Sarah, whose doctoral defense was already on the calendar, had landed three on-campus interviews, which shocked her greatly given the realities of the academic market. The first interview was at a small teaching institution with only a fair reputation. The other two interviews were at institutions that better matched her professional goals.
Two weeks before the first interview, she decided to withdraw from that search, since she had doubts that she would be happy at the institution. Among her thoughts was that it wasn’t really ethical for her to go through the motions of interviewing when she already had determined that she would be unlikely to take the position if it were offered.
She mentioned this to her dissertation adviser, who told her that she should go through with the interview “for the experience.” The first interview would be a dry run for her other two interviews. Still, Sarah decided to cancel the interview and to use the time (it would have taken two energy-draining days for the first interview) to prepare for the other two opportunities.
When I heard about this situation, I thought that the “experience” interview was the flip side of the courtesy interview, where a department interviews a candidate who is not really under serious consideration for the position. Having been on the hiring side of the table for a few “experience” interviews, I can say that it was just as infuriating as the “courtesy” interviews I’ve had.
Do you think that “experience” interviews are appropriate?
Follow On Hiring through your favorite RSS reader:
28 Responses to The ‘Experience’ Interview
sdragoo - January 25, 2010 at 4:18 pm
No I do not think that “experience” interviews are appropriate, nor do I think the “courtesy” interviews are appropriate. Both are wastes of time for the interviewer and the person interviewing. I find “courtesy” interviews are only done to steer clear of any legal ramifications and these are usually done with internal applicants.SD
beulah - January 25, 2010 at 4:19 pm
It seems that Sarah has better ethical decision-making than her advisor does. The job search is always a 2-way street, and no candidate would want to be treated as a practice candidate.
lgregory - January 25, 2010 at 4:26 pm
No, I do not. If PhD candidates need “experience” interviews, their programs should consider that part of their education and create some opportunity for students to practice. For those of us hiring, the experience interview is frustrating. First, it keeps us from bringing in someone who might have been qualified and actually wanted the job. Second, it wastes time and money- both of which are in short supply. Finally, having experience this a number of times, search committe members often begin to focus on whether candidates are “really interested” or applying for some other reason. It’s not just new PhDs. I can think of more than one tenured professor who applied for a position somewhere else for the sole purpose of broaching or maximizing contract negotiations at their current university. It’s one thing if you are pursued by another college, but it’s quite another to pretend to be interested in an entry-level position, take a free trip to our campus, and shine us on as though you are “really excited about this great opportunity” when you know you have no interest in being here.
oldcommprof - January 25, 2010 at 4:35 pm
I agree, lgregory, that both of these tactics are distasteful. I wasn’t aware of the new-doc “experience” interview, but the flip side where senior tenured faculty use interviews/offers for leverage at their current institution is well-known.
blue_state_academic - January 25, 2010 at 4:50 pm
I agree with Sarah — given the expense involved (both in actual dollars as well as people’s time), it’s unfair to hiring institutions to agree to an interview if the candidate has no real interest in the job. However, if the candidate is unfamiliar with the institution, and is willing to consider it – as opposed to outright reject it – then it would be fair for her to go on the interview.
ritanethersole - January 25, 2010 at 5:06 pm
I think there is a difference between an interview in which you already know that you will not take the position (an “experience” interview), and one in which you are truly trying to see what’s out there, even at an unlikely place. Similarly, there is a difference in courtesy interviews – if the decision has been made that this candidate will not be hired, then it is an insulting waste of everyone’s time and is acting in bad faith. But the purpose of a courtesy interview is to give a candidate an opportunity to prove your initial inclination wrong. A true courtesy interview should only be offered to someone who has some other redeeming attribute (current staff, for example) that might make them a reasonable candidate.
