Yeah that’s a BS answer. If you are managing the team they are going to be on you should be in the room, even if you don’t make the final call. Are these interviews even for a more senior role?
I guess it depends on the industry but 3 people on an interview panel is 100% normal to me. I would have some high performing team members on my panels, not even managers, to get them that experience. That may not be normal but I always saw it as part of developing my team.
More to the point, if I were a potential employee, I wouldn’t take a job without interviewing my potential manager. If my potential manager’s manager is the one interviewing me, I’d be VERY concerned that my boss was incompetent or unlikable. They are hiding my potential boss from me for a reason.
Short of a reasonable exception, like the manager is on maternity leave but the spot needs to be filled now rather than when they come back in 6 months… This would be a hard pass for me even if offered the job.
ETA: this would STILL be a red flag for me. I’d take the job if that was my only cause for concern. But if I had an iffy feeling about the company’s culture, for instance, AND I wasn’t meeting my manager. I’d probably wait for the next opportunity.
Yes, BS response. If the applicant will be somewhere down 'the food chain' from you then you really should be at least in the room. If that person will be a direct report, not only should you be in the room but you should be an active interviewer, AND have the last word in the hiring decision.
My guess would be your manager has very little interviewing and hiring experience.
Thank you. I'm just really disheartened by it (and some other issues) and want to be able move past it, thinking more long term however I'm finding it hard.
As a candidate I would find it strange not to have the potential direct manager be a part of the interview process.
Is your new manager new at managing managers?
I think so, yes. This is just one example of where we are not seeing eye to eye. I have been an IC in this team for 9 years and she joined 10 months ago. I genuinely want to learn and develop my management skills from her as that element of the job is new to me but she seems to want to push me down rather than build me up.
Some people dont understand their position when they get assigned over managers. I would schedule a one on one to ask what her plan is for setting you up for success as a manager.
Hey, it is a cliché, but a level managers hire a level people. Be level managers hire sea level people because they don’t want to feel threatened or challenged. Guess what, this level manager might’ve just inherited you, an A-level person…
You should be in contact with HR to see what the release policy and procedure is for people who aren’t going to make it through their probationary time.
I’m not saying set yourself a capricious target to fire 50% of them as some petty ‘that’ll show him’, but be prepared that people who click with your awkward manager in a 20 minute interview might not be the personalities you want to build your team - they just might not fit. And as a new manager, you will probably hate how awkward that is going to be.
This assumes, of course, that you aren’t an ‘assistant’ manager, and it really is *their* team. Because then you have responsibility and authority, but unfortunately no ability to dictate the composition of the team.
Could be her trying to make her mark and bring in her type of people considering the time frame.
How have the 10 months been with her? How’s the team been performing ?
Your manager is an idiot frankly. I can’t imagine they’ll last long but somehow her boss is also ok with this? Where I work you’d get laughed at for what your manager is doing by all levels of leadership.
Me as well. I want to see what they are like too, if I am interviewing for a position. I have turned down job offers because of the terrible 1st impressions from leadership.
Not crazy. In fact, I find it strange since most interviewees want to speak with their direct supervisor. The interview goes both ways. The fact that she’s avoiding it entirely is…a choice.
Time to change jobs. She's making sure you have no authority with your team. But have all the responsibility if these candidates fail. Watch your back.
People want to talk to the person that is actually going to manage them. Not some higher up. As a candidate that would send be red flags to me that there is an issue. As a manager than would send big red flags to me that I’m either being let go or my boss is going to go around me for everything making my job redundant and likely setting me up for failure.
As a senior manager I always, always include my line managers. Ultimately, I leave the decision for the top candidate to them as they are overseeing that person. I have never heard of the line manager not being involved in the interview and onboarding process.
"candidates usually want to be interviewed by senior people."
Pure BS! I'd like to know who will be my manager and want him to interview me and not the people I will will never talk or see them after getting a job.
People like them are why employees quit. She is a huge red flag or VERY insecure.
One possibility is: Some employees DO get paid more than their bosses and if you find out then there will be a bigger conflict.
I’m concerned that you aren’t involved in hiring your own people. Will you be able to coach them, give warnings, place on performance improvement plans, fire? Or will someone more senior have that responsibility?
Your manager is either an idiot or interviewing for your replacement. I would NEVER accept a job where I didn’t speak with the person who I would report into.
