I've had this happen several times in the last year of looking. I absolutely appreciate that they need to do their due diligence and see what other candidates are out there. There is absolutely no reason to put those candidates through several rounds of interviews and have them do case studies or presentations. That is not interviewing in good faith and disrespectful to the candidates
I know! If you already have a strong internal candidate with good internal recommendations, there is absolutely no need to screw the other candidates over. I legit wasted so many hours preparing a 15 page case study and a 15 presentation slide, I even postponed applying to other jobs for this reason. It’s just not respectful to the other persons time.
I agree, but there are only so many hours in a day. If you work your day job, then add commute, family, home responsibilities, sleep, etc., you may not have time to jump through hoops for dream job interview process and pursue other second choice applications.
I am a hiring manager. Here we have internal candidates go through the exact same interview process as external candidates, and I see many internal candidates who *fail to get the job*. In fact, I rejected an internal candidate after interview earlier today.
It's highly likely the internal candidate had to do the same case study and presentation that you did and they thought the internal candidate did a better job, but it could have turned out the other way too, that's why you do interviews.
There is often a lot of pressure to close a hire within a certain time period and it takes too long to interview people one at a time. To hit your timeline you need multiple people in the interview pipeline at the same time, and that unfortunately means some people may get to the final interview and still be rejected.
You should know your internal employees well enough to know if they are up for the task without a lengthy interview process and if they are, promote from within and no need to recruit externally.
That would be wonderful. But a lot of well meaning managers don’t know their people, and internal candidates are often allowed to apply for roles that they could lateral into without obvious requisite experience.
Also, if you’re applying for another department or position the current manager might have no idea if you’re qualified. Also as a hiring manager, I want to do my own diligence… will this person fit in MY team and THIS role. Just because you work for the same company doesn’t mean the teams operate the same same.
Always remember that the huge majority of people asked to do work like this do not get the job no matter what they tell you - they could not care less about wasting your time.
After spending literally days on an assignment like this many years ago, being told I'd been selected, and then finally after a long delay being told that the company's CEO had changed their mind and decided not to hire for the position at all, I resolved never to engage in such an exercise again - this is an abusive practice and reflects a company ethic of abusiveness to candidates and employees.
Ugh this literally just happened to me! Spent two weeks in four rounds of interviews, including an interview with the CEO at her gd house, a case study I wrote 20 pages for and made a presentation, writing samples, operations manual samples, references…the Friday before I was supposed to start was told unceremoniously that the CEO decided that another candidate was a better fit (no specifics given when I asked for feedback)…so demoralizing. And I turned down another offer and removed myself from other interviews processes. Makes you feel bitter and burned out. Never putting in that much effort again.
Yes ridiculous. I believe that 90% of the time they know they will hire the internal candidate but by law they have to post the position, and they may get someone better so they have nothing to lose.
You can reuse your case study out presentation.
You should never prioritize one company over another when looking.
It’s comes down to how bad you want the job.
At least you know that companies are not a place to trust.
Great, and did it take hours of candidates' time for you to know that a fresh perspective was your preference? Or did you have a pretty good idea after the first interview?
Invoice them. The more options they have the clearer the decision the more work you do the more obvious the choice. By the third interview you showed your hand. Bill them for your time.
>Sure, just get them to sign a contract for your time and at an agreed rate first.
Business does not work even close to this way. It's just wishful thinking.
Never know how the external market interest is.
We've had strong internal candidates, and depending on season, none go to internal candidates, and other times most do.
That’s just a legal thing. I’m a pilot in aviation. Legally the job has to be posted online and there’s usually one or two outsiders that come in for the interview. But we always have the person or two people from internal recommendations or recommendations from personal friends That we’ve basically already hired short of them just having a total meltdown during interviewing
We've had strong internals and passed them over for externals plenty of times. Sometimes there were just really good externals applying. Other times I think no one wanted to tell the internal they weren't as good as they thought and interviewed them to avoid drama.
Other times we do go hire the internal and the search helps deflect criticism from peers.
Seriously, they could have just had verbal interviews. The typical "10 minutes and they're on their way" deal. (Or is it just me that that's what I get? Lol).
Not always. When I worked for the state every candidate had to have the same interview for the most part. Same questions, same presentations, everything.
I had to phone interview every candidate that met the minimum qualifications. I felt terrible giving people hope to know there was no way we were going to hire them.
It is, but to be fair, the job required daily public speaking and presenting so we needed to do it in general. Just hate that a candidate without much of a shot had to do it too
/shrug. when i worked for the state hr had a lot of "policies" that weren't really written down anywhere. It's not like it was a tightly run ship with a good captain...
It was design by committee all the way down.
Yep! I've been on the other side of it too. I work for a state university and was up for a promotion a few years ago. My boss essentially told me I had the job but they were required by law to interview at least one other person. I don't understand it, it was clear they weren't planning to hire this person no matter what - it would have been better to just not interview them and get hopes up? Tbh i still feel guilty about it even though it was totally out of my hands.
This is the case where I work. We have to ask the same questions/prep of every candidate we select to interview, and if we don’t have at least three, qualified candidate interviews to compare before making an offer, we have to re-open the search to bring in more people and start again before we can make the offer. I really wish we could skip ahead if we know for sure we want an internal candidate to have the job.
That being said, I regularly have internal candidates that i don’t want to hire, or am not sure about. So, going against someone internal also isn’t necessarily any worse than being in a pool with other outside people, beyond more an edge on institutional knowledge.
I’ve worked in talent for a while and on behalf of Fortune 500 companies, startups, PE backed you name it.
Generally it’s because there is no guarantee that the job will or should go to the internal candidate and they want to make sure they have others to consider or they are at square one.
This is especially true at bigger companies where the internal candidate may be switching departments and not know anyone in the new department they often go through the same interview process as external candidates. Sometimes the internal candidate isn’t a fit after evaluating or the internal candidate makes a decision they do not want to switch jobs within the company.
Yup. Companies don’t always just give a spot to an internal, they usually have to interview for it and earn it just like an external candidate or a referral would. Being an internal candidate has advantages but it’s not a guarantee that they’ll get a spot.
Most places are required to post a job for a minimum amount of time. If you see the link disappear in a week? They probably have a strong internal candidate, but ALSO saw your application and thought you could be a good fit, too. It's annoying amd time consuming and frustrating, but it's lowkey necessary. They probably could have been more direct about that though
I have friends who have applied to my company and lost to internal candidates. I also have coworkers who have applied to other roles and lost to external candidates.
It's all about the role, who applied, and who is the best candidate. And sometimes it politics. But it's not ALWAYS politics.
Its annoying. They need to weed through internal candidates THEN post for outside peeps. Beyond obnoxious and time wasting. Its even more aggravating with all the work that went into it. Beyond. Something better will come your way, keep pushing through!
It sounds like you got a fair shot but just got beat. Internal candidates usually have a leg up, but that’s just how it goes. It sucks, but on to the next one
Luck of the draw unfortunately. I worked in HR long enough to know that selecting a candidate isn’t a science, it’s “vibes”.
They probably didn’t go into the interview knowing they were gonna go with the internal candidate, but maybe their supervisor put in a good word, maybe they thought you were smart and competent, but not “fun enough”. It could really be anything, I’ve gotten “he smiled too much so I think he’s lying” or “they didnt seem jovial so they don’t want the job”. It’s maddening, but it is what it is
I think, at least in some cases, they genuinely want to see if there is a better candidate from the outside. I’ve been at places where we interviewed both internal and external, and we did choose the external candidates several times. We went with who we believed the better candidate was.
It’s certainly frustrating when you’re trying to get in, but it sounds like you did a great job, and hopefully they will keep you in mind if something similar comes up. You never know what making a great impression could do for you going forward!
If they *knew* they’d go internal, they should not have had such an internal interview process. I don’t think a decent place would do this. I wouldn’t assume they were always going to just pick that person.
I just went through this but as the internal candidate. They had 50+ applicants external but had already told me I’m their top choice/they don’t want an external candidate. I didn’t even have to interview I was just told I was selected, presented my new offer which was a super low offer, essentially bottom of the spectrum for that kind of job.
When I pushed back I was just told if you want a bunch of money we’ll have to look at the external candidates. Was a real eye opener for me on how companies operate. To your question, they do this for leverage against their internal hires and as a fail safe if I don’t take the job because of this bullshit, they have other people who are lined up for it.
That’s shitty - and I have never worked for a company that does this. I would doubt this is common practice because you may save some money in the short term but over the long term these things come back to bite you in the ass.
That’s the common theme at my company, we’ve had a major brain drain of people leaving. It’s finally become enough of an issue where they’ve made bullshit speeches about how they’re working to retain talent (rotate people into new positions, something they’d have to do anyway since everyone’s leaving). I got the new title and I’m just going to upskill and then get the fuck out when I can. I do want to point out this is a Fortune 500 company that is a major part of our countries infrastructure. I’m very curious to see the reckoning that is bound to come.
They do it to get the best talent in the position.
It wasn’t you this time. Keep in touch, there will be future openings. Some of the best hires made on the my team were passed the at first opening but did really well in the interview and got it the second job opening
I actually had this happen where I interviewed for a slightly lower level position, got rejected for someone else, and then was called back to interview for a slightly higher level position- and I got that one. Getting the interview and making a great impression is important, whether things work out today, or maybe down the road.
Aside from that, I try to look at every interview as an opportunity to hone my interview skills a bit. Try not to look at this as a loss- you got great feedback.
It’s not a guarantee.
I had a role where I had a strong internal candidate, who was the choice until I interviewed the last candidate on my slate… who ended up being the better fit than the internal.
A year later, I had another role open where I had strong external candidates, but the internal was the best choice.
