Ask the expert: Mystery why interview was refused

Q. I applied for a training co-ordinator role in the construction industry and according to the advert met most of the brief (they have no job description or person specification) for training experience. I did not get an interview so I asked the contact person why I missed out as it could be something I could easily remedy for future roles such as this one.

He responded that he could not tell me why "in line with their recruitment policy".

I can only conclude that: I'm too old; I have too much experience; they don't want women to do those jobs; I have too many qualifications; or some other unexplained reason.

I do understand that the organisation doesn't want to say anything in case it could be "discriminating" or the declined candidate could argue that they fit the brief.


A. I agree that it is bad practice and that it shouldn't occur.

Effective practice is to know clearly what you want in terms of the job and the person to fill it.

These become part of the recruiting process and should be profiled in the ad, and available to potential applicants so they can assess whether they fit the requirements or not. They also form the basis for the employer to evaluate the applicants, which makes it easy to give feedback to unsuccessful applicants as the chosen person must have met the requirements better. Without this, it is unlikely that they will be hiring as well as they could, and they are obviously not maintaining their reputation with potential employees.

On the positive side, if they can't specify what is required for a job or a person, there is no basis for a training coordinator to be able to develop and coordinate effective training.

So it may be "sour grapes" but you probably wouldn't have enjoyed that job anyway. Look for a more professional employer, where effective recruiting practices, and appropriate communications complement your skills and professional orientation.