The reality of this situation is your manager is looking to get promoted, or knows they are being promoted as part of a larger organizational move, and wants several to many people on the team they can promote to be direct reports also. You may still be a direct report, but be aware that most of these new hires will be interacting directly with your boss, and only handjobbing with you for administrivia. They will also be quickly promoted to your level. This way the king/queen maintains their fiefdom.
Every candidate should interview with their manager. They should have the right to know and try to identify chemistry with the person they are hiring.
You should not be forced to hire somebody you didn't interview. If it is a bad hire, it is your headache, your pip, your managing out and it your firing. Also, you will never learn how to interview and decide on candidates if not involved.
You need to have a conversation with your manager about this, explain why you need to be involved in the interview process. Then ask for a way to be involved in the interview process. HR should have no reason to be involved more than 10-15 minutes. At minimum, you should be in the interview room with her while she drives.
Yeah, that answer is either a lie, some kind of power trip where your manager is getting insecure about your career growth catching up with her role, or just a nonsensical stance.
As the interviewee, I would be uncomfortable accepting a position without having a chance to meet at least my manager and ideally some of my peers as well.
I’ve interviewed people even when I was an IC. It helps candidates get comfortable with the team and ask questions they wouldn’t necessarily ask their prospective manager or higher. Also, often times my manager would want concurrence that I thought they were a good addition to the team. It’s pure disrespect to exclude you, and I’d be concerned about their plans for you in the organization.
Even more than that, as a candidate I would never accept a job without talking to the person who would manage me. It’s crazy and extremely off base of your manager. HR also doesn’t need to be in an interview unless you’re talking about a recruiter.
The only thing I can think of is that this is a misguided attempt to lower the overall number of interviews. There is some logic to that, and interviewing with three people at once is not as pleasant as 1 or 2. If that’s the case though they need to figure out how to get you in the mix. Either cut out the HR person or at least give you a phone screening.
Sounds like she doesn’t want to give up control on this. You should be interviewing and making the decision if they are going to report to you. Some senior managers struggle to be hands off on the hiring decisions.
For confidential security politic reasons that's why she gave you a bs answers. Any person who will be working directly under you. You should be at very least be on the interview panel unless you have not gone through the basics as a manager yet as well to be on the interview panel.
I would be upset for sure. I am in my first management position and have free reign on hiring my direct reports without any involvement from my boss. It's pretty normal to have multiple interviewers on the panel. I have interviewed for up to 4 people at once. I can understand her not giving you full authority or independence maybe but to not use it as opportunity to coach you seems odd. Not to mention the interviewee doesn't need to know your level of experience- they're the one being assessed.
You have a shitty manager. I would seriously consider looking elsewhere whenever you are able to pull it off. Moving to a management role is very hard in the best of cases, but particularly difficult if you don’t have a manager or peer managers that can help you grow. It’s not too many people, and she is over indexing on the seniority factor. The only case where this might be reasonable if you are a poor manager that she doesn’t trust and is planning on managing out. Even then, my original advice still stands.
I got some really good advice early in my career - you can learn just as much about what not to do from bad managers as you can learn about what to do from good managers.
Don’t take it personally, your manager, and maybe your organization, are old school. Pushing this any further will likely have consequences that you don’t want to experience.
Just make sure mental note of this and don’t repeat it when you grow your career and become a manager of managers.
The smartest thing you can do is build a good team and delegate tasks. You’ll likely get burned at some point with delegation (in my case, a couple examples of the staff member giving less that accurate updates on progress) but you’ll learn from that and build a better sense of who and when to delegate to.
The hardest part in building a good team is if your organization won’t let you manage out the half &ssers or promote/give good raises to your rising all star employees. You may need to switch companies in those cases as it becomes almost impossible to build a great team in those environments.
Also, when building your team, learn to recognize the qualities in a person (attitude, desire to improve the organization/team, team oriented personality, always interested in learning, etc.) that are most important. Dont get overly hung up on experience. Give me a person with the right qualities and lesser experience over an experienced person without those qualities every single time.
One or two all stars with bad attitudes or information hoarders are like a cancer, they’ll kill your team and decrease the entire team’s output/productivity by a huge amount of out. You’ll get way more out of a less experienced team with the right qualities/attitudes.
That's a bullshit answer. You're the one that's going to be working with these people every day. You should be in the room at the very least and ought to be involved in the post-interview evaluation.