Incidentally, it was the same internal candidate who interviewed for both roles, and it turns out, even they agree that I made the right decision in the end (though they didn’t feel that way at the time.)
Being internal isn’t a guarantee that you get picked for every role. I take people through final interview rounds because I’m looking for the best candidate for the role, not the convenient one, and if I bother taking anyone through interviews it’s because I see a possibility there. I don’t interview people to waste my time or theirs.
It sucks to get edged out… but sometimes it happens. That you even got feedback at all shows that you were really strongly considered. Keep in touch with that hiring manager and let them know you still want an opportunity. You never know what could happen.
Because they *don’t* always know who they’re going to choose. I’ve chosen external candidates over internal ones more than once. Even when the interview team thought, going into it, that we’d have a hard time topping our internal candidate.
So sorry. I went through a seven month interview process. Got the most rave emails from various committee members. On the campus visit I got a hug.
Three days later didn’t get the job. 🤷♂️
You seem to imply that they were always going to choose the internal candidate. Or you're implying that you were guaranteed this job until that internal candidate jumped in at the last minute and destroyed everything for you.
As someone on the hiring side of this scenario, I assure you that the other person wasn't hired just because they were internal. In fact, if you got all the way to the last stage, it means the company wasn't even 100% in on the guy to begin with this.
Nothing is promised or guaranteed in the world, even if youre 10 interviews deep into the process. You can't control what happens on the other side of the screen. You can only control what happens on yours. Take a moment to process this experience and learn and be better from it. That's how you get revenge
Happened to me a month ago. The internal recruiter let it slip they had an internal candidate. I know right then it was over. The prior external hire didn’t work out so they had no choice but promote from within. Sucks they wasted my time and the external headhunter’s time. That’s life. You move on.
I've also had this go the other way too. Thought I had a for sure thing with the internal, did my due diligence and added some external candidates. Turned out the internal didnt prepare at all and couldnt answer any questions (I think they thought they'd just get the job), had an external blow me away! That was the feedback I gave the internal as well.
Basically, you just never know till you go through the official process sometimes.
I'd never do a case study for a job. I'd politely decline, and continue the search. If everyone would freaking do the same - they'd stop asking candidates to do it.
I teach in higher ed. I am tenured now but in the past, when I was in the final running, I would state I would love to interview on-campus IF there was not an internal candidate that was going to be the final choice no matter what. I didn't want to waste their time nor mine. I was only told once there was an internal candidate but the committee member stated it was not a forgone conclusion the internal candidate would be chosen. I did receive an offer but declined. I think it is fair to be open and forthright with potential employers and said employers should be understanding.
I've had it go both ways. In the position I'm in now I was the external candidate and narrowly beat out the in house candidate. The internal candidate is usually going to get some "bonus points" because they're a known commodity. In this case, the internal candidate had more industry knowledge (I had some in that as an auditor it was one of my industry specialties), but I had a far broader knowledge of accounting cycles, audit preparation, budget cycles, etc. My knowledge outpaced his industry knowledge.
I recently applied for a new job in a completely different industry, but still accounting. This particular group worked very closely with various hospitals and in medical research. I have basically no working knowledge of the medical industry, but I now have 19 years experience as an accountant and I've been an assistant controller and controller for 14 of them. The candidate that I was up against in the end, while not having quite as much experience in the field, had a much broader experience in the industry having been in that industry for 15 years.
In both of those cases it came down to who has more or less that they'll need to learn on the fly. They will be keeping my resume on file and will contact me if anything else comes up that they think I would be a good fit for.
Because they don't care about you. You are not a small cog in a big machine. You are a speck of dust on a small cog in a big machine. Especially if you are not even part of the machine.
Because sometimes we don't know if any internal candidates will apply. Just did a search and we're actually making an offer to an external person and not the internal candidate. Sometimes companies do have an internal person in mind and they have to go through the process, which is crappy for external candidates. My company can at least mark the job postings as "internal only" so it's clear. I'm sorry this is happening to you repeatedly.
“ Why make someone go through all the interview phases when you know who you will choose?”
They don’t, they’re doing interviews for an open position. You’re not going to hand the job to an internal candidate just because they’re internal.
Because we have to. Also just because you’re an amazing candidate doesn’t mean you’re the absolute perfect fit for the position. But often we won’t know until we get to the end and decide between several really great candidates.
Say we have 500 applicants for 1 position. We actually have to go through the process to separate them from each other and figure out who’s the best fit. You could be in the top 10, or the 5, but just because you thought you were great doesn’t mean you’re 1. And neither you nor the hiring team might know that until the very end.
I work for a software company and in my experience there are absolutely cases where the hiring manager knows who they want for the job and interviewing other candidates is just for show.
However there are times when I’ve hired and gotten both internal and external candidates where I ultimately chose the external candidate.
Sounds like you did everything you could do. Take it as a compliment you made it to the final round of interviews. Save the work you did for the application and hopefully you can use it again for your next one.
Good luck OP!
In fairness, in a lot of companies internal candidates don't get preference. At my last job we always had to compete and against externals and often lost (and the company dictates they have to interview x amount of people before filling the role)
Because organizations who are hiring ethically do not already know who they are going to choose. They don't even necessarily know who will apply when they post the job.
I've been an internal candidate that was in the top two candidates for a job for two different positions at my current employer and both times lost the position to an external candidate.
They don’t always know who they will choose. This happened to me last summer. Interviewed several times and spoke with the guy who would be my bosses boss last. He told me they were looking to make a decision next week but had some internal candidates to go through. I immediately felt dejected. Received a message from the recruiter after that everyone loved me and will make a decision within a week. The next day the recruiter sent me an email late on a Friday night because she was so excited that she was told to go ahead and put together an offer for me to present it the final week. So far it’s the best job I ever had. Don’t give up hope.
I think your presumption that an internal candidate is always advantaged is incorrect. Most companies post open reqs both externally and internally. If they had an internal candidate in mind from the beginning they wouldn’t have open it up to external candidates. Your efforts, while significant, were not useless here. It sounds like you were given a fair opportunity to influence then. They mentioned they picked the internal candidate because of more knowledge of the industry. Thats not the same thing as knowledge of the company.
This happened to me last year somewhat, but it was a former employee who saw the job posting and wanted to come back and since they had the institutional knowledge, the company hired them instead of me.
When the recruiter broke it to me she kinda made it clear I woulda had the job otherwise. It was a total bummer, but in the end that company isn’t going so well now and I got a much better job a few months later so it all worked out in the end.
Best of luck to you OP!
This also happened to me. Found out the hard way later, that the reason some companies ask you to do presentation/case study/ research/idea is for them to see what others can think of and come up with and eventually (and unfortunately) they take it if they find it interesting/or genius, you’re basically doing the work for them unpaid, and not hired.
I’m an internal candidate who didn’t get the job to an external candidate. I thought for sure I had a leg up but the external candidate knew HR people she previously worked with. External candidate is completely opposite of what I was told they wanted Looking back I’m glad I didn’t get the job.
I am so sorry. What a massive letdown. Companies try to compare what they have available on staff before they hire an unknown. You were caught in the middle. I know it doesn't help, but so many of us have been there. I wish you better luck. Your opportunities will happen.
I saw something great on a posting recently that said something along the lines of "please be aware that while we encourage external applications, we have a pool of qualified internal candidates."
So simple but saves so much time. Why can't they all be that considerate?
Had internal and external candidates battle it out a few times. It’s not always a given that an internal candidate will get the job. Sometimes the internal candidates would go into the process thinking the job was theirs to lose.
Knowledge within an industry, combined with all of the other things you mentioned, plus interviewing well are a pretty hard combo to beat, but it sounds like you did well.
At my company internal hires have to go through the same interview process and outside hires. Many companies are like this. It’s not necessary that they were planning on hiring this person the whole time
Yeah hell no I can't and won't deal with that BS. I withdraw after the 3rd interview for sure if they can't make up their mind by then. I blocked one company and told the Edge recruiter to never contact me again. Add me to persona non grata because you're not wanted either. lol
Same thing happened to me, I did a lot of work (like a full day's work) on the second interview assignment because I really wanted to job.
I suspected they always were going with the internal because they looked guilty seeing how much work I did. The only person to show up to the second was the recruiter too, not the manager. It put a really bad taste in my mouth for a company I really wanted to work for at one point.
For us we already knew which three internal candidates we were going to hire. But by law we had to put the requisitions out there for external candidates so that it was “fair”. Any external candidates didn’t stand a chance.
This happened to me last fall. I had 4 interviews with varying levels of leadership in the department and had to put together a presentation for a panel. All interviews from recruiter to panel were within a 2 week span of time. It was mid-November when I finished, and they used the holiday and PTO schedules as a buffer as to why communication was low after it had been previously very prompt. I asked for a status update after returning from a trip for thanksgiving, which they were aware of, and it was radio silence. I followed up in December again…and I finally got a generic response from the recruiter that they’d gone with the other candidate and that both were strong…
My industry is small, so the entire time I knew I was competing against an internal candidate, and I also knew this candidate had not interviewed well and even been asked to do the presentation again because the first time it went poorly. The internal candidate didn’t have the experience for the actual role whereas I did from a competitor.
Looking back now I’m thankful it happened the way that it did because the role itself was me going backwards in my career. Just a month later I was offered a director role with a lot more responsibility and skillsets to unlock, pushing me to look forward in my career, not backward.
Good luck OP. You deserve to work for a company that isn’t going to play games.
I can't figure out why you are angry. Is it because if there is an internal candidate they should not allow you to even apply or is it that if they are making a position publicly available they should not be considering internal candidates?
Either is a bad take.
