I Started Emailing People Back After They Rejected Me. Three Actually Told Me The Truth.

Well this came about really from pure spitefulness if I am going to be perfectly honest.

I got an email saying the usual…'we are moving forward with other candidates for this role and we wish you all the best in your job search' - and then on the back of this, something just broke me a little bit that day and, rather than hitting delete as usual, I hit reply.

I did not even give it much thought.

I just typed a simple 'Are you happy to give me any feedback why I did not get the role?' I was not trying to argue with anyone, just asking, a little out of desperation because I had gotten to the final stages.

I was really curious as it was the only job that I felt had been going particularly well up until this point, and all I got was this impersonal message.

To my surprise I got an email back about 2 days later.

The contents of which has actually stuck in my mind enough to start asking for it with every application I have had since, and have actually had about 4 months of doing this - I sent about 20 and actually received a meaningful response 3 times.

The first one. The interview that I thought had gone really well

I thought this interview had gone extremely well leaving with it a good positive vibe which is so rare for me, as usually I spend my walk home dissecting every single sentence, hating most of my responses.

This one however had felt natural; I connected with all the panelists; answered the questions pertaining to the technical side of the role perfectly; and I even managed to make the panel laugh.

A few weeks later the inevitable rejection email arrived.

Emailed them as planned.

She responded saying, not in so many words -'I will summarise' - I interviewed well and received a good response, but another candidate possessed the specific type of experience required by the role and therefore it was based solely on that fact and there were not that many distinguishing factors in terms of personality and how we would have fitted in in general.

I was really happy to hear that.

I do not feel any more knowledgeable now but at least there is no lingering question of whether I wasn't good enough!

The second one. That I found frustrating to be honest

Again another interview that had gone to final rounds and then I was met with the usual template email.

I was pleased when I did hear back, some weeks later, however as it was more corporate than the first, and I am guessing probably double checked by a HR team… The feedback from the interview was that there was actually a restructuring taking place with the role as a result of the recruitment process, and that a new version was going to be implemented at a lower level (and therefore a cheaper employee) for what they were now needing.

Not me obviously.

The job itself changed form and became redundant.

I found this annoying as there was really nothing I could do or have done differently that would have prevented this.

It was no reflection of how I had interviewed but that is one useful way to approach rejections as they sometimes do genuinely have nothing to do with the candidate.

The third one. This one I still find myself pondering over the most.

This is an interview that, I believe, made me view interviews as a whole in a slightly different light; so I am going to try and describe it well.

I thought this interview had gone just as well as the previous ones.

I got rejected, sent out my usual email, didn't hold out much hope.

He responded with a lot of information this time round; he said the interview was fine, the questions were answered well, however one question, regarding a dispute with a former manager, when I was answering it, was perceived by him to have been…in his exact words 'a little too polished to have been real' and therefore made him wonder if he had been receiving an honest response or not.

This one hurt a little, as he wasn't entirely wrong.

I had smoothed it over; rehearsed it to ensure that I wasn't rambling, and that I sounded articulate and professional, all the things I am sure we are encouraged to do during interview process.

So that polish can sometimes actually highlight the opposite.

No one had ever told me that before that email though!

What replying 20 times taught me that advice articles have not

So I only received three genuinely useful answers in my 20 emails, I appreciate it is hardly a definitive study, but what it did teach me is this: the reasons behind your rejection are rarely as catastrophic as your mind suggests on the drive home, it's not normally some sweeping 'you aren't good enough'.

Instead, it's a specific, very narrow, element - such as someone possessing a particular skill already that the role specifically required.

Sometimes it is the fact that the company re-evaluated what they were looking for during the recruitment process and their budget allowed for this change - this has nothing to do with the interview itself at all.

And sometimes it is a fleeting moment in a hour long chat, where one aspect of it may have been polished, just a fraction, so much that the panel was unsure if what they heard was genuine.

There's not a lot that you can do to combat 'not good enough,' but you certainly can work on your delivery to ensure that it does not appear over rehearsed or too polished!

The vast majority of companies do not get back to your emails of enquiry and this is totally understand, there is really nothing in it for them.

But if you do get a response, however brief it is, it can provide you with so much more information than the usual generic 'chin up and carry on.'

Well worth giving it a shot on your next rejection!