I'm not one to post about the lows of the job hunt. I don't believe in toxic positivity and "looking on the bright side." I do believe in being a light, though. I also believe in protecting myself from being misunderstood and misperceived, so I usually keep moments of exhaustion and dejection to myself and my inner circle. I can't bite my tongue on this one, though. I have now interviewed with 3 companies where the role has been "put on hold” after going through final interviews ands assignments (and, in one case, after reference checks). I’m not trying to put anyone on blast. I just genuinely can't wrap my head around going through these processes only to determine you don't have budget for the role. If anyone has any insights or explanations, please share. Help me and others in this position understand.
Hey Karli, thank you for raising awareness on this topic. As a person who's been 'on the other side', this can happen because: - Company needs to hire someone, but doesn't have good overview of their finances (which is wild that this happens) - Other people in the team are spending the team's budget like crazy, and then invoices are submitted at once, and the budget can't physically be allocated for a hire - Company doesn't have an open position but likes you and your skillset, tries to forecast but the budget/money still isn't there, interviews 'just in case' All 3 scenarios suck, and I'm sure there's more than these, but this is what I personally experienced. As a recruiter, we (most of the time, unless you're inhouse and you're also HR/payroll) don't have oversight of the company finances and we have to trust our HR/procurement team gives us the right info. Sorry you're going through this, and hopefully you break the curse!
I've had 3 scenarios that I got feedback on, but many others like this I didnt. For the 3 I did, 1. Hiring manager was let go and all roles under were put on hold due to department review. 2. The CEO was ousted by the board and they stopped all hiring until they finished cleaning up internally. 3. They cut the whole department and pivoted in a different direction. Also assume that for many of these companies, if they are startups, have some runway and assume they are able to get another round of funding. With the current market those talks with VCs fall through, so now they need to stretch that runway as far as they can, cutting all current "non-critical" hires.
I recently read a report that the job market is slowing down and more people are staying in their current positions which means less turnover.
I’m sorry this is happening, it’s really difficult. I don’t know why this is becoming common place now and I’m sure there’ll be a lot of opinions/reasons but I’ve heard about this so much lately that it’s not anecdotal anymore. Roles are either being modified after interviews have started or they’re just on hold indefinitely. It’s a strange time.
With regard to startups, yes interview the company, but also investigate who the investors are. Try to determine if they have invested in the company multiple times or in their other portfolio companies multiple times. Crunchbase is a decent starting point and easy way to do this. If hiring managers think they have a budget and do not or the headcount budget gets reallocated so quickly that they have to pause hiring it's an indication of a lack of communication within the organization. Companies should also be decent and communicate to candidates the why, as best as they can.
There are a couple of reasons why I've seen this happen, and some are (maybe) defensible. One is that the hiring process can take a while. Business conditions and needs can change dramatically, even over the course of a 1-2 month interview process. The company may have lost a key deal to their operational plan, or a different leader may have left and shifted the dynamic and needs of the team. Something else I've seen is that after interviewing some great candidates, the company might realize that the headcount they had been hiring for is not the magic bullet that they thought would solve their problems. Not that those candidates weren't great, but that the feedback from that cycle changed how they viewed the role and they need to reevaluate the scope or timing.
That happened to me before. I followed up with the recruiter and they never hired anyone! I did a bunch of assignments too and they likely used everyone's ideas and started implementing them. You will find something soon, I'm so sorry.🩷
OMG same! on hold positions and sorry we've picked another candidate after requesting reference checks is the new normal.
Sales Director @ Sweet Security
6moMy 2 cents as a long-time people manager; most hiring managers have zero control over broader corporate issues, so they genuinely believe they have a role to fill and are actively trying to do so. There are also multiple processes to go through to get the job posted in the first place, so it's typically "real" for lack of a better term. The issue occurs when something economically shifts at the company mid interview, something changes with annual planning, company is being acquired, etc. Any of these broader issues can impact your role, and then the line manager has to explain to the candidate that the job is toast. This can be, as you'd imagine, incredibly frustrating on the manager's side as well because they need the hire.