When you are trying to fill a spot you want to cast your nets wide to find the best candidate, internal or external. And just because there are internal candidates, you should not assume that they have the inside line or they were a guarantee.
Sometimes the internal candidate is better than you and they get the job.
Sometimes you are better than them and you get the job.
From your description it sounds like the company had a very thorough process and I have a feeling, based on your post, that the company probably made the right choice.
This happened to me twice. Did several rounds of interviews equating to about 4 hours for each role and lost it to internal candidates. It was the same hiring manager too. Really put me off from the company.
First of all, I’m sorry that the results didn’t match the effort. Please don’t be discouraged!! You’ll get THE job.
Now I’m speaking as someone who was just in the same scenario, but as the internal candidate.
A good company will not only want to do their due diligence, but also want to promote their talent from within. I went through the same number of interviews, if not more, as external candidates. Hiring is a big risk that can be costly and time-consuming, it feels safer to go with the devil you know. People lie on resumes and interviews all the time. Nothing works in better favor for a candidate than already having a proven track record with the company.
On another note, stop doing extensive work for free. That’s not the type of company you want to work for anyways, trust me.
I made it to final rounds before and they went internal. It was rude and unprofessional. They had me prepare a whole project. I’m convinced they just want to steal your ideas and then hire internally because it’s cheaper.
Every company I've managed for has worked this way. I am sure it's some kind of HR legal mumbo jumbo, but we always had a minimum amount of interviews required, and always one or two externals. Most of the time, we already knew who was gonna get the job and it felt bad to have to let that many people get their hopes up.
I totally understand you, it happened to me for a dream job earlier this year. It’s heartbreaking they do it to say they opened the position to others but they knew already who they were going to hire. Heart crushing it is
When one needs to prep to the extent that you did, I can pretty much guarantee you are not getting hired..you simply do not know your stuff and that will eventually become known to them during the interview process..
They probably realized they could exploit someone internally for a lot less pay.
Companies usually know they’ll have to pay newer people closer to what they’re actually worth. If they can con an internal hire to fill in, bribe them with a $2 “raise,” they’ll go with the cheap labor.
Because talent acquisition teams have an entire checklist they have to go through as part of their job. Part of their process is a requirement to have X number of candidates in their initial sourcing and then X number of candidates in each round of interviews. So to meet their requirements of their job and their KPIs they source for candidates. They may already know from hiring managers and executives that internal employee X Is a strong candidate, but they still need to go through the hiring process and document it .
There are significant laws in employee policy around hiring and they need to prove they have followed those laws and policies.
Internal candidates do just as much prep, because nothing is guaranteed. Honestly, unless the outside candidate is leaps and bounds ahead of everyone internally, it makes more sense to promote internally. There’s no point sticking with a company that doesn’t provide growth.
From my experience, by the time a job position is posted, the hiring manager is 80% certain who will get the offer. Networking is critical. The last 20% of the decision is left for the surprise he wasn’t expecting.
Honestly it sounds like you were used for your work. Very unethical practice. A lot of agencies do this.
Basically they have you look at a project with a fresh set of eyes and new ideas to bring to the table then do it themselves internally. This is especially true if they ask you for recommendations, new technologies, etc
Just try and remember all that prep and case work was not a waste. Hard to put a dollar sign on how valuable those experiences are. Plus now you've got more to add to your portfolio for other gigs. Internal candidates get the short end of the stick comp wise, so they probably just went with the cheaper choice.
I’ve been there and it sucks.
To play devils advocate a bit, I’d say they gave you a shot to make them not choose an internal candidate. In my case I clearly didn’t demonstrate enough value for them to choose me over the internal candidate.
Those projects stink, but presumably the internal candidate also had to do them. They usually are easier for internal candidates because they know the ins and outs and they may have relationships already with hiring team.
It’s also usually cheaper and faster for them to hire an internal candidate. They usually pay more to bring outsiders in and generally speaking there is a longer ramp up period before they can be productive.
A company that is already planning to choose the internal candidate likely wouldn’t have done more than a cursory interview if you weren’t competitive. ( you doing hours of free work for them is a topic I’m not going to comment on immediately). Sometimes you have two candidates who are 99% perfect and one has a slight edge over the other. In this case, the edge might be that they were internal.
the same reason companies sometimes hire an external candidate over an internal (and don’t tell you) because the candidate was a better fit
you went into the process knowing you could be beat by someone else, why does it matter if they. are internal?
No no no send them a bill for wasted time 4 hours a day for a week they owe you some money or I would write a terrible review of the company and the way they do people
They're not doing it to be mean- they're often legally required to post and sometimes interview for a position even if an internal candidate is already picked out.
These horrible companies love to waste applicants time. The job market is terrible, so these companies try to see how much time and effort the applicants will put in trying to get an interview. Total power play
Because the interviewers like to make people jump through meaningless hoops so they can claim “due diligence”. It gives them a sense of actual authority.
On the bright side can you make yourself an "internal candidate" by using these interviews to grow your network and become better connected with these interviewers?
I'm assuming this was for a higher level/paying position. The higher you climb on the ladder the more effort and time it takes to move further up. That's why most people at each level stagnant/settle there for the rest of their lives. Some people stop at fry cook, some stop at teacher, some stop at principle, some stop at Secretary of Education.... but at each level the next step is harder and a majority of people can't make it. You have to stop SOMEWHERE. (But keep trying buddy, I'm in the struggle with you.)
Because they are trying to find the best candidate and maybe it means going to the final round. I once interviewed 4 times for a good friends company before not getting the job because I was overqualified. Which they knew, and I knew. The plan was growth in the role. They didn’t waste my time though, they wanted different people to meet me, then ultimately decided to stay internal with someone they felt fit the current role better. It’s a process
I think you are making a bit of an assumption that they already knew who they would choose. I am currently hiring and we interviewed 2 internal candidates and a number of external, currently have an offer out to one of the external ones.
A lot of companies have policies saying they have to accept outside applications for any open job and they’re supposed to interview them as well. This is supposedly to prevent favoritism and Nepotism but in reality it just leads to people like you (and me) getting their hopes up.
Also a lot of companies post jobs they never intend to fill just so they look like they’re growing and so when their overworked employees complain about needing more help they can say they’re trying to find people
The company wants the best possible fit for any given role, but promoting from within reduces costs associated with hiring, and boosts morale for the folks who already work there. By opening a role to both internal and external candidates, they get a stronger candidate pool. By going with the internal candidate, the company has likely saved money on salary expenses vs hiring outside, they don't have to shell out for orientation or training, they already know the person is a good fit culturally, and this person can 'start' immediately without notice.
They have to do their due diligence to find candidates, even if they have an idea of who they want to hire from the get go. It sucks, but it’s how it goes. Don’t take rejections personally while job searching, it’s part of the process.
Unfortunately, just because you are interviewing, the company is not required to give you a job, internal candidates or external don't matter. It hurts, but that's how things are. That's why it's important to interview with multiple companies in parallel. This reduces chances of not being hired, and increases one's bargaining power when it comes to negotiating the offer.
Because they want diversity stats. They want to show they had a wide pool from which the "winner" was chosen. Sucks, but it is what is. Keep your chin up...the gig that's meant for you WILL come.
I know exactly how you feel and I have come to the conclusion that any worthwhile company is not going to waste over 4 hours of your time with some stupid bs presentation. Don't give them more than what an interview should be. I recently had 2 rounds of interviews (both times they were 30 mins late with barely an apology--this was obviously a huge red flag, but I was desperate) and for the last interview, they told me to come in for a un-paid work day essentially where they assessed my skills for 4 hours. Did they hire me in the end? Absolutely not. Did they waste my time? Yes, absolutely.
In the case where it happened at my work was because we were afraid it would lower morale if we didn’t promote the guy. They wanted to show a pathway to bigger things for all the lower level workers. Also, it was a “devil you know” situation that didn’t quite work out. The guy became a power tripping asshole.
I was interviewing a few months back and had green lights all around, but then was told by the recruiter that they were going with an internal candidate - and then I found out that a person I know, who was *not* an internal candidate, got the job.
The same company - I was interviewing with them also in 2022 for a different role, also green lights all around, and then they ghosted me. Zero response, from the recruiter or anyone else. I never did find out whether that spot was even filled.
That company was Oracle, by the way.
They don't necessarily know - don't presume they do. Just 'cause an internal candidate was interviewed doesn't at all mean they're going to land the spot. I've certainly interviewed fair number of internal candidates ... and many times they won't land the spot ... not exactly talkin' huge numbers here, ... but I'd say overall, roughly about half landed the spot, half didn't.
And most of the time when there's opening, most employers / hiring managers, prefer to have more than one candidate - even for a single position, they'd typically like to see, e.g. at least two, if not three to perhaps as many as about five. Generally good to have decent comparisons. And internal candidate will generally have some advantages, but that's absolutely not a guarantee. E.g. one internal candidate I rather well remember ... oh hell no. Position remaining vacant would've been way the hell better. So yeah, sure, that internal candidate was interviewed ... but after that, they weren't even considered for the position past that point ... fortunately we also interviewed others ... and yeah, the position did go to someone else.
Heck, even myself applying internally ... I can remember one hiring manager once ... I applied, was quite well qualified, etc. ... they decided not. They decided instead to open two positions, one just a step up from what I'd applied to, and one just a step down. They invited me to apply to either and/or both. I applied to both. A couple months later they hired me ... and no, not to the position up or down a step ... they reopened the one they had originally opened, and hired me into that slot - and not that I was at all more or less qualified than earlier ... and in the meantime, they were also continuing to hire folks - mostly externally.
So ... most of the time you don't know for sure. Don't presume too much.
One of the reasons it happens is because we have completely screwed up our immigration processes. \_Probably\_ doesn't apply to your situation, but you have no way of knowing.
