The "feedback" I received doesn't seem quite detailed enough for me to really use or take anything from it. There should be some positives but also constructive criticism as to why I wasn't selected, that would allow me to learn and improve my performance in my next interviews, ultimately it would assist my future job seeking approach. I was advised i had good experience but no client management experience... I do have client management experience in two forms, firstly I managed the relationship between my current employer and our screening vendor, feeding back into the QBR's and holding the screening provider accountable against their contractual SLA's and also i was a sales account manager prior to my financial background where i managed many accounts, building relationships and looking for ways to increase performance and profitability for both my company and the client. That could have been clarified if the right interview questions had been asked. The two interviews that I had (1 x 30 minute casual chat & 1 x 30 minute presentation on legal right to work), didn't have any real structure to them, there was clearly no defined interview structure on what questions to ask and what probing questions to pursue based on my initial answer. I was not asked to talk about my achievements or any challenges I've encountered and how I managed and overcame them. There were no questions regarding how I managed client relationships or dealt with difficult stakeholders. The interview did not offer any competency based questions or how my values and mindset would fit within Sterling's environment, or how they match up to Sterling's mission statement and core beliefs. With that lack of structure I felt that i wasn't being assessed accordingly and as a result the interview conversations went back and forth without a natural flow, this also meant that I had to try and crowbar examples of achievements and challenges into the interview, at which point I began to feel like I was leading the interview rather being interviewed. Now, this is the point I'm trying to make which allows for consistency and a fairer way of interviewing candidates. Without that fixed structure in interviews you will find that each candidate is judged differently and you are at danger of unconscious bias, because each interview between candidates will differ, without realising, you are judging candidates differently and that inconsistency could come across to candidates as unfair because everybody should be judged equally and personally I feel that may be the case for Sterling. Additionally, I felt like I was penalised for having a structured approach to my work. Working for a large international bank meant I am used to policies, procedures, governance and process maps but I am capable of working in a more ad-hoc environment without organisation. If the competency based interview questions had been present, Sterling would have understood how I managed to overcome unstructured challenges, and how I was able to implement the relevant changes to ensure that processes were agreed, therefore taking away confusion from a confusing situation and delivering on continuous improvement and really adding value.
Finally, when rejecting a candidate, for whatever reason, that has gone through two interview stages, produced a presentation at under a week's notice, they at least deserve a phone call to be advised of this, that shouldn't be an email. An auto reject prior to interviews is fine but to go through the full interview process, dedicating time, creating a presentation, researching the company and the recent acquisition by First Advantage, understanding the pros and cons of said acquisition...that is a lot of effort made on my behalf, a lot of dedication to the interview process at Sterling, that's me showing respect to the company and I think it is only right that the same level of respect is returned. I would suggest that Sterling arrange interviews that last longer than 30 minutes to allow for a better structured interview process, they'd get more out of it as a business, getting the right calibre of candidate and the candidate would have a better recruitment/hiring experience