11893310 - January 25, 2010 at 5:14 pm
Of course, both types of interviews are unethical. However, power rests with the institution, not with the applicant, either a newbie on the market or a old-hand salary-checker. How do tenured (or untenured but employed) teachers discover what their paycheck might really be worth? Can Sarah be certain the first institution, regardless of her interests and better judgement is not the place she will have to go (if she really needs a job) because the other two, with a better applicant pool, will offer to other people? This is not a rationalization for unethical behavior. I pose it as a question on how job hunters should act when they know full well an application/interview setting is hardly ever a conversation among equals and in many cases is an act of injustice to the applicant, especially when institutions, their real agendas well hidden, are less than candid/honest in their job announcements or subsequent discussion?
tallenc - January 25, 2010 at 5:40 pm
No, premeditated “experience interviews” are not appropriate. However, sometimes a candidate believes he or she is seriously interested in a position until the moment he or she arrives on campus (or meets the committee if it’s an off-campus interview)and then realizes immediately upon arrival that the job is wrong. Having arrived, though, with everything scheduled, going ahead with the interview seems less discourteous to the committee than bolting.
jruiz - January 25, 2010 at 6:04 pm
I would think that, for better or for worse, candidates’ decisions on “experience interviews” would be based on their previous experiences in job hunting. If they had lived through institutions not acknowledging applications, long periods of silence, few interviews and no follow-ups, and finally no formal rejection notification, I could see where a certain cynicism might result in a “screw them” mentality. No matter how innocent the current institution might be.
blueberrycrunch - January 25, 2010 at 6:26 pm
Turning down a campus interview as an ABD in the current academic job market–even at “a small teaching institution with only a fair reputation”–seems very unwise to me. I would advise the job seeker to accept every interview invitation that is offered unless she has already decided that she would rather be unemployed than accept a job at a particular institution. Having two interviews at “institutions that better matched her professional goals” is no guarantee that she will actually receive a job offer from one of those two institutions.
sinatra - January 26, 2010 at 7:29 am
I agree with tallenc that premeditated “experience interviews” are inappropriate and waste everyone’s time and resources. But I have been on a few interviews myself at private colleges/universities in which I was seriously interested in the position, loved the institution and its values or practices, and could see myself being productive there for many years to come. Then they told me what the salary was and it became an “experience interview.” I also disagree with blueberrycrunch. In this job market and for the forseeable future, getting stuck in a position one knows runs counter to one’s philosophy/values/etc. can do irreparable harm to an ABD’s career. Going to an institution where “research” is a four-letter word, for example, will make it difficult even for the most time-conscious employee to “write herself out” of the position down the road. So, I think what the doctoral student did in the case presented was most appropriate.
emerson_scholar - January 26, 2010 at 8:04 am
Sarah’s decision NOT to interview with the first institution is idiotic. A) Her job at thsi point is to get a job. Period. She doesn’t know how the other two “better fits” will pan out. She might go to less-desirable college and end up liking it. You learn much more about an institution on a campus visit than online or elsewhere. If that ends up being her only offer it is much better to have something to pay the bills than not, especially in this environment.B) Her doctoral advisor may have been advising her to “practice” as a way of signaling that it might be the only offer without stressing her out about the other two “better” schools. Unless Sarah KNOWS she CAN’T accept a position at middling teaching institution for unmovable reasons (family, geography, etc.), she should go and see what happens. Graduate students (and their doctoral advisors) generally have no idea what the range of institutional personalities mean when they are on the market. For many it is R1/High Rank or Bust. This is foolish and counterproductive.Short version: blueberrycrunch is right on the mark.
unused_user_name_727 - January 26, 2010 at 8:32 am
The experience interview is unethical, but rarely is one entirely certain they would not take the job. Worse is the salary adjustment interview. But institutions take the majority of the blame for this. At our institution, faculty are routinely told that if they want a raise, or another position improvement, they need to get a job offer elsewhere to prove their worth on the market. Ethical faculty either do just that and then leave (take the job), or they wait until they are truly fed up enough to leave and then go get the other job offer. Both situations are bad for all the institutions involved and the faculty member.
dr_redrum - January 26, 2010 at 10:08 am
How can a candidate truely know a place, and make an informed choice, until she/he visits and interviews? The interview process is a two-way street. During an interview there is much a candidate can learn about the institution while the institution learns the true story about the candidate. The questions the committee asks the candidate, the behaviour of the administrators, faculty, staff and students the candidate meets, how the buildings and grounds look, all reveal the genuine story about an institution. This is the story that a candidate does not find online or in their literature or in the position description or even from people who claim they are familiar with the institution. So, from this perspective, every interview can be viewed as an “experience” of great value.