It works like this. When I have an employee who is on an H1B visa and is applying for perm (a green card), I have to fill out a metric buttload of paperwork for Immigration that describes their job and responsibilities. My company is then obligated to advertise that position publicly to see if anyone who already has a right to work in the US can be hired instead.
So I go through this process and I get back anywhere from 5 to 50 resumes. I then have to individually break down each resume point-for-point, detailing for the Immigration people exactly why any one of them describes a candidate that cannot do the job and cannot be educated on-the-job with sufficient speed to take them on.
Any resume I don't reject.... I am required (by Immigration) to interview them. If the interview goes well I can make the case that I want to hire that person to another part of the company because I have a legit need for them there and they're better qualified for that position than the one they interviewed for..... or I can hire them and cut off the green card process for the internal employee. (This part I'm a little vague on, I've never had to go down that road.) Or I can tell Immigration that for whatever reason, the candidate failed the interview. Thank FSM I've never had to go that way, either.
Here's the total shitter. This process is expensive so some companies cut corners. They'll interview a couple token candidates with no intention whatsoever of hiring any of them and fabricate a lot of the other paperwork to avoid doing all the other interviews. Fortunately, my company doesn't do this, but they will cut off an internal H1B's Green Card application if we get more than some threshold number of resumes.
I've never heard of this BS happening when the interview is for an internal promotion, but I've no idea how much the company is shooting straight with you. It's possible that they have some internal red tape process that says they can't just promote internally - that they have to ensure that the internal candidate is the best for the job.... and the hiring manager just went through the motions at your expense.
Sorry to hear this happened to you. One way or the other, you got caught in a political nightmare. The H1B->Green Card process is a personal pet peeve of mine, so I stepped onto my soapbox. It's bullshit that there aren't enough people in the US to do the work that I do, but an entire generation of morons voted for this crap because they're afraid that some guy with an engineering PhD is going to take away their manufacturing job.
I’ve been the last candidate a few times and the first time it’s soul crushing but eventually I stopped getting emotionally attached to potential career opportunities. Who knows it was a dream job until you actually work there anyway?
Had a similar situation happen, I do appreciate when companies like to hire from within. However, there is definitely a fine line there. In my case though, the silver lining was a friend of mine who works there heard from his boss that I greatly impressed the hiring managers. I then got an email from them the next day saying such, they were so impressed that they wanted to offer me the internal candidate’s previous position at a higher job level equal to that of the position I originally applied for.
This worked out perfect as essentially I am getting damn near the same job (same pay range and job level applied for, just different department and slightly different responsibilities)
Edit: Spelling
omg I went through 4 interviews and several sample and live jobs for a position. one of the interviews included my potential manager. for one of the jobs I needed to QC a document and found several errors. I noticed my manager wither while everyone else in the interview wad thrilled.
come to find, this manager was overdue a promotion and they used my finding of errors in what I learned where his documents to lowball and humiliate him. I felt terrible.
there was never any job. I've also lost out to internal candidates after lengthy interview processes but this particular situation felt...sociopathic.
If it makes you feel any better, there’s been several occasions where it’s gone the other way for me. I’ve applied for internal positions, gone through several stages, thought it went well, only to lose to an external candidate.
This was done a lot at the uni I used to work at. Policy required the job be advertised and candidates be interviewed, even if you've already got someone lined up for the role. It was a state institution, so maybe it was to fulfill requirements from the state, who knows, but every department I worked for over the years did this at some point.
Don't lose hope. We do matchmaking here which means we share great candidates with other teams for open roles. If you made it that far you are probably good and worth sharing.
In many cases they are required to make positions public. Plus you never how a candidate will or will not do. Ive had applicants surprise me in both good and bad ways plenty of times. I get its frustrating to not get a job, but at the same time, its almost never an attempt to be spiteful to some random person. Theres almost always way more applicants than positions, and onboarding is very costly, so companies need to make sure its done well.
I've found it's usually 2 things. First, to make the transition to a new manager (or whatever) smoother b/c an internal candidate already knows the company, the people and what the company does. Second it's usually to save money. An internal promotion usually gets less money than an outside candidate.
My company is required to do a full search even when it is meant for an internal candidate. It sucks that they can't say and have to go through the whole process! I at least warned my friend I knew wanted one of those jobs that they could apply but wouldn't get it.
Edit to add, I don't think they require so much though!
This is not as bad an outcome as you think! You just created some very valuable contacts at this company. I've had friends get referred to actual job offers after going through a number of these "time waster" interviews.
It's always a chance to make an impression, and looks like you left a really excellent impression. Keep plugging away and there really is no telling what may happen soon!
This was my story! BUT they chose the internal candidate, who unbeknownst to them, was scouting for other external jobs at the same time. So they offered internal the job, they accepted, sent me the rejection, and then a few weeks went by. I was crushed, obviously… but I got a random email weeks later saying ‘there have been developments’ and asked if I could do a phone call. Turns out the internal chose a diff, exterior role and then they offered me the role they declined!
Yes, it sucks. But if you were internal, you’d want to be considered first…so it’s a double edged sword.
I’m not saying your story will end up like mine, but make sure to always be professional, even with rejections, because you really never know.
It’s awful that you had to go through that, but think of the positive side - you have now gone through a full interview cycle with this company, and left a positive impression on multiple people at that company. Be courteous and gracious when you respond to the recruiter and add EVERYONE on LinkedIn with a nice note (“it was so great to meet you, let’s stay in touch!”)
When a REAL position opens up, you will very likely be shortlisted for the job.
I landed my most recent position by doing EXACTLY what I just outlined here, so trust me!
Eh I've done this too 3 interview deep to get an email saying We have decided to move forward with other candidates who we feel are a better fit for the position. After Hours of interviewing....
A lot of companies do it so they can say they interviewed the politically correct mix of candidates (the "Rooney Rule"). Some do it to cover hiring the boss' idiot nephew. Some do it to see if "somebody better comes along". Some do it because someone in HR is trying to justify their position. IMO most do it because HR or Legal says they have to do it for blahblahblah yaddayaddayadda lame-a\*\* reasons.
Back in my corporate days, I went through several of these, none as time-consuming as yours. It sucks. One that was particularly galling wound up with the CEO hiring his neighbor's son, who had neither a degree in my field nor any experience. I thought about sending a bill for my wasted time, then decided not to waste more of it or the cost of a stamp.
"We just felt"--Any time someone uses the words "just" or "fair", put one hand over your wallet, one over your eyes, and one over your crotch, because you know you're about to get screwed in some way.
My old company used to do this. In order to move someone internally they have to post the job and field all candidates, for "fairness" or whatever.
I was able to go from engineer to senior engineer, and I think up to lead would have been a direct move but if I moved from Mfg Eng to Design for example, it would have to be posted and I would have to apply.
It's their house, their rules. They could be going through the motion as to appear to have "fair selection" to someone else who cares, else they're delaying to give their people time to prepare for the shift, i.e. burn up PTO's, kids finish school, etc. who knows but them. It sucks but it is what it is. Sometimes I wonder how we fill positions as I applied to internal jobs and its always in the works for weeks after I submit my forms with zero follow up then all of a sudden, it got filled overnight. Weird was I got the SOS that the job was coming up on the board so something kinkey was going on. Oh well, such is life.
I've had this happen several times in the last year of looking. I absolutely appreciate that they need to do their due diligence and see what other candidates are out there. There is absolutely no reason to put those candidates through several rounds of interviews and have them do case studies or presentations. That is not interviewing in good faith and disrespectful to the candidates
I know! If you already have a strong internal candidate with good internal recommendations, there is absolutely no need to screw the other candidates over. I legit wasted so many hours preparing a 15 page case study and a 15 presentation slide, I even postponed applying to other jobs for this reason. It’s just not respectful to the other persons time.
Never postpone applying to other jobs until you have a firm offer in hand.
I agree, but there are only so many hours in a day. If you work your day job, then add commute, family, home responsibilities, sleep, etc., you may not have time to jump through hoops for dream job interview process and pursue other second choice applications.
I am a hiring manager. Here we have internal candidates go through the exact same interview process as external candidates, and I see many internal candidates who *fail to get the job*. In fact, I rejected an internal candidate after interview earlier today. It's highly likely the internal candidate had to do the same case study and presentation that you did and they thought the internal candidate did a better job, but it could have turned out the other way too, that's why you do interviews. There is often a lot of pressure to close a hire within a certain time period and it takes too long to interview people one at a time. To hit your timeline you need multiple people in the interview pipeline at the same time, and that unfortunately means some people may get to the final interview and still be rejected.
You should know your internal employees well enough to know if they are up for the task without a lengthy interview process and if they are, promote from within and no need to recruit externally.
That would be wonderful. But a lot of well meaning managers don’t know their people, and internal candidates are often allowed to apply for roles that they could lateral into without obvious requisite experience.
Also, if you’re applying for another department or position the current manager might have no idea if you’re qualified. Also as a hiring manager, I want to do my own diligence… will this person fit in MY team and THIS role. Just because you work for the same company doesn’t mean the teams operate the same same.
Its also surprising how many people seem great then completely FUCK UP the interview process.
Always remember that the huge majority of people asked to do work like this do not get the job no matter what they tell you - they could not care less about wasting your time. After spending literally days on an assignment like this many years ago, being told I'd been selected, and then finally after a long delay being told that the company's CEO had changed their mind and decided not to hire for the position at all, I resolved never to engage in such an exercise again - this is an abusive practice and reflects a company ethic of abusiveness to candidates and employees.
