Will blog for cake.
A conversation with a colleague today brought up an interesting question about job-search etiquette. We’ve just concluded a search in our department, and we were discussing the phrasing of the letter that was going to be sent out to all the candidates we didn’t hire. The letter, as written by the head of the search committee, identified the person who had accepted the position and included a brief paragraph outlining this person’s previous experience and publications. My colleague was a bit surprised by this, and asked me if it was usual practice. Her impression was that this paragraph came across as “We hired this person because s/he’s got all this great research and experience and you didn’t, so there.” Since most of the people we interviewed for this position were more recent PhDs than the successful candidate, my reaction would have been more to read it as “Wow, at least I was in the running with someone with a lot more publications than I have; that means I’m reasonably competitive.” (then again, I tend to be rather obsessively positive about things.)
I’ve seen rejection letters that simply say “We’ve made a hire, and you weren’t it, thanks anyway;” I’ve seen some that identify the successful candidate by name, and I’ve seen some like this one that provide a little more information. The first option strikes me as a little coy, because it’s not like the new hire is some sort of state secret, and people are going to poke around until they find out anyway. But does that mean lots more information is good? or is it insulting? What kind of rejection letter do you think search committees should send out, and why?
I’ve seen rejection letters that simply say “We’ve made a hire, and you weren’t it, thanks anyway;” I’ve seen some that identify the successful candidate by name, and I’ve seen some like this one that provide a little more information. The first option strikes me as a little coy, because it’s not like the new hire is some sort of state secret, and people are going to poke around until they find out anyway. But does that mean lots more information is good? or is it insulting? What kind of rejection letter do you think search committees should send out, and why?
About me
- I'm Pilgrim/Heretic
- From Just over the horizon
- Pilgrim: More committed to journeys than destinations. Heretic: Too curious for my own good.
- My profile
Still on the table
Aging in the cask
- November 2004
- February 2005
- March 2005
- April 2005
- May 2005
- June 2005
- July 2005
- August 2005
- September 2005
- October 2005
- November 2005
- December 2005
- January 2006
- February 2006
- March 2006
- April 2006
- May 2006
- June 2006
- July 2006
- August 2006
- September 2006
- October 2006
- November 2006
- December 2006
- January 2007
- February 2007
- March 2007
- April 2007
- May 2007
- June 2007
- July 2007
- August 2007
- September 2007
- October 2007
- November 2007
- December 2007
- January 2008
- February 2008
- March 2008
- April 2008
- May 2008
- June 2008
- July 2008
- August 2008
- September 2008
- October 2008
- November 2008
- December 2008