next »

[goingbatty]

Hi All

I have a campus interview next week, I'm not sure how interested in the job I am, but once you're in the running for something it's hard not to ruminate over it (even when you know it has an internal candidate).

I was one of three candidates invited for a campus interview last year (at a different university), and I never heard back from the committee, I do know that the job was filled via the wiki.  It drove me crazy though, never hearing back from them.  (I know that this is the subject of many threads and basically an inevitability of the process.)

This year, after interviewing, I will ask them about their timeline and when they think they will notify the anointed one; would it be inappropriate to also ask if they will notify the finalists that they do not select?  I realize one should not follow up for a phone interview, but is the "rule" different for campus interviews? Much as I am interested in some other options, it will gnaw at my soul at night for weeks and weeks if I never hear, and unfortunately there seems to be complete radio silence on the wiki on this one...

P.S. Related question -- my husband argues that this can't be completely in the bag for the internal candidate, since it's a private university and they could have just hired him if they wanted to.  I say that private u's are just as obligated as public ones to do a national search.  Am I right or is he?

[hegemony]

The problem is that many search committees have no knowledge of what goes on about notifying candidates.  I assume that our powers that be are notifying our candidates, but how promptly they do this, I have no idea.  When we ask, we're told, "Oh, don't worry, that's all taken care of.  The secretary sends them out at the right time."  But who notifies her of the right time?  Who decides what the right time is?  Where does she get the list of who the notices should be sent to?  And does she send to every last person, considering that she's already got twice as much work to do as she had time to do it?  Who knows? 

You can certainly establish that the SC has good will and wants notifications to be sent out at the right time, but there's many a slip along the way.  So I wouldn't conclude that the notices will be sent out.  I'm afraid that's just the way of things.  I personally wouldn't mention it.  I don't think it will make any difference, and you don't want to plant the idea in their minds that you're so sure you'll be rejected that you're already thinking ahead to it.

[oldadjunct]

Definitely ask about the time line, but asking if you will be notified on a negative decision strikes me as vaguely accusatory.

I have great sympathy for the feeling of having sunk into a dark abyss of uncertainty after a seemingly promising interview process; and I think that the simple courtesy of a denial letter to the 3-4 candidates brought in for a campus visit is not burdensome.  But the reality is don't expect or ask for it.  In this case, no news is bad news.

Maybe you will hear, maybe you won't.  It shouldn't be that way, but it is and asking about it won't change anything.

Best of luck to you.

[goingbatty]

Thanks all -- that's what I figured, but sometimes you gotta hear it from the disinterested voice of the interwebs...

[hesitant]

I have not been on a search committee, but my experience shows that it is unlikely they will not contact you immediately if you are not their first choice. Sometimes the first choice turns them down and the departments will go down to the second and possibly the third choice, so I guess many department will prefer to keep their options open. Plus, many places have HR polices in place that forbid them to contact candidates until the search is closed (i.e. the contract is signed)

Good luck.

[f_talbot]

I have been on a search committee and the radio silence happens on this end also. We turn over the recommendation and then we hear nothing. Nothing. We hear nothing for weeks. I know what happens during those weeks (an offer is extended, time for decision is granted, HR probably does something either useless or obstructive or both, the search committee fears returning to the applicant pool and going through another round of campus visits, negotiations happen) but the length of time it takes to happen usually does not match up with a particular outcome.

I don't know when would be an appropriate time to notify the other candidates --when the person shows up for the job? Or, if the accepting candidate is ABD, do we send them out when they defend successfully (making them eligible to sign the job contract)? I understand, obviously I've been on the other side of the hiring process, but there is not a cut-and-dried moment until it is so late that it would almost be meaningless.

[octoprof]

No.

[imawakenow]

Definitely ask about the time line, but asking if you will be notified on a negative decision strikes me as vaguely accusatory.

I agree.

Two things you can do in the future: 1) when you serve on a SC, suggest/nudge/encourage the SCC to be as open with candidates as possible about the outcome (while recognizing that things like notification of the outcome may be kicked over to HR and/or that a search may not be technically closed until quite late in the process); 2) update the appropriate wiki yourself.

Good luck on your interview!

[busyslinky]

P.S. Related question -- my husband argues that this can't be completely in the bag for the internal candidate, since it's a private university and they could have just hired him if they wanted to.  I say that private u's are just as obligated as public ones to do a national search.  Am I right or is he?

For this part of the question.  For full time tenure track positions, private universities usually do national searches (interational searches too) for positions.  Are we obligated?  It depends on your definition of obligated.  I don't think there is any written rule that we have to, but it is usually a very good idea to do so from an EEO and International perspective.  I do remember a situation where a non-U.S. citizen was selected and we had to show the Labor department (they were getting a visa or a permanent residency, I don't remember which) that we did a national search.  So in some cases it is something to do to make sure that you have completed a fair search from a regulatory perspective.  For the university's self-interest it is always good to select the candidate that is the best 'fit' from a larger pool.

[msparticularity]

In both of my job searches (four years ago and again this year), there has been an internal candidate for the position for which I was ultimately hired. In both cases, the individual was quite impressive, and was well-liked by the department. In both cases, there was an area of professional expertise/experience that was needed by the department, and which the internal candidate did not possess--but I did.

Try not to think of this as a competition with the internal candidate. Be yourself, listen carefully to the questions you are asked and be certain to answer them directly, and also spend time noticing if you like the place and the people. IOW, this is just another normal interview.

[eddean]

It is proper to ask about the time line for decision making.

[ruralguy]

First of all, no, OP don't do this (the SC chair will immediately get a "thought bubble" that reads: Oh, I think I can tell you right now! You aren't it!) .

Secondly, as many of us have stated numerous times, the internal candidate thing can go in many directions. Even if they are the first choice, the first choice might not accept (that just happened at my school).

And yes, the timeline is often dictated by higher ups and lower downs who have varying degrees of competence and sense of importance.

Just be patient, and if you have some other decision you need to make, then either just make, or tell the SC in question that you have another offer. That may or may not motivate folks to work faster, depending on where you fall in the ranking of applicants.

I assure you that impatience and paranoia is not the true path to a TT position (or tenure, or more, for that matter).