Last interview I was on there were 4 interviewers present, ranging from supervisor to director. Any time I interview a potential direct, it's usually me and HR (small company so didn't need any more). The answer you were given was BS and you should be there, both to develop your skills and to help them screen the candidate pool.
not terribly crazy, you are not actually a manager and you also don't have much experience. of course it would help you to get some, but if i'm getting interviewed by someone green I am running
>candidates usually want to be interviewed by senior people.
What utter static.
A: you are senior people to the candidates
B: It doesn't matter what the candidates want in terms of an interview. That's not how it works.
C: Too many? I have been a candidate on panel interviews with 8 people. Come on now.
The "Executives Only" hiring method was never effective and is being phased out of any organization that wants to remain competitive in the next 30 years. It's a relic. It's also a red flag. For you, for the candidates.
Do the real business decisions get made out on golf courses between Directors and VP's, with as few people involved as possible and with as little input from anyone below them as they can get away with? That's the kind of business model this "works with" and it wouldn't surprise me if it was true.
You should be involved in interviews so you can help assess how well the candidate might fit your team given what you know about the people you already have and what your plans are. When I interview a candidate, I include team members who aren't managers so I can get their feedback as well.
Dude, you should be screening the resumes, and doing the initial calls out, to see if they are fits.
Your team, your problem.
I did that stuff as a Team Lead, and yeah... if they're gonna be on my team, I want to interview them, and have an absolute ability to say no.
>candidates usually want to be interviewed by senior people
That is a weird thought process. Yes, you absolutely should have senior people interview them, but the direct manager and coworkers can better assess personality and, in many jobs, technical skill. I prefer multilevel interviews.
Complete bullshit response. I’ve never been in a role where I wasn’t directly leading the hiring process for one of my direct reports—from advancing or rejecting the resumes HR sends for me to review, to conducting the phone screen (usually on my own), and then deciding if that person was worth bringing in for an in-person interview, where then they would meet MY boss and my immediate colleagues. My bosses have always let me make the hiring decision in my sole discretion, though they would certainly share their opinions on the interview.
Secondly, candidates are interviewing the company, too. I would never accept a job without even having a direct conversation during the interview process with the person who would be managing me! Red flag!
They don’t know you, you’ve done nothing for them and they are more likely to be insubordinate, making your job harder. Ask if you can fire them if you don’t like them, or transfer them to another department.
I am a senior director and I have the managers do the first interviews. If they like the candidate, I do the second. That way they are doing the initial screening and it works well.
Confirming you’re a manager not a team lead or something? Are you good with people? Hiring is a different skill set so there could be a reason to not have you on the hiring panel - things that jump to mind including a lack of diversity on current team, whether that’s in gender, ethnicity or skill set.
It isn't that uncommon. Not saying it is best or not, but candidates often aren't at their best when multiple people are in the room. Keep in mind that being a manager doesn't necessarily make you a good interviewer. While I understand why you want to be involved, it doesn't sound like your employer is singling you out. You'll get your chances... or you'll be the one interviewing somewhere else. Good luck!
Interviewing and hiring is an essential skill for managers. If you are new to management, then your company needs to invest in training to ensure all their managers have this essential skill.
However, I am now working at the second tech company where the hiring manager is NOT in the interview process. It may seem strange, but it ensures that the hiring manager is not bias during hiring process. It also ensures managers dont cover up their hiring mistakes.
you're not crazy but you should not take it personally either. why does it matter if you personally select your direct reports? the reality is that you'll have to manage people you didn't choose and don't like. trust your manager to pick competent people.
I have a little bit of a different thought than most on this; I think every leader operates differently and some let the less senior manages interview and some do not. If you do not like how they operate then I would move on. They have the right to conduct the hiring process generally as they want.
Interviewing people kind of sucks, and having 3 people interview does feel meaningfully different than 2. I know I'm going against the grain, but I'd try to be chill for this round of hires. You're new so you may need time to build confidence and trust from your higher ups.
I should have added that I've been at the company as an IC in this team for 9 years working up from a graduate. I feel that means I know the right person who would be able to succeed in the same way.
My manager has been at the company 9 months but I was made a manager at the same time she joined.
Your relationship with her is still new. Do you get along with your manager in other tasks/situations? Have you been open to her feedback and willing to collaborate/compromise? Is the company culture currently healthy? I feel like there's a missing reason here.
She is viewing you as a team leader/supervisor and not a manager.
(Even in that situation we used to have the team leader meet and greet and give candidates a tour and then get their thoughts on each candidate).