koufax33 - January 26, 2010 at 10:09 am
I was on the short-end of a courtesy interview for an administrative position several years ago. This RU university brought on 4 finalists. The morning of the interview, I went to the lobby of the department and was greeted by three others dressed up. I assumed they were the interview committee. Instead they were the other candidates and we had a “group meeting/interview” first. One of the candidates rather arrogantly pointed her husband was a high ranking person within the division. The rest of us knew right there who was going to get the job (she did). They had brought us in not only for the courtesy interview, but also to offer lesser positions to us, even though we had not applied for those (or would have)…. I would have liked to have back those two days in my life – especially since the department took a long time (almost 3 months) to reimburse me for travel expenses too!
willynilly - January 26, 2010 at 10:19 am
Sarah must have a lot of money to waste. Just the other day The Chronicle published an article by a Mr Evans on a related subject. Mr Evans postulated that, almost universally, candidates for faculty and administrative job openings must pay all of their own travel, lodging, etc. expenses if they accept an employment interview. I argued to the contrary. I do not believe that practice is universal and cited my own experiences as a senior officer in higher education for over thirty-two years. Mr. Evans conducted his research and reached his conclusions based on a review of HE employment practices in four states, plus, reading a number of job ads in The Chronicle. Notwithstanding this flimsy research effort, several posters jumped down my throat stating that Mr. Evans was right on target. So if we all prepared to accept his thesis then we must conclude that Sarah is loaded with money and is willing to spend it on “experience”.
johnw86 - January 26, 2010 at 11:12 am
willynilly, you’re entitled to your opinion, but you shouldn’t mischaracterize Mr. Evans’ previous post. He said that, with few exceptions, most candidates for positions at COMMUNITY COLLEGES must pay their own expenses.
drj50 - January 26, 2010 at 11:49 am
It is inappropriate to ask representatives of a school to pay your travel and take their time so one can get “experience.” With that said, dr_redrum is right. Schools (and other employers) look different onsite than they do online. One that initially looks less desireable may turn out to be a wonderful fit (and vice versa). Some of the best advice I received during my last job search was “first, get the job; then decide if you want it.” I have seen too many job seekers limit their options by applying only for those few jobs that appear to be a perfect fit. There things you can’t learn about a job/employer without interviewing; there are other things that you can’t ask about (e.g., salary, benefits, position for a spouse) until you have an offer. I will not waste the time of an employer applying for a job that I am certain I don’t want, but if there is a chance of a fit, it is worth my time — and the school’s — to find out more.
lbriggs - January 26, 2010 at 3:28 pm
dr_redrum’s point certainly resonates with me- you really can’t know if the job is right for you until you go to the interview and meet the people who you’ll be working with. My new position is the perfect fit for me. I sure didn’t think that at the pre-interview stage- the position was a horizontal move and I sure didn’t want to live in a large city or work at Giant U. I quickly figured out during the interview that my department had very similiar goals to my own and that I would fit well in their organizational culture. That’s something that’s really hard to find.
willynilly - January 26, 2010 at 4:41 pm
Reaction to Post #16I am always amazed at how some readers can totally miss the essence of a published article. John, pleaee go back and read again Evans’ first two paragraphs – particularly the last sentence of his second paragraph. Evans actually EXCLUDED community colleges from his report of findings. His research was in four year colleges and universities, such as those Sarah was seeking to compete with for a position.
drpud - January 27, 2010 at 5:43 am
Ditto blueberrycrunch’s comments (see below). Sarah may be ethical but she also sounds a bit naive to me:”Turning down a campus interview as an ABD in the current academic job market–even at “a small teaching institution with only a fair reputation”–seems very unwise to me. I would advise the job seeker to accept every interview invitation that is offered unless she has already decided that she would rather be unemployed than accept a job at a particular institution. Having two interviews at “institutions that better matched her professional goals” is no guarantee that she will actually receive a job offer from one of those two institutions.”
