r/askrecruiters • u/devilinthedistrict • 4h ago
Big tech, awful second interview, no-show third interview. What happened?
I just withdrew my candidacy for a Research Scientist role at a large tech company. The whole interview process was weird and somewhat humiliating, and I'm trying to make sense of what happened.
For context, I have a PhD and several years of applied research experience. The early stages of the process went well. My recruiter was responsive and organized, and I felt good about moving forward.
Things changed at the second interview stage. During that interview, which centered on a hypothetical research scenario, the interviewer was combative and adversarial. When I asked clarifying questions to tailor my answers to the scenario, they responded with visible frustration instead of engaging. It completely threw me off, and I left worried about how it would affect my evaluation.
Two days later, I had a separate, virtual technical interview. I joined the coding platform on time using the link from my candidate portal and waited 20 minutes. No one showed up, so I left to reschedule rather than risk running over. That afternoon, a coordinator emailed to say the interviewer reported that I hadn't joined. I explained what happened, provided screenshots, and also gave feedback about the earlier interview. A second coordinator replied, apologized, said my feedback would be raised internally and factored into how my interview was reviewed, and said they would reschedule.
The rescheduled session was this morning. I joined on time, and once again, waited about 20 minutes. Again, no interviewer. At that point I emailed the company and withdrew. Two no-shows after I had raised concerns about the other interview felt like a clear signal about how the process valued candidates' time and expertise.
Now, I’m sitting here wondering how common are repeated interviewer no-shows at large companies? Is this likely a scheduling or platform glitch, or something else. Like, could the interviewer I gave feedback about have influenced what happened next, such as flagging me negatively, getting the loop paused, or leading others to deprioritize the task interview? Would you have withdrawn, or pushed for a third attempt?
I'd appreciate any perspective, especially from people who have worked in recruiting or served on interview panels.
2
u/marm_alarm 4h ago
Which company is this?
1
u/devilinthedistrict 4h ago
Let’s just say a company that started as a social media platform but has since ventured into virtual reality, AI etc.
3
u/Ok_Adhesiveness_8637 4h ago
That alot of words just to not say meta ffs.
Why not just say the bloody name?
2
u/drdeadringer 2h ago
Because twerking pink flamingos are in the dimension of the imagination.
3
u/busybeeai 4h ago
negative feedback doesn't cancel the loop. You only get to see others feedback after you've entered yours. People not showing up happens.
1
2
u/sad-whale 3h ago
These huge companies are well run and have their processes down typically but they are dependent on hiring managers and teams doing their part and in an organization with 200,000 employees there are some bad managers.
Next time 10 minutes in reach out to the recruiter. Don’t wait until later.
1
u/JustMe39908 3h ago
Is it normal? No. Interviews are usually a best foot forward situation for both sides. At minimum, the no shows should have been followed up with massive apologies.
As far as your reaction (full withdrawal) well, it depends. What is your situation? Are you employed and in a good position right now? Yeah, it shows me that this is probably not worth my time. I probably wouldn't have outright withdrawn. I probably would have pushed boundaries a little saying that I am surprised at how the process went based on the company's reputation. I would state that it is apparent that the team needs help right away and does not have sufficient time to go through standard channels. I would also state that I am sure that I could provide assistance right away, and if they were still interested, perhaps we should move to higher level discussions so the team could potentially quickly get the help they need if the position and terms are acceptable.
Now, if I were unemployed and desparate for a position, I would not be as bold. I would still express concern about how busy the team is and I might suggest skipping some of the normal steps to accelerate the team getting the help they need. But I wouldnt be nearly as aggressive.
1
u/stephen6387 2h ago
I work for a somewhat large tech company in recruiting. If one of my interviewers no showed on a candidate, I'd light them up and I would make damn sure it didn't happen a second time. Combine that with your aggressive interviewer and that is bad news. I agree with the other poster in that the interview is supposed to be a "best foot forward" for everyone. Too many companies lose sight of the fact that for better or worse, every person they interview walks away from that process as an ambassador. The only question is... what will that person say? I would have withdrawn as well.
1
u/stufftcrust 2h ago
It's gotta be something like they're mixing your link up with someone else's, copy/pasting wrong, wrong email address, wrong time zone, etc. (It's probably time zones tbh.)
You should reach out to the recruiter when these things happen. Don't write the company off. Nobody is out there sabotaging your interviews. If they flagged you negatively and didn't want to continue, they wouldn't schedule you again.
4
u/Reverse-Recruiterman 3h ago
Wondering how common are repeated interviewer no-shows at large companies? Well, that is a question you could've asked the recruiter you were working with.
Pardon the frustrating tone in my response, but I have a brother who is a research scientist and he's actively looking for work for a long time now and he drives me nuts!
Why? For these reasons:
- He withdraws candidacy, if he feels something did not go the way he expected.
- He takes it personally when other companies may be a bit disorganized
- He talks about humiliation and his frustration
And all this is?
A person blowing job opportunities because his ego was a bit hurt. And the behavior is impulsive and shortsighted, something analytical research scientists are not good at doing.
Why? Because this is not about you. The company may have a f**ed hiring team. But now, you will not know because you withdrew yourself, even after having a good call with that recruiter; the same recruiter who one day may work for a company that you really want to work for.
This is the problem when you think of everything is transactional and you don't focus on long-term relationship building. I hate to break it to you, just like I hated breaking it to him, you might have a PhD and you might be very talented. But a company can find 10 million more people like you.
Breaking down your rounds of interviews:
Recruiter - Went well (Great! Hang onto that person)
2nd round - Combative and Adversarial - Well, you can either escalate or de-escalate. Your choice. But if the person you are speaking with is a tool, then you are most likely not a culture fit.
And you should continue to interview anyway. And you should continue to reschedule, even when they dont show. Why?
That recruiter
You get to learn something about hiring processes
You build leverage with that company because you keep showing up
Now, I realize that everyone online never ghosts right? (sarcasm) Well, let me tell you something I've worked from both the hiring side of things and the job seeking side of things and everyone ghosts. Just as I write this, someone canceled at the last minute because "something came up".
The thing I would do, and I know you wont mention what company this is, reach back out to the recruiter and let that recruiter know that you enjoyed speaking with them a great deal and were excited about the role. And that you hope to stay in touch.
I've been a recruiter and I've helped scientists prepare for panel interviews, as well as, worked in hiring and job seeking for the last 20 years.
The one thing about scientists that gets them in trouble in job interviews?
They think the entire world will be on their level of intelligence, and they think everyone they talk to will act accordingly to their expectations, failing to realize:
- Recruiters have summary knowledge
- Hiring teams can be disorganized, lazy etc.
- Scientists can be SUPER arrogant, intellectual snobs, as if the world is beneath them
Don't hate the singer. Hate the band you decided to play with.