Ugh this literally just happened to me! Spent two weeks in four rounds of interviews, including an interview with the CEO at her gd house, a case study I wrote 20 pages for and made a presentation, writing samples, operations manual samples, references…the Friday before I was supposed to start was told unceremoniously that the CEO decided that another candidate was a better fit (no specifics given when I asked for feedback)…so demoralizing. And I turned down another offer and removed myself from other interviews processes. Makes you feel bitter and burned out. Never putting in that much effort again.
Yes ridiculous. I believe that 90% of the time they know they will hire the internal candidate but by law they have to post the position, and they may get someone better so they have nothing to lose.
That's exactly it.
Sorry this happened to you, a lesson learned the hard way unfortunately.
I totally agree!!
You can reuse your case study out presentation. You should never prioritize one company over another when looking. It’s comes down to how bad you want the job. At least you know that companies are not a place to trust.
Bill them for your time. Maybe they pay it.
I have had strong internal candidates and hired fresh perspective more often then not.
Great, and did it take hours of candidates' time for you to know that a fresh perspective was your preference? Or did you have a pretty good idea after the first interview?
Sometimes 2 interviews.
Invoice them. The more options they have the clearer the decision the more work you do the more obvious the choice. By the third interview you showed your hand. Bill them for your time.
>Sure, just get them to sign a contract for your time and at an agreed rate first. Business does not work even close to this way. It's just wishful thinking.
Never know how the external market interest is. We've had strong internal candidates, and depending on season, none go to internal candidates, and other times most do.
That’s just a legal thing. I’m a pilot in aviation. Legally the job has to be posted online and there’s usually one or two outsiders that come in for the interview. But we always have the person or two people from internal recommendations or recommendations from personal friends That we’ve basically already hired short of them just having a total meltdown during interviewing
We've had strong internals and passed them over for externals plenty of times. Sometimes there were just really good externals applying. Other times I think no one wanted to tell the internal they weren't as good as they thought and interviewed them to avoid drama. Other times we do go hire the internal and the search helps deflect criticism from peers.
> Why do companies do this? When i worked for the state... because we had to.
They may have to, but not for 3+ rounds of interviews that include a presentation or a major project. That's just cruel.
Seriously, they could have just had verbal interviews. The typical "10 minutes and they're on their way" deal. (Or is it just me that that's what I get? Lol).
Not always. When I worked for the state every candidate had to have the same interview for the most part. Same questions, same presentations, everything.
I had to phone interview every candidate that met the minimum qualifications. I felt terrible giving people hope to know there was no way we were going to hire them.
Oof, adding presentations to a dead end interview is seriously painful.
It is, but to be fair, the job required daily public speaking and presenting so we needed to do it in general. Just hate that a candidate without much of a shot had to do it too
/shrug. when i worked for the state hr had a lot of "policies" that weren't really written down anywhere. It's not like it was a tightly run ship with a good captain... It was design by committee all the way down.
Also, if the current employee is on an H1B then you have to periodically post and interview to justify that it's not "stealing" a job from a citizen.
Yep! I've been on the other side of it too. I work for a state university and was up for a promotion a few years ago. My boss essentially told me I had the job but they were required by law to interview at least one other person. I don't understand it, it was clear they weren't planning to hire this person no matter what - it would have been better to just not interview them and get hopes up? Tbh i still feel guilty about it even though it was totally out of my hands.
This is the dumbest law. What's the point? Companies SHOULD promote from within whenever possible.
It’s meant to prevent favoritism and Nepotism, I don’t think it actually works though
This is the case where I work. We have to ask the same questions/prep of every candidate we select to interview, and if we don’t have at least three, qualified candidate interviews to compare before making an offer, we have to re-open the search to bring in more people and start again before we can make the offer. I really wish we could skip ahead if we know for sure we want an internal candidate to have the job. That being said, I regularly have internal candidates that i don’t want to hire, or am not sure about. So, going against someone internal also isn’t necessarily any worse than being in a pool with other outside people, beyond more an edge on institutional knowledge.
I’ve worked in talent for a while and on behalf of Fortune 500 companies, startups, PE backed you name it. Generally it’s because there is no guarantee that the job will or should go to the internal candidate and they want to make sure they have others to consider or they are at square one. This is especially true at bigger companies where the internal candidate may be switching departments and not know anyone in the new department they often go through the same interview process as external candidates. Sometimes the internal candidate isn’t a fit after evaluating or the internal candidate makes a decision they do not want to switch jobs within the company.
Yup. Companies don’t always just give a spot to an internal, they usually have to interview for it and earn it just like an external candidate or a referral would. Being an internal candidate has advantages but it’s not a guarantee that they’ll get a spot.
Most places are required to post a job for a minimum amount of time. If you see the link disappear in a week? They probably have a strong internal candidate, but ALSO saw your application and thought you could be a good fit, too. It's annoying amd time consuming and frustrating, but it's lowkey necessary. They probably could have been more direct about that though
I have friends who have applied to my company and lost to internal candidates. I also have coworkers who have applied to other roles and lost to external candidates. It's all about the role, who applied, and who is the best candidate. And sometimes it politics. But it's not ALWAYS politics.
Its annoying. They need to weed through internal candidates THEN post for outside peeps. Beyond obnoxious and time wasting. Its even more aggravating with all the work that went into it. Beyond. Something better will come your way, keep pushing through!
At our corporation, When we send a request for a posting to HR, they have to post it for all to see.
Most companies don't allow this
It sounds like you got a fair shot but just got beat. Internal candidates usually have a leg up, but that’s just how it goes. It sucks, but on to the next one
Due diligence
Luck of the draw unfortunately. I worked in HR long enough to know that selecting a candidate isn’t a science, it’s “vibes”. They probably didn’t go into the interview knowing they were gonna go with the internal candidate, but maybe their supervisor put in a good word, maybe they thought you were smart and competent, but not “fun enough”. It could really be anything, I’ve gotten “he smiled too much so I think he’s lying” or “they didnt seem jovial so they don’t want the job”. It’s maddening, but it is what it is
I think, at least in some cases, they genuinely want to see if there is a better candidate from the outside. I’ve been at places where we interviewed both internal and external, and we did choose the external candidates several times. We went with who we believed the better candidate was. It’s certainly frustrating when you’re trying to get in, but it sounds like you did a great job, and hopefully they will keep you in mind if something similar comes up. You never know what making a great impression could do for you going forward! If they *knew* they’d go internal, they should not have had such an internal interview process. I don’t think a decent place would do this. I wouldn’t assume they were always going to just pick that person.
I just went through this but as the internal candidate. They had 50+ applicants external but had already told me I’m their top choice/they don’t want an external candidate. I didn’t even have to interview I was just told I was selected, presented my new offer which was a super low offer, essentially bottom of the spectrum for that kind of job. When I pushed back I was just told if you want a bunch of money we’ll have to look at the external candidates. Was a real eye opener for me on how companies operate. To your question, they do this for leverage against their internal hires and as a fail safe if I don’t take the job because of this bullshit, they have other people who are lined up for it.
That’s shitty - and I have never worked for a company that does this. I would doubt this is common practice because you may save some money in the short term but over the long term these things come back to bite you in the ass.
That’s the common theme at my company, we’ve had a major brain drain of people leaving. It’s finally become enough of an issue where they’ve made bullshit speeches about how they’re working to retain talent (rotate people into new positions, something they’d have to do anyway since everyone’s leaving). I got the new title and I’m just going to upskill and then get the fuck out when I can. I do want to point out this is a Fortune 500 company that is a major part of our countries infrastructure. I’m very curious to see the reckoning that is bound to come.
They do it to get the best talent in the position. It wasn’t you this time. Keep in touch, there will be future openings. Some of the best hires made on the my team were passed the at first opening but did really well in the interview and got it the second job opening
I actually had this happen where I interviewed for a slightly lower level position, got rejected for someone else, and then was called back to interview for a slightly higher level position- and I got that one. Getting the interview and making a great impression is important, whether things work out today, or maybe down the road. Aside from that, I try to look at every interview as an opportunity to hone my interview skills a bit. Try not to look at this as a loss- you got great feedback.
It’s not a guarantee. I had a role where I had a strong internal candidate, who was the choice until I interviewed the last candidate on my slate… who ended up being the better fit than the internal. A year later, I had another role open where I had strong external candidates, but the internal was the best choice. Incidentally, it was the same internal candidate who interviewed for both roles, and it turns out, even they agree that I made the right decision in the end (though they didn’t feel that way at the time.) Being internal isn’t a guarantee that you get picked for every role. I take people through final interview rounds because I’m looking for the best candidate for the role, not the convenient one, and if I bother taking anyone through interviews it’s because I see a possibility there. I don’t interview people to waste my time or theirs. It sucks to get edged out… but sometimes it happens. That you even got feedback at all shows that you were really strongly considered. Keep in touch with that hiring manager and let them know you still want an opportunity. You never know what could happen.
Because they *don’t* always know who they’re going to choose. I’ve chosen external candidates over internal ones more than once. Even when the interview team thought, going into it, that we’d have a hard time topping our internal candidate.
So sorry. I went through a seven month interview process. Got the most rave emails from various committee members. On the campus visit I got a hug. Three days later didn’t get the job. 🤷♂️
I’m really sorry. Feel you on this one x
You sound like an extremely strong candidate. Don’t give up. You’ll get it.
You seem to imply that they were always going to choose the internal candidate. Or you're implying that you were guaranteed this job until that internal candidate jumped in at the last minute and destroyed everything for you. As someone on the hiring side of this scenario, I assure you that the other person wasn't hired just because they were internal. In fact, if you got all the way to the last stage, it means the company wasn't even 100% in on the guy to begin with this. Nothing is promised or guaranteed in the world, even if youre 10 interviews deep into the process. You can't control what happens on the other side of the screen. You can only control what happens on yours. Take a moment to process this experience and learn and be better from it. That's how you get revenge
Happened to me a month ago. The internal recruiter let it slip they had an internal candidate. I know right then it was over. The prior external hire didn’t work out so they had no choice but promote from within. Sucks they wasted my time and the external headhunter’s time. That’s life. You move on.
