Playing Hard to Get in the Final Interview... DUH!

Some things just baffle me about candidate behavior. I guess I look at how things in a search play out and just shake my head in utter disbelief. In the final stages of the interview process, there should be a certain expectation in the minds of both the new employer and the candidate when they meet for the last time - before making that big committment to become "employer" and "employee". One last chance to make sure both parties "click" and the "cultural fit" we all talk about is either confirmed - or not. The big dance. The final step of the job search when everything comes together.

My challenge is understanding how and why any candidate would go thru the entire interview dating game and decide to show up for the final interview with an attitude of arrogance - still playing "hard to get" as if they are THE divine answer to solve all of the new employer's challenges and issues if they are lucky enough to have that candidate say "YES". What? Are you kidding me? Unusual behavior when the unemployment rate is currently at 9.7%. Maybe they don't understand math or are so caught up in themselves they simply don't get it. Can you say "clueless"? Thanks.  

Bigger question: Why suit up and board the airplane if you are not fairly certain you want to pursue the opportunity and get to the final interview and ultimately - an offer. Why waste everyone's time (and money) if you are not ready to make a move? I don't get it. Is it that they view this as a game? Is this behavior based on the candidate's view that "the hunt is far greater than the kill"? In the vetting process, we constantly seek validation that a candidate is definitely interested in seeking greener pastures as we near final approach leading to the offer. 

That's why I always smile when people on the outside tell me that the executive search business looks easy. As long as people and human nature are part of the search equation - the word easy will never be in play. Never.

Editor's Note - Tim Tolan is a partner at Sanford Rose Associates and specializes in Executive Search in Healthcare IT.  He's a closer, and you really don't want to call him unless you're ready to bring out the bazooka to bag some big game...    

Comments

[Todd Rogers]

Why? Probably insufficient self-esteem. How does one mitigate this? A line of questioning that centers around Maslow's Pyramid, perhaps? Such is the pitfall of an industry whose inventory exhibits free will.

[Wally Greene]

Amen. A shopping expedition? Trying to leverage a job offer against a raise at one's current job? The spouse all of a sudden doesn't want to relo? The human element is something we don't have control over in most search processes.

What we do have control over is deciding whether we (or our firm) ever consider(s) the "arrogant" candidate for another opportunity.

[Tim Tolan]

Todd - "insufficient self-esteem" is a perfect term! Love it! "inflated sense of self" is another.
Wally - The "Human Element" is always the one element we have no control over. Our product happens to be human capital which walks, talks, changes their mind and on occasion makes absolutely no sense whatsoever!
Thanks to both for your comments.

[Jim Connolly]

Where there are people - there are issues!

Jim Connolly
Organizational Performance Consultant
Bloomington, Illinois

www.orgresults.net/newsblog

[Apolinaras "Apollo" Sinkevicius]

You see, employers (interviewers) aren't exactly angels either. It takes two to tango and many employers are forgetting that this market is cyclical. Many act like gods and are forgetting there are places like Glassdoor.com and Vault.com. Poor treatment stories of candidates will be posted all over those sites. Yes, maybe the candidate got a bit hard to get, but something tells me, maybe the interviewer did a poor job selling. As I said before, it takes two to tango.

Now speaking of huge egos, isn't it ironic, someone who describes himself in such a high-horse way would complain about someone else who has maybe unrealistically high view of themselves. Pot meet kettle ;-)

Let us read this again...
"He's a closer, and you really don't want to call him unless you're ready to bring out the bazooka to bag some big game... "

Maybe a glass of humility juice is in order.

[Tim Tolan]

Apollo:

Thanks for your comment. I write for FOT about the crazy things (good and bad) that happen in my search practice. Period. There is never a dull moment - even in this down market. People are people. They do strange things and you and I, as hard as we might try, will never change that. Strange candidate or client behavior is exactly what it is. Not sure what you are trying to convey here - but I look forward to continuing to write my blog about the search business and sharing my stories with the FOT Nation.
Thanks again Apollo.

[Apolinaras "Apollo" Sinkevicius]

Tim,
What I am trying to convey is not too far from what you have stated in your reply. I have been on both ends (though I am not a recruiter, I am in business operations) and through my own skin I've learned that behavior of the candidate can be hugely impacted by the one of the interviewer. Some people just tend to "bring out an asshole in someone". I keep them away from touching any candidates.

That all said, I still find the last sentence of the editor's note extremely salesy, high-horse, and a major turn-off. You don't have to agree, I am merely expressing my reaction to it.

[KD]

Apollo -

I'm the founder and one of the editors at FOT, and Tim doesn't write his own "Editor's Note" - I do. If you go look around at the editor's notes, they reflect us having fun and being topical in addition to capturing the essence of what the person does for a living in the talent game.

I've engaged Tim on a search before, where he acquired one of the best sales management performers I've ever had the pleasure of working with.

While the editor's note was written (by me, not Tim) to have fun, the core of it is true. He performs searches at high levels, and does very, very, good work...

We stand behind the editor's note. Go to NPR if you want it all serious, all the time. We speak the truth and try to have fun while we do that...

KD

[Rachel]

A higher rate of unemployment just means that employers have more unqualified people to plow through nowadays before locating the same small numbers of qualified candidates for truly hard to fill positions. The fact is *both* (and, if you include the independent recruiter, all three) parties to the recruitment dance have to show respect for one another throughout the process, if anyone is going to benefit. I've seen one or two notable employers treat everyone that they interview like schmucks during this recession, forgetting that some of those so-treated will be the very people they hope will say "I do", when they eventually design to ask "Will you work for me?".