In a bizarre interviewing situation for a sales role, a candidate shares their experience of being fake-rejected by an interviewer to test their tenacity. After going through several interviews and feeling optimistic about the process, the candidate received a call from a VP, informing them that they weren’t a good fit for the position. But shockingly, the VP followed up with a reveal that it was all a joke to see if the candidate would “fight for the job.” Confused and awkwardly laughing, the candidate questioned the legitimacy of this tactic and wondered if they should be fighting back whenever they face rejection in the job market. This article explores the questionable practice and sheds light on why it’s generally considered an obnoxious behavior that employers don’t appreciate.
I. Background of the Situation
In this article, we will explore a peculiar interviewing situation that a reader experienced while evaluating a new sales role. The reader had gone through the standard interview process, including a phone screen, an in-person interview, and a tour of the branch. However, after the in-person interview, the reader received a call from a vice president (VP) they had previously met, informing them that they were not a good fit for the role and would not be moving forward in the process. Little did the reader know that this rejection was a fake one, designed to test their reaction and see if they would “fight for the job.”
II. The Interview Process
Before delving into the fake rejection incident, let’s briefly discuss the interview process that the reader went through. It began with a phone screen, where the candidate had an opportunity to showcase their qualifications and skills. If they successfully passed this initial screening, they progressed to an in-person interview, which provided a deeper assessment of their capabilities and suitability for the role. After the interview, the candidate also had the chance to tour the branch, gaining insight into the working environment and culture of the company. The next step in the process would have been shadowing a cold call, allowing the candidate to further demonstrate their sales abilities.
III. The Fake Rejection
A. The phone call from the VP
Following the in-person interview and branch tour, the reader received an unexpected phone call from the VP they had previously met. This call delivered the shocking news that the reader was not a good fit for the role and would not be moving forward in the hiring process. Such a rejection after progressing through several stages of the interview process would naturally be disheartening and disappointing for any candidate.
B. The VP’s confession
However, the VP’s rejection turned out to be a fake one. After the initial blow of the rejection, the VP revealed that it was all a joke and that they wanted to see if the reader would “fight for the job.” This sudden revelation added an additional layer of confusion and unease to the situation.
C. The candidate’s response
In response to the VP’s confession, the reader experienced a mixture of emotions, including awkward laughter. This unexpected turn of events left them uncertain about how to proceed. On one hand, the VP expressed an interest in having the reader continue with the process by scheduling the cold call. On the other hand, the reader had reservations about moving forward due to the strange and unprofessional nature of the joke. Ultimately, the reader decided to decline the offer and remain in their current role.
IV. The Candidate’s Reaction
A. Awkward laughter
The candidate’s response of awkward laughter to the VP’s confession is understandable given the surprising and peculiar nature of the situation. It can be challenging to navigate such unexpected encounters, especially when they deviate from the norms of professional behavior. The reader’s laughter could be seen as an attempt to diffuse the awkwardness and maintain a sense of professionalism.
B. Decision to stay in current role
Upon reflection, the reader made the decision to decline the offer and stay in their current role. The fake rejection and subsequent joke by the VP may have raised doubts about the company’s culture and professionalism. Such an incident could be perceived as a red flag that warrants careful consideration before pursuing employment with the organization. The reader’s choice to remain in their current role demonstrates their reservation about joining a company that employs unconventional tactics during the interview process.
V. Is It a Legitimate Tactic?
A. Unusual and questionable
The fake rejection tactic employed by the VP in this situation is highly unusual and raises ethical concerns. Ordinarily, rejections in job interviews are believed to be a clear indication that the candidate is not the ideal fit for the role. Using a fake rejection as a means of testing a candidate’s persistence and determination can be seen as manipulative and unprofessional.
B. Considered obnoxious behavior
In most professional settings, candidates who push back against rejections and refuse to accept a “no” are viewed as obnoxious and undesirable. This behavior can create an uncomfortable working dynamic and is generally not welcomed by employers. It is essential for candidates to respect the employer’s decision-making process and handle rejections with grace and professionalism.
C. Sales strategies vs. job rejections
While there may be specific sales strategies that encourage salespeople to persistently pursue potential customers, this approach does not necessarily translate to the job interview process. Pushing back against a rejection in a sales transaction is different from doing so in an employment context. Sales tactics that may be effective in one situation can be off-putting and inappropriate in another.
VI. Screening for Boundary Ignoring Behavior
If the fake rejection was indeed a deliberate tactic employed by the VP to assess the candidate’s response, it raises concerns about the company’s approach to boundaries and respect. Candidates should not be put in a position where they are expected to cross professional and personal boundaries to prove their commitment to a job. Healthy and respectful professional relationships are built on clear communication and mutual trust. Screening for boundary-ignoring behavior should not be the basis for evaluating a candidate’s suitability for a role.
VII. The Candidate’s Withdrawal
The reader’s decision to decline the offer and withdraw from the hiring process was a rational and prudent step. The fake rejection and subsequent joke introduced an element of uncertainty and unprofessionalism into the interview process. It is essential for candidates to assess the company’s culture and values before accepting a job offer. In this case, the reader’s withdrawal demonstrated their preference for a workplace that upholds professionalism and clear communication.
VIII. Ambiguity in the VP’s Intentions
While the VP’s fake rejection raises questions about their intentions, it is essential to acknowledge the ambiguity surrounding their actions. The weird “just kidding, I got you!” statement and the subsequent interest in moving the candidate forward despite the rejection may suggest a miscommunication or impulsive behavior on the part of the VP. It is crucial for employers to communicate their expectations and intentions clearly to avoid such misunderstandings during the hiring process.
IX. The Importance of Clear Communication
The incident described in this article underscores the importance of clear communication in the hiring process. Job seekers rely on employers to provide transparent feedback and decisions throughout the interview stages. Employers, in turn, should be mindful of the impact their actions and words can have on candidates’ experiences. Open and honest communication helps establish trust and fosters positive relationships between employers and candidates.
X. Conclusion
In conclusion, the fake rejection experienced by the reader during the interview process raises questions about the appropriateness and legitimacy of such tactics. While sales strategies may encourage persistence, candidates should exercise professionalism and respect in the job interview context. The candidate’s decision to decline the offer and stay in their current role showcases their emphasis on a workplace culture that values clear communication and professionalism. Employers should prioritize respectful and transparent communication throughout the hiring process to ensure a positive experience for all involved parties.