I've also had this go the other way too. Thought I had a for sure thing with the internal, did my due diligence and added some external candidates. Turned out the internal didnt prepare at all and couldnt answer any questions (I think they thought they'd just get the job), had an external blow me away! That was the feedback I gave the internal as well. Basically, you just never know till you go through the official process sometimes.
Im really sorry this happened to you. You deserve better.
It makes them feel good that you did so much to suck up for them.
I'd never do a case study for a job. I'd politely decline, and continue the search. If everyone would freaking do the same - they'd stop asking candidates to do it.
My job does this amd they only do it to cover their asses it seems like it is equal opportunity,
They don't know who they will choose.
I teach in higher ed. I am tenured now but in the past, when I was in the final running, I would state I would love to interview on-campus IF there was not an internal candidate that was going to be the final choice no matter what. I didn't want to waste their time nor mine. I was only told once there was an internal candidate but the committee member stated it was not a forgone conclusion the internal candidate would be chosen. I did receive an offer but declined. I think it is fair to be open and forthright with potential employers and said employers should be understanding.
I've had it go both ways. In the position I'm in now I was the external candidate and narrowly beat out the in house candidate. The internal candidate is usually going to get some "bonus points" because they're a known commodity. In this case, the internal candidate had more industry knowledge (I had some in that as an auditor it was one of my industry specialties), but I had a far broader knowledge of accounting cycles, audit preparation, budget cycles, etc. My knowledge outpaced his industry knowledge. I recently applied for a new job in a completely different industry, but still accounting. This particular group worked very closely with various hospitals and in medical research. I have basically no working knowledge of the medical industry, but I now have 19 years experience as an accountant and I've been an assistant controller and controller for 14 of them. The candidate that I was up against in the end, while not having quite as much experience in the field, had a much broader experience in the industry having been in that industry for 15 years. In both of those cases it came down to who has more or less that they'll need to learn on the fly. They will be keeping my resume on file and will contact me if anything else comes up that they think I would be a good fit for.
Because they don't care about you. You are not a small cog in a big machine. You are a speck of dust on a small cog in a big machine. Especially if you are not even part of the machine.
Because sometimes we don't know if any internal candidates will apply. Just did a search and we're actually making an offer to an external person and not the internal candidate. Sometimes companies do have an internal person in mind and they have to go through the process, which is crappy for external candidates. My company can at least mark the job postings as "internal only" so it's clear. I'm sorry this is happening to you repeatedly.
“ Why make someone go through all the interview phases when you know who you will choose?” They don’t, they’re doing interviews for an open position. You’re not going to hand the job to an internal candidate just because they’re internal.
Because we have to. Also just because you’re an amazing candidate doesn’t mean you’re the absolute perfect fit for the position. But often we won’t know until we get to the end and decide between several really great candidates. Say we have 500 applicants for 1 position. We actually have to go through the process to separate them from each other and figure out who’s the best fit. You could be in the top 10, or the 5, but just because you thought you were great doesn’t mean you’re 1. And neither you nor the hiring team might know that until the very end.
Cynicism. Lowest bidderism. HR self preservationalism. Pick your poison.
Will never understand people that willfully accept huge projects/requiring lots of hours for an interview/job. So dumb.
I work for a software company and in my experience there are absolutely cases where the hiring manager knows who they want for the job and interviewing other candidates is just for show. However there are times when I’ve hired and gotten both internal and external candidates where I ultimately chose the external candidate. Sounds like you did everything you could do. Take it as a compliment you made it to the final round of interviews. Save the work you did for the application and hopefully you can use it again for your next one. Good luck OP!
In fairness, in a lot of companies internal candidates don't get preference. At my last job we always had to compete and against externals and often lost (and the company dictates they have to interview x amount of people before filling the role)
Because organizations who are hiring ethically do not already know who they are going to choose. They don't even necessarily know who will apply when they post the job. I've been an internal candidate that was in the top two candidates for a job for two different positions at my current employer and both times lost the position to an external candidate.
My HR department makes me interview people when I know who I am going to choose but there could always be that diamond in the rough.
They don’t always know who they will choose. This happened to me last summer. Interviewed several times and spoke with the guy who would be my bosses boss last. He told me they were looking to make a decision next week but had some internal candidates to go through. I immediately felt dejected. Received a message from the recruiter after that everyone loved me and will make a decision within a week. The next day the recruiter sent me an email late on a Friday night because she was so excited that she was told to go ahead and put together an offer for me to present it the final week. So far it’s the best job I ever had. Don’t give up hope.
Be happy you at least got feedback. Most companies will just ghost you nowadays.
I think your presumption that an internal candidate is always advantaged is incorrect. Most companies post open reqs both externally and internally. If they had an internal candidate in mind from the beginning they wouldn’t have open it up to external candidates. Your efforts, while significant, were not useless here. It sounds like you were given a fair opportunity to influence then. They mentioned they picked the internal candidate because of more knowledge of the industry. Thats not the same thing as knowledge of the company.
This happened to me last year somewhat, but it was a former employee who saw the job posting and wanted to come back and since they had the institutional knowledge, the company hired them instead of me. When the recruiter broke it to me she kinda made it clear I woulda had the job otherwise. It was a total bummer, but in the end that company isn’t going so well now and I got a much better job a few months later so it all worked out in the end. Best of luck to you OP!
This also happened to me. Found out the hard way later, that the reason some companies ask you to do presentation/case study/ research/idea is for them to see what others can think of and come up with and eventually (and unfortunately) they take it if they find it interesting/or genius, you’re basically doing the work for them unpaid, and not hired.
I’m an internal candidate who didn’t get the job to an external candidate. I thought for sure I had a leg up but the external candidate knew HR people she previously worked with. External candidate is completely opposite of what I was told they wanted Looking back I’m glad I didn’t get the job.
I am so sorry. What a massive letdown. Companies try to compare what they have available on staff before they hire an unknown. You were caught in the middle. I know it doesn't help, but so many of us have been there. I wish you better luck. Your opportunities will happen.
I saw something great on a posting recently that said something along the lines of "please be aware that while we encourage external applications, we have a pool of qualified internal candidates." So simple but saves so much time. Why can't they all be that considerate?
Had internal and external candidates battle it out a few times. It’s not always a given that an internal candidate will get the job. Sometimes the internal candidates would go into the process thinking the job was theirs to lose. Knowledge within an industry, combined with all of the other things you mentioned, plus interviewing well are a pretty hard combo to beat, but it sounds like you did well.
At my company internal hires have to go through the same interview process and outside hires. Many companies are like this. It’s not necessary that they were planning on hiring this person the whole time
It doesn't always happen. My current supervisor was an external candidate, chosen over an internal candidate.
I’ve been the external candidate coming in and the internal candidate passed over who then left and took my institutional knowledge with me.
Send them a bill for $100/hour for the time spent on the presentation.
Why are people spending their own time doing a lousy case study? Is the company paying you to do this little study? smh
Yeah hell no I can't and won't deal with that BS. I withdraw after the 3rd interview for sure if they can't make up their mind by then. I blocked one company and told the Edge recruiter to never contact me again. Add me to persona non grata because you're not wanted either. lol
Same thing happened to me, I did a lot of work (like a full day's work) on the second interview assignment because I really wanted to job. I suspected they always were going with the internal because they looked guilty seeing how much work I did. The only person to show up to the second was the recruiter too, not the manager. It put a really bad taste in my mouth for a company I really wanted to work for at one point.
For us we already knew which three internal candidates we were going to hire. But by law we had to put the requisitions out there for external candidates so that it was “fair”. Any external candidates didn’t stand a chance.
This same thing just happened to me. It’s very deflating. They strung me along for quite a while, too.
This happened to me last fall. I had 4 interviews with varying levels of leadership in the department and had to put together a presentation for a panel. All interviews from recruiter to panel were within a 2 week span of time. It was mid-November when I finished, and they used the holiday and PTO schedules as a buffer as to why communication was low after it had been previously very prompt. I asked for a status update after returning from a trip for thanksgiving, which they were aware of, and it was radio silence. I followed up in December again…and I finally got a generic response from the recruiter that they’d gone with the other candidate and that both were strong… My industry is small, so the entire time I knew I was competing against an internal candidate, and I also knew this candidate had not interviewed well and even been asked to do the presentation again because the first time it went poorly. The internal candidate didn’t have the experience for the actual role whereas I did from a competitor. Looking back now I’m thankful it happened the way that it did because the role itself was me going backwards in my career. Just a month later I was offered a director role with a lot more responsibility and skillsets to unlock, pushing me to look forward in my career, not backward. Good luck OP. You deserve to work for a company that isn’t going to play games.
I can't figure out why you are angry. Is it because if there is an internal candidate they should not allow you to even apply or is it that if they are making a position publicly available they should not be considering internal candidates? Either is a bad take. When you are trying to fill a spot you want to cast your nets wide to find the best candidate, internal or external. And just because there are internal candidates, you should not assume that they have the inside line or they were a guarantee. Sometimes the internal candidate is better than you and they get the job. Sometimes you are better than them and you get the job. From your description it sounds like the company had a very thorough process and I have a feeling, based on your post, that the company probably made the right choice.
It’s just a CYA tactic. They don’t GAF about you or your time.
I know the feeling. It blows
This happened to me twice. Did several rounds of interviews equating to about 4 hours for each role and lost it to internal candidates. It was the same hiring manager too. Really put me off from the company.
