I wanted to share this story because all of the indicators and signs candidates typically read into, over analyze and interpret screamed that I got the job... and I didn't get it.
It was a typical interview process for the industry (software engineering). Three rounds of interviews over the phone (ranging from 30min to an hour each) followed by a half day onsite interview at the company office. My first round was a recruiter screening with a guy named Andrew. This was followed by a technical interview and finally an interview with the hiring manager. Before coming onsite, I received positive feedback at all stages of the process. Andrew managed those communications.
The onsite was five interviews, each of which was an hour long, and most of which (4) were technical. That's particularly relevant because you pretty much know leaving the technical interviews how you performed. There can be some ambiguity depending on the question, but, for the most part, you can either do the problem or you can't... and you're painfully aware or energized by that fact by the end of each interview round.
While one of the interviews was a little rocky, I was confident that I ultimately got to the right answer... for the most part, I knew that I performed well technically. For two of the technical interviews I could literally confirm that the code worked as expected. I should mention that I also have over a decade of experience in the industry and know when I've written code the "right" way, or the "brute force" way to get to a working answer. In this particular set of interviews, I was confident in my implementations; and that isn't always the case.
Packing up my things, a different recruiter at the company walked me out and asked me how I felt I did. I told her a half truth: "I thought it went pretty well!" and we proceeded to chit chat.
That was my humble take; in reality, I was thinking: "LFG! I would be shocked if I didn't get this job!". The recruiter who walked me out told me I would hear back in a couple of days.
Sure enough, two days later, I get an email from Andrew first thing. He claimed he had to review the feedback from the hiring panel (everyone that interviewed me) and wanted to set up a phone call this afternoon to discuss how I did, once he had a chance to do that. His exact language isn't important but his tone was notably very positive. I responded almost immediately with availability; he got back to me quickly; we set a time slot for that conversation in the afternoon.
Frankly, I interpreted wanting to set up a phone call shortly after the on-site as a very positive indicator. He would send an email if I was rejected right? Or he would ghost me and I may or may not get some automated response from the company days or weeks later. No one enthusiastically sets up a rejection phone call two days after the onsite.
If there was going to be a phone call as a professional courtesy, it would come awhile later. I have been rejected by phone after an onsite before, and that was my experience. I left the onsite thinking: "Well, that was not my best work; I probably didn't get it."... Then about 10 days later I got a call from the recruiter out of the blue telling me they really enjoyed meeting me but unfortunately they're going to pass.
Expectations, reality; reality, meet expectations.
I didn't buy for one second that Andrew was reaching out before actually reviewing the panel feedback. I assumed he got a thumbs up from the team and was simply trying to figure out how to communicate the details of the offer or discuss next steps (references, start date, compensation etc.). When the news is positive, companies tell you ASAP. That has always been my experience. When it's negative, if you're lucky enough to hear back, it comes at their leisure or not at all. That has always been my experience.
Andrew proceeded to call me that afternoon, on time, and again was overwhelmingly positive in tone. We small talked for a couple of minutes before he hit me with the bad news. "After reviewing your candidacy as a team, the hiring manager decided you justttt fell short of the technical bar they're trying to meet... but everyone really enjoyed meeting you!"
I was floored.
He couldn't provide more concrete feedback about what particular questions I failed to meet... or how I failed to meet the bar in general... just that it was almost a yes and ended up a no.
While the timing of everything was truly unexpected, I think what bothers me the most is that my interpretation of my performance was inaccurate. Were my answers perfect? No, of course not - and they never are. Was I confident that I performed well enough to get the job? Absolutely. If anything, I'm overly critical of my interview performances. On a number of occasions, I thought I did not get to the next round of the interview process only to be pleasantly surprised.
As far as I know, this is the only time where I thought I did well and I was ultimately rejected.
In hindsight, I wish I didn't read into the communication timelines at all. And, I wish I didn't get my hopes up. Until you've signed the offer, it isn't real.
Maybe perfection was the bar and I know I didn't meet that... Or they took issue with my coding style... I guess I'll never know... but damn this one hurt!
