|
|
|
|
|
|
by infamouscow
746 days ago
|
|
|
It sounds like the recruiter reached out to the team for feedback, and their response was along the lines of: arrogant and unteachable. Given the choice between a technically superior but difficult candidate and a weaker but collaborative one, most teams will choose the latter or pass on both. In my experience, it's more productive to mentor a coachable candidate than hire someone who dissents at every turn. In a high-performing team, personality fit and other soft skills matter significantly more than many candidates realize. |
|
|
Thanks for the feedback and I am actually very happy to hear that, given that one of my strongest skills is that I'm generally very nice to work with. That was actually the one piece of feedback I got in the original rejection mail, that all the interviewers had said that I had been great to chat with and that they hoped I applied in the future. The reason given when I called was specifically that I didn't reach their technical bar.
It's actually you funny you raise it, because we spent the last parts of the second interview talking about how important interpersonal relations was and how we both, me and the interviewer, were surprised by how many people in IT undervalue the skill.
Regardless, taking the third person point of view is always difficult and I appreciate your insight!