glad to get some ...Thanks for the response: I'm glad to get some feedback from someone outside of the entire process! It is a shame that bridges have been burned (or at the very least, left mildly charred) in this case, but it won't stop me from applying in the future if any positions come up. The worst that can happen is that they say no, of course.<br /><br />This has at least been good experience for me; I'm a pretty apt interviewee, and have been told in my new job that I'm doing very well so far, but handling these kinds of situations is somewhat new to me.<br /><br />Whilst I do hope that I'm not put under such pressure in the application process again, but if they give me unreasonable time constraints for acceptance in the future, I will have to work on my ability to compromise for a more adequate time to make such decisions!<br /><br />Anyhow, constructive comments from your readership are welcome, even if they don't entirely agree with my actions: I thrive on any input to improve myself, so have at it! :)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com