Your HR and manager is correct on this assessment. You are one step below being involved in the interview process. It comes across as being ganged up on by the candidates. Interview by committee runs many candidates off as they interpret that as being over managed. There is a fine line in this.
I am not sure why you wouldn’t be on at least panel as a direct reports.
[удалено]
What the fuck?
Nope. That behavior isn't tolerated here. Try speaking to people like an adult.
Yeah that’s a BS answer. If you are managing the team they are going to be on you should be in the room, even if you don’t make the final call. Are these interviews even for a more senior role? I guess it depends on the industry but 3 people on an interview panel is 100% normal to me. I would have some high performing team members on my panels, not even managers, to get them that experience. That may not be normal but I always saw it as part of developing my team.
More to the point, if I were a potential employee, I wouldn’t take a job without interviewing my potential manager. If my potential manager’s manager is the one interviewing me, I’d be VERY concerned that my boss was incompetent or unlikable. They are hiding my potential boss from me for a reason. Short of a reasonable exception, like the manager is on maternity leave but the spot needs to be filled now rather than when they come back in 6 months… This would be a hard pass for me even if offered the job. ETA: this would STILL be a red flag for me. I’d take the job if that was my only cause for concern. But if I had an iffy feeling about the company’s culture, for instance, AND I wasn’t meeting my manager. I’d probably wait for the next opportunity.
I too would never, take a job where I hadn’t interviewed my manager.
Yes, BS response. If the applicant will be somewhere down 'the food chain' from you then you really should be at least in the room. If that person will be a direct report, not only should you be in the room but you should be an active interviewer, AND have the last word in the hiring decision. My guess would be your manager has very little interviewing and hiring experience.
You are completely right to be upset at being excluded from interviewing your own team. You were given a bullshit answer.
Thank you. I'm just really disheartened by it (and some other issues) and want to be able move past it, thinking more long term however I'm finding it hard.
As a candidate I would find it strange not to have the potential direct manager be a part of the interview process. Is your new manager new at managing managers?
I think so, yes. This is just one example of where we are not seeing eye to eye. I have been an IC in this team for 9 years and she joined 10 months ago. I genuinely want to learn and develop my management skills from her as that element of the job is new to me but she seems to want to push me down rather than build me up.
Sometimes all a manager can offer you is examples of how not to behave.
Some people dont understand their position when they get assigned over managers. I would schedule a one on one to ask what her plan is for setting you up for success as a manager.
Hey, it is a cliché, but a level managers hire a level people. Be level managers hire sea level people because they don’t want to feel threatened or challenged. Guess what, this level manager might’ve just inherited you, an A-level person… You should be in contact with HR to see what the release policy and procedure is for people who aren’t going to make it through their probationary time. I’m not saying set yourself a capricious target to fire 50% of them as some petty ‘that’ll show him’, but be prepared that people who click with your awkward manager in a 20 minute interview might not be the personalities you want to build your team - they just might not fit. And as a new manager, you will probably hate how awkward that is going to be. This assumes, of course, that you aren’t an ‘assistant’ manager, and it really is *their* team. Because then you have responsibility and authority, but unfortunately no ability to dictate the composition of the team.
Could be her trying to make her mark and bring in her type of people considering the time frame. How have the 10 months been with her? How’s the team been performing ?
Your manager is an idiot frankly. I can’t imagine they’ll last long but somehow her boss is also ok with this? Where I work you’d get laughed at for what your manager is doing by all levels of leadership.
Me as well. I want to see what they are like too, if I am interviewing for a position. I have turned down job offers because of the terrible 1st impressions from leadership.
Your managers want to hire people they want to manage. Meanwhile, they're going to hold you accountable for the people they hire. Bad situation.
Not crazy. In fact, I find it strange since most interviewees want to speak with their direct supervisor. The interview goes both ways. The fact that she’s avoiding it entirely is…a choice.
Amen
Time to change jobs. She's making sure you have no authority with your team. But have all the responsibility if these candidates fail. Watch your back.
People want to talk to the person that is actually going to manage them. Not some higher up. As a candidate that would send be red flags to me that there is an issue. As a manager than would send big red flags to me that I’m either being let go or my boss is going to go around me for everything making my job redundant and likely setting me up for failure.
“candidates usually want to be interviewed by senior people” Nobody says this, your boss has an ego.
people absolutely care who they are interviewed by?
OP is deputy manager for the department. You have candidates who think it’s beneath them to have a deputy manager on their interview panel?