amnirov - January 27, 2010 at 6:46 am
It’s payback time, pure and simple. The typical SC is so hopelessly incompetent and ignorant of the stress it causes to candidates that whenever someone can claw a little back for the home team, he or she should. The endless delays, the lack of communication, the rudeness… this sort of behavior begs for revenge.Hey candidates! If you get an interview go for it. If you already know you’re not going to take the job, make sure you order the most expensive dish on the menu every time they take you out.
david_r_evans - January 27, 2010 at 2:54 pm
Amnirov, it’s not “clawing one back for the home team,” it’s depriving the next candidate in line (“the away team”) the shot at a job she or he might actually take.
sam189 - January 28, 2010 at 12:22 pm
I’ve sat through courtesy interviews, and they are painful. I was on a committee that had to make the painful decision to not offer a courtesy interview to someone who was in a non-tenure track line in our department. S/he would not make tenure and did not want to publish in general and certainly not in our field (S/he was teaching some cross-over and methods classes for us). We felt it was cruel to offer this person an interview when we knew there were more qualified candidates in the pool. The next year we had to have a courtesy interview(I was not on this committee). The interview was painful. His/Her CV had promise, but he barely presented a job talk, could not answer questions about his/her current and prior research, etc. S/He was from a local, well-respected, university. Most of us were embarrised that the admin. pushed us to do the interview. We felt horrible. I’m not sure if S/he new that s/he would not have gotten the job or not. I think they interviewed 5 or 6 canididates for that search, and we came out with 2 people who have amazing degrees, publishing, and teaching records. As for the “experience” interview. I’ve never done one or been on the receiving side of one. But, her dissertation adviser might have said that to encourage her to go and not the flip “hey, you might not get the job at the two more competitive places, your are not that good, you really dont know what you want, and a grad student can’t be too selective.”
microcarpetus - January 28, 2010 at 2:21 pm
I don’t understand why these interviews are unethical. In fact, it seems schools *have* to do a national search even if they know which person they want to hire. I know graduate students who ended up getting great visitings from courtesy interviews. And as for the “experience” interview, there is no reason for anyone to make up their mind about a place before the interview. Getting an offer from another institution can be a very useful bargaining tool. Either way, as long as people treat each other with respect (there are plenty of unacceptable unethical behaviors that run rampant during academic searches, such as not reimbursing for travel, never contacting the candidate, etc.), people are to apply to jobs without, and institutions should be free to turn down candidates!
joanlw3 - January 28, 2010 at 9:50 pm
I am currently chairing a faculty search. Two candidates withdrew within this last week after I called to invite them to campus. They withdrew, I think (tho neither gave a reason) because we wouldn’t either fly them business class or have them arrive a day early (we pay lodging, etc.) in order to be “fresh” for the interview day. I’ve chaired a large number of searches over the years and never had this happen before. Both are ABD. I am totally mystified. We always pay expenses and I never paid my own when I was being interviewed. After the “negotiations” over travel, I was relieved when they withdrew since I didn’t think we’d want to hire them after all – the sense of entitlement was amazing to me.
johnw86 - February 1, 2010 at 12:49 pm
Willynilly (#20): I did go back to recheck as you suggested. I re-read the original post and the discussion thread referenced in it. What I didn’t see in either place: a specific number or percentage of 4-year schools that no longer reimburse for interview expenses. Mr. Evans wasn’t presenting his position as research, nor was he discussing the FREQUENCY of non-reimbursement, simply the fact that it should not occur. You, on the other hand, continue to misrepresent his post. Please stop. (And, yes, I’ll stop when you do.)
babbalouie - February 14, 2010 at 4:14 pm
I had an experience about 12 years ago where I was brought on as an “emergency hire” at an institution. This allowed the university to fill an empty position very quickly. Three months later, and after a national search, I was part of the hiring committee interviewing five candidates who the dean and assistant dean had no intention of hiring, because they wanted me for the job. The interviews were incredibly uncomfortable for me as we were talking to people who did not stand a chance of being offered a job. I’ve always felt bad about that. Yet I’ve also wondered just how many positions I’ve interviewed for where none of the candidates had a possibility of being hired due to a college just going through the motions. I have a hunch there are a lot of those types of searches and interviews going on.