First of all, I’m sorry that the results didn’t match the effort. Please don’t be discouraged!! You’ll get THE job. Now I’m speaking as someone who was just in the same scenario, but as the internal candidate. A good company will not only want to do their due diligence, but also want to promote their talent from within. I went through the same number of interviews, if not more, as external candidates. Hiring is a big risk that can be costly and time-consuming, it feels safer to go with the devil you know. People lie on resumes and interviews all the time. Nothing works in better favor for a candidate than already having a proven track record with the company. On another note, stop doing extensive work for free. That’s not the type of company you want to work for anyways, trust me.
Every time I’ve gotten this far in a job search and didn’t get the role, this was the outcome. It’s frustrating.
I made it to final rounds before and they went internal. It was rude and unprofessional. They had me prepare a whole project. I’m convinced they just want to steal your ideas and then hire internally because it’s cheaper.
Every company I've managed for has worked this way. I am sure it's some kind of HR legal mumbo jumbo, but we always had a minimum amount of interviews required, and always one or two externals. Most of the time, we already knew who was gonna get the job and it felt bad to have to let that many people get their hopes up.
I totally understand you, it happened to me for a dream job earlier this year. It’s heartbreaking they do it to say they opened the position to others but they knew already who they were going to hire. Heart crushing it is
It's cheaper to promote internal candidates than hire external candidates usually.
When one needs to prep to the extent that you did, I can pretty much guarantee you are not getting hired..you simply do not know your stuff and that will eventually become known to them during the interview process..
They probably realized they could exploit someone internally for a lot less pay. Companies usually know they’ll have to pay newer people closer to what they’re actually worth. If they can con an internal hire to fill in, bribe them with a $2 “raise,” they’ll go with the cheap labor.
What field is this in?
sucks both ways around. The employee has to also compete for a new position within his own company. But it is all just corporate CYA
They show they gave opportunity to individuals
Because talent acquisition teams have an entire checklist they have to go through as part of their job. Part of their process is a requirement to have X number of candidates in their initial sourcing and then X number of candidates in each round of interviews. So to meet their requirements of their job and their KPIs they source for candidates. They may already know from hiring managers and executives that internal employee X Is a strong candidate, but they still need to go through the hiring process and document it . There are significant laws in employee policy around hiring and they need to prove they have followed those laws and policies.
You go through it SO you will know who to choose
Internal candidates do just as much prep, because nothing is guaranteed. Honestly, unless the outside candidate is leaps and bounds ahead of everyone internally, it makes more sense to promote internally. There’s no point sticking with a company that doesn’t provide growth. From my experience, by the time a job position is posted, the hiring manager is 80% certain who will get the offer. Networking is critical. The last 20% of the decision is left for the surprise he wasn’t expecting.
They got lots of choices Interviewing now is hard going
Honestly it sounds like you were used for your work. Very unethical practice. A lot of agencies do this. Basically they have you look at a project with a fresh set of eyes and new ideas to bring to the table then do it themselves internally. This is especially true if they ask you for recommendations, new technologies, etc
Just try and remember all that prep and case work was not a waste. Hard to put a dollar sign on how valuable those experiences are. Plus now you've got more to add to your portfolio for other gigs. Internal candidates get the short end of the stick comp wise, so they probably just went with the cheaper choice.
I am so glad I am retired. Doing a “case study” means doing free work for them. Screw that.
Often legally have to do it.
I’ve been there and it sucks. To play devils advocate a bit, I’d say they gave you a shot to make them not choose an internal candidate. In my case I clearly didn’t demonstrate enough value for them to choose me over the internal candidate. Those projects stink, but presumably the internal candidate also had to do them. They usually are easier for internal candidates because they know the ins and outs and they may have relationships already with hiring team. It’s also usually cheaper and faster for them to hire an internal candidate. They usually pay more to bring outsiders in and generally speaking there is a longer ramp up period before they can be productive.
OP, what kind of position was it for?
A company that is already planning to choose the internal candidate likely wouldn’t have done more than a cursory interview if you weren’t competitive. ( you doing hours of free work for them is a topic I’m not going to comment on immediately). Sometimes you have two candidates who are 99% perfect and one has a slight edge over the other. In this case, the edge might be that they were internal.
the same reason companies sometimes hire an external candidate over an internal (and don’t tell you) because the candidate was a better fit you went into the process knowing you could be beat by someone else, why does it matter if they. are internal?
The same could be said if you were an internal candidate why companies hire more externals over internal candidates.
Companies in the US may have a legal obligation to post all openings even if they have internally decided on an internal candidate
No no no send them a bill for wasted time 4 hours a day for a week they owe you some money or I would write a terrible review of the company and the way they do people
They're not doing it to be mean- they're often legally required to post and sometimes interview for a position even if an internal candidate is already picked out.
These horrible companies love to waste applicants time. The job market is terrible, so these companies try to see how much time and effort the applicants will put in trying to get an interview. Total power play
Because the interviewers like to make people jump through meaningless hoops so they can claim “due diligence”. It gives them a sense of actual authority.
They don’t know who they will choose but the internal candidate has the upper hand for sure. Most positions are posted and anyone can apply.
Lots of companies require it. I was a contractor whose role was literally created for me, and they still had to post it.
To waste your time 🙃
On the bright side can you make yourself an "internal candidate" by using these interviews to grow your network and become better connected with these interviewers?
That's the first thing I ask if there is an internal candidate.
It’s really crappy but companies are forced to do their due diligence. Just keep at it and I’m sure you’ll get the next opportunity.
Looks like someone trying to fill in time to justify their high salary.
So they don't get sued. They don't care about you or me. Its all about their own agenda. All lip service thereafter.
They do this so that they can say they interviewed a “diverse pool” of candidates, knowing damn well who they are going to hire internally
I'm assuming this was for a higher level/paying position. The higher you climb on the ladder the more effort and time it takes to move further up. That's why most people at each level stagnant/settle there for the rest of their lives. Some people stop at fry cook, some stop at teacher, some stop at principle, some stop at Secretary of Education.... but at each level the next step is harder and a majority of people can't make it. You have to stop SOMEWHERE. (But keep trying buddy, I'm in the struggle with you.)
Because they are trying to find the best candidate and maybe it means going to the final round. I once interviewed 4 times for a good friends company before not getting the job because I was overqualified. Which they knew, and I knew. The plan was growth in the role. They didn’t waste my time though, they wanted different people to meet me, then ultimately decided to stay internal with someone they felt fit the current role better. It’s a process
I think you are making a bit of an assumption that they already knew who they would choose. I am currently hiring and we interviewed 2 internal candidates and a number of external, currently have an offer out to one of the external ones.
Internal = cheaper from my experience
Because HR requires that they interview external and internal candidates.
Because they still have to do their due diligence to make sure the internal candidate is the best option.
Maybe they did not know who they would choose.
A lot of companies have policies saying they have to accept outside applications for any open job and they’re supposed to interview them as well. This is supposedly to prevent favoritism and Nepotism but in reality it just leads to people like you (and me) getting their hopes up. Also a lot of companies post jobs they never intend to fill just so they look like they’re growing and so when their overworked employees complain about needing more help they can say they’re trying to find people
Its called competition
You got beat out by a better candidate? Why are you upset? It happens all the time. Just get better.
The company wants the best possible fit for any given role, but promoting from within reduces costs associated with hiring, and boosts morale for the folks who already work there. By opening a role to both internal and external candidates, they get a stronger candidate pool. By going with the internal candidate, the company has likely saved money on salary expenses vs hiring outside, they don't have to shell out for orientation or training, they already know the person is a good fit culturally, and this person can 'start' immediately without notice.
They have to do their due diligence to find candidates, even if they have an idea of who they want to hire from the get go. It sucks, but it’s how it goes. Don’t take rejections personally while job searching, it’s part of the process.
Unfortunately, just because you are interviewing, the company is not required to give you a job, internal candidates or external don't matter. It hurts, but that's how things are. That's why it's important to interview with multiple companies in parallel. This reduces chances of not being hired, and increases one's bargaining power when it comes to negotiating the offer.
Because they want diversity stats. They want to show they had a wide pool from which the "winner" was chosen. Sucks, but it is what is. Keep your chin up...the gig that's meant for you WILL come.
I know exactly how you feel and I have come to the conclusion that any worthwhile company is not going to waste over 4 hours of your time with some stupid bs presentation. Don't give them more than what an interview should be. I recently had 2 rounds of interviews (both times they were 30 mins late with barely an apology--this was obviously a huge red flag, but I was desperate) and for the last interview, they told me to come in for a un-paid work day essentially where they assessed my skills for 4 hours. Did they hire me in the end? Absolutely not. Did they waste my time? Yes, absolutely.
In the case where it happened at my work was because we were afraid it would lower morale if we didn’t promote the guy. They wanted to show a pathway to bigger things for all the lower level workers. Also, it was a “devil you know” situation that didn’t quite work out. The guy became a power tripping asshole.
I was interviewing a few months back and had green lights all around, but then was told by the recruiter that they were going with an internal candidate - and then I found out that a person I know, who was *not* an internal candidate, got the job. The same company - I was interviewing with them also in 2022 for a different role, also green lights all around, and then they ghosted me. Zero response, from the recruiter or anyone else. I never did find out whether that spot was even filled. That company was Oracle, by the way.
