It’s like a bad joke. You have to listen to a somewhat long story until you get to the punchline. It’s a rather simple story, but you have to keep track of the players.
“Ted” is an executive and he’s finally getting around to hiring a replacement for the manager who quit six months ago. Several people apply and four make it to first round interviews. Soon it’s narrowed down to just two, “Bill” and “Rob.” Bill is actually in the group that this new manager will direct, and Bill wants to be promoted to the manager role. Rob works in the same division as Bill but in a different group. Rob won’t report to this new manager, but he’s looking to get out of his current group.
Following so far?
So Ted has scheduled two sessions for our group so that we can interview Bill and Rob for the new manager role. Invited to the interview session with Bill is the group of people who will be reporting to Bill if he becomes the new manager. And this same group is invited to the interview session with Rob. But because Bill is already in the group (and wants to be promoted), Ted included Bill in on the interview session with Rob.
Bill and Rob competing for the same job. Bill gets to be a part of the interview with Rob, but Rob doesn’t get to interview Bill.
After some debate, I drew the short straw and contacted HR to ask if there was a mistake in the invites for the interviews. The answer? No mistake. Ted intended for Bill to interview Rob.
Will Rob be included in the interview with Bill? Nope.
If you can figure out the logic here, or if you can find a punchline, please share it. Because I’m still baffled as to why an executive would allow for one candidate to be treated differently from another.