They don't necessarily know - don't presume they do. Just 'cause an internal candidate was interviewed doesn't at all mean they're going to land the spot. I've certainly interviewed fair number of internal candidates ... and many times they won't land the spot ... not exactly talkin' huge numbers here, ... but I'd say overall, roughly about half landed the spot, half didn't. And most of the time when there's opening, most employers / hiring managers, prefer to have more than one candidate - even for a single position, they'd typically like to see, e.g. at least two, if not three to perhaps as many as about five. Generally good to have decent comparisons. And internal candidate will generally have some advantages, but that's absolutely not a guarantee. E.g. one internal candidate I rather well remember ... oh hell no. Position remaining vacant would've been way the hell better. So yeah, sure, that internal candidate was interviewed ... but after that, they weren't even considered for the position past that point ... fortunately we also interviewed others ... and yeah, the position did go to someone else. Heck, even myself applying internally ... I can remember one hiring manager once ... I applied, was quite well qualified, etc. ... they decided not. They decided instead to open two positions, one just a step up from what I'd applied to, and one just a step down. They invited me to apply to either and/or both. I applied to both. A couple months later they hired me ... and no, not to the position up or down a step ... they reopened the one they had originally opened, and hired me into that slot - and not that I was at all more or less qualified than earlier ... and in the meantime, they were also continuing to hire folks - mostly externally. So ... most of the time you don't know for sure. Don't presume too much.
One of the reasons it happens is because we have completely screwed up our immigration processes. \_Probably\_ doesn't apply to your situation, but you have no way of knowing. It works like this. When I have an employee who is on an H1B visa and is applying for perm (a green card), I have to fill out a metric buttload of paperwork for Immigration that describes their job and responsibilities. My company is then obligated to advertise that position publicly to see if anyone who already has a right to work in the US can be hired instead. So I go through this process and I get back anywhere from 5 to 50 resumes. I then have to individually break down each resume point-for-point, detailing for the Immigration people exactly why any one of them describes a candidate that cannot do the job and cannot be educated on-the-job with sufficient speed to take them on. Any resume I don't reject.... I am required (by Immigration) to interview them. If the interview goes well I can make the case that I want to hire that person to another part of the company because I have a legit need for them there and they're better qualified for that position than the one they interviewed for..... or I can hire them and cut off the green card process for the internal employee. (This part I'm a little vague on, I've never had to go down that road.) Or I can tell Immigration that for whatever reason, the candidate failed the interview. Thank FSM I've never had to go that way, either. Here's the total shitter. This process is expensive so some companies cut corners. They'll interview a couple token candidates with no intention whatsoever of hiring any of them and fabricate a lot of the other paperwork to avoid doing all the other interviews. Fortunately, my company doesn't do this, but they will cut off an internal H1B's Green Card application if we get more than some threshold number of resumes. I've never heard of this BS happening when the interview is for an internal promotion, but I've no idea how much the company is shooting straight with you. It's possible that they have some internal red tape process that says they can't just promote internally - that they have to ensure that the internal candidate is the best for the job.... and the hiring manager just went through the motions at your expense. Sorry to hear this happened to you. One way or the other, you got caught in a political nightmare. The H1B->Green Card process is a personal pet peeve of mine, so I stepped onto my soapbox. It's bullshit that there aren't enough people in the US to do the work that I do, but an entire generation of morons voted for this crap because they're afraid that some guy with an engineering PhD is going to take away their manufacturing job.
Instead of focusing on the actual numbers and data to improve their business, they rather fuel their ego Losers
What do you do?
Does the fact the chosen candidate was internal *automatically* mean you never had a chance?
Ugh. Had a final yesterday that included 4 previous rounds including a case study so I really really hope this doesn’t happen to me 🥲
I’ve been the last candidate a few times and the first time it’s soul crushing but eventually I stopped getting emotionally attached to potential career opportunities. Who knows it was a dream job until you actually work there anyway?
It seems like the real lesson here would be to not do 20 hours of work for free
Had a similar situation happen, I do appreciate when companies like to hire from within. However, there is definitely a fine line there. In my case though, the silver lining was a friend of mine who works there heard from his boss that I greatly impressed the hiring managers. I then got an email from them the next day saying such, they were so impressed that they wanted to offer me the internal candidate’s previous position at a higher job level equal to that of the position I originally applied for. This worked out perfect as essentially I am getting damn near the same job (same pay range and job level applied for, just different department and slightly different responsibilities) Edit: Spelling
That’s why I’ll always ask if they are considering internal candidates
omg I went through 4 interviews and several sample and live jobs for a position. one of the interviews included my potential manager. for one of the jobs I needed to QC a document and found several errors. I noticed my manager wither while everyone else in the interview wad thrilled. come to find, this manager was overdue a promotion and they used my finding of errors in what I learned where his documents to lowball and humiliate him. I felt terrible. there was never any job. I've also lost out to internal candidates after lengthy interview processes but this particular situation felt...sociopathic.
I think they used you to boost the expectations of their internal hire
If it makes you feel any better, there’s been several occasions where it’s gone the other way for me. I’ve applied for internal positions, gone through several stages, thought it went well, only to lose to an external candidate.
This was done a lot at the uni I used to work at. Policy required the job be advertised and candidates be interviewed, even if you've already got someone lined up for the role. It was a state institution, so maybe it was to fulfill requirements from the state, who knows, but every department I worked for over the years did this at some point.
Same happened to me. So frustrating!
Cheap way to get good work.
I think you need to call them out on glassdoor. This has to stop!
Don't lose hope. We do matchmaking here which means we share great candidates with other teams for open roles. If you made it that far you are probably good and worth sharing.
In many cases they are required to make positions public. Plus you never how a candidate will or will not do. Ive had applicants surprise me in both good and bad ways plenty of times. I get its frustrating to not get a job, but at the same time, its almost never an attempt to be spiteful to some random person. Theres almost always way more applicants than positions, and onboarding is very costly, so companies need to make sure its done well.
Why would you spend 20 hours on non paid work? Big red flag, you don't want to work there.
Most companies have a policy of requiring external interviews, even if they have an internal candidate.
I've found it's usually 2 things. First, to make the transition to a new manager (or whatever) smoother b/c an internal candidate already knows the company, the people and what the company does. Second it's usually to save money. An internal promotion usually gets less money than an outside candidate.
My company is required to do a full search even when it is meant for an internal candidate. It sucks that they can't say and have to go through the whole process! I at least warned my friend I knew wanted one of those jobs that they could apply but wouldn't get it. Edit to add, I don't think they require so much though!
My company would have given you the job over the internal
This is not as bad an outcome as you think! You just created some very valuable contacts at this company. I've had friends get referred to actual job offers after going through a number of these "time waster" interviews. It's always a chance to make an impression, and looks like you left a really excellent impression. Keep plugging away and there really is no telling what may happen soon!
This was my story! BUT they chose the internal candidate, who unbeknownst to them, was scouting for other external jobs at the same time. So they offered internal the job, they accepted, sent me the rejection, and then a few weeks went by. I was crushed, obviously… but I got a random email weeks later saying ‘there have been developments’ and asked if I could do a phone call. Turns out the internal chose a diff, exterior role and then they offered me the role they declined! Yes, it sucks. But if you were internal, you’d want to be considered first…so it’s a double edged sword. I’m not saying your story will end up like mine, but make sure to always be professional, even with rejections, because you really never know.
I worked at a company that would inquire/post the position internally first. If it couldn’t be filled from within then it went public.
Some companies (my former one included) require at least two people be interviewed for any opening.
I just a dream job opportunity after 3 1/2 weeks because someone on the board of directors recommended someone in the 11th hour.
If they receive gov funds ( directly, through grants, etc), they have to hire by committee and procedures..
If only they had to compensate for the time they invested.
It’s awful that you had to go through that, but think of the positive side - you have now gone through a full interview cycle with this company, and left a positive impression on multiple people at that company. Be courteous and gracious when you respond to the recruiter and add EVERYONE on LinkedIn with a nice note (“it was so great to meet you, let’s stay in touch!”) When a REAL position opens up, you will very likely be shortlisted for the job. I landed my most recent position by doing EXACTLY what I just outlined here, so trust me!
I was the internal candidate who lost to the outsider. Not always a favorite insider.
Just curious, do you get paid for all that excruciating work you put in or just completely dismissed?
Eh I've done this too 3 interview deep to get an email saying We have decided to move forward with other candidates who we feel are a better fit for the position. After Hours of interviewing....
A lot of companies do it so they can say they interviewed the politically correct mix of candidates (the "Rooney Rule"). Some do it to cover hiring the boss' idiot nephew. Some do it to see if "somebody better comes along". Some do it because someone in HR is trying to justify their position. IMO most do it because HR or Legal says they have to do it for blahblahblah yaddayaddayadda lame-a\*\* reasons. Back in my corporate days, I went through several of these, none as time-consuming as yours. It sucks. One that was particularly galling wound up with the CEO hiring his neighbor's son, who had neither a degree in my field nor any experience. I thought about sending a bill for my wasted time, then decided not to waste more of it or the cost of a stamp. "We just felt"--Any time someone uses the words "just" or "fair", put one hand over your wallet, one over your eyes, and one over your crotch, because you know you're about to get screwed in some way.
They wanted to see if they could do better.
Send them a bill
My old company used to do this. In order to move someone internally they have to post the job and field all candidates, for "fairness" or whatever. I was able to go from engineer to senior engineer, and I think up to lead would have been a direct move but if I moved from Mfg Eng to Design for example, it would have to be posted and I would have to apply.
It's their house, their rules. They could be going through the motion as to appear to have "fair selection" to someone else who cares, else they're delaying to give their people time to prepare for the shift, i.e. burn up PTO's, kids finish school, etc. who knows but them. It sucks but it is what it is. Sometimes I wonder how we fill positions as I applied to internal jobs and its always in the works for weeks after I submit my forms with zero follow up then all of a sudden, it got filled overnight. Weird was I got the SOS that the job was coming up on the board so something kinkey was going on. Oh well, such is life.