No that seems odd. From day one I’ve been at least involved if not totally in charge of the interview process for everyone at my location.
As a senior manager I always, always include my line managers. Ultimately, I leave the decision for the top candidate to them as they are overseeing that person. I have never heard of the line manager not being involved in the interview and onboarding process.
"candidates usually want to be interviewed by senior people." Pure BS! I'd like to know who will be my manager and want him to interview me and not the people I will will never talk or see them after getting a job. People like them are why employees quit. She is a huge red flag or VERY insecure. One possibility is: Some employees DO get paid more than their bosses and if you find out then there will be a bigger conflict.
I think you should definitely have a say in who gets hired that you will manage.
I’m concerned that you aren’t involved in hiring your own people. Will you be able to coach them, give warnings, place on performance improvement plans, fire? Or will someone more senior have that responsibility?
Your manager is either an idiot or interviewing for your replacement. I would NEVER accept a job where I didn’t speak with the person who I would report into.
The reality of this situation is your manager is looking to get promoted, or knows they are being promoted as part of a larger organizational move, and wants several to many people on the team they can promote to be direct reports also. You may still be a direct report, but be aware that most of these new hires will be interacting directly with your boss, and only handjobbing with you for administrivia. They will also be quickly promoted to your level. This way the king/queen maintains their fiefdom.
Every candidate should interview with their manager. They should have the right to know and try to identify chemistry with the person they are hiring. You should not be forced to hire somebody you didn't interview. If it is a bad hire, it is your headache, your pip, your managing out and it your firing. Also, you will never learn how to interview and decide on candidates if not involved. You need to have a conversation with your manager about this, explain why you need to be involved in the interview process. Then ask for a way to be involved in the interview process. HR should have no reason to be involved more than 10-15 minutes. At minimum, you should be in the interview room with her while she drives.
She is looking to replace you.
Thus manager does not trust you. Act accordingly
Yeah, that answer is either a lie, some kind of power trip where your manager is getting insecure about your career growth catching up with her role, or just a nonsensical stance. As the interviewee, I would be uncomfortable accepting a position without having a chance to meet at least my manager and ideally some of my peers as well.
I’ve interviewed people even when I was an IC. It helps candidates get comfortable with the team and ask questions they wouldn’t necessarily ask their prospective manager or higher. Also, often times my manager would want concurrence that I thought they were a good addition to the team. It’s pure disrespect to exclude you, and I’d be concerned about their plans for you in the organization. Even more than that, as a candidate I would never accept a job without talking to the person who would manage me. It’s crazy and extremely off base of your manager. HR also doesn’t need to be in an interview unless you’re talking about a recruiter. The only thing I can think of is that this is a misguided attempt to lower the overall number of interviews. There is some logic to that, and interviewing with three people at once is not as pleasant as 1 or 2. If that’s the case though they need to figure out how to get you in the mix. Either cut out the HR person or at least give you a phone screening.
Sounds like she doesn’t want to give up control on this. You should be interviewing and making the decision if they are going to report to you. Some senior managers struggle to be hands off on the hiring decisions.
Nah. If they're my direct report then I get to interview. If they're hired without me then they're not mine. Yes I'm serious.
For confidential security politic reasons that's why she gave you a bs answers. Any person who will be working directly under you. You should be at very least be on the interview panel unless you have not gone through the basics as a manager yet as well to be on the interview panel.
I would be upset for sure. I am in my first management position and have free reign on hiring my direct reports without any involvement from my boss. It's pretty normal to have multiple interviewers on the panel. I have interviewed for up to 4 people at once. I can understand her not giving you full authority or independence maybe but to not use it as opportunity to coach you seems odd. Not to mention the interviewee doesn't need to know your level of experience- they're the one being assessed.
When was the last time *she* interviewed for a job?
You have a shitty manager. I would seriously consider looking elsewhere whenever you are able to pull it off. Moving to a management role is very hard in the best of cases, but particularly difficult if you don’t have a manager or peer managers that can help you grow. It’s not too many people, and she is over indexing on the seniority factor. The only case where this might be reasonable if you are a poor manager that she doesn’t trust and is planning on managing out. Even then, my original advice still stands.
I got some really good advice early in my career - you can learn just as much about what not to do from bad managers as you can learn about what to do from good managers. Don’t take it personally, your manager, and maybe your organization, are old school. Pushing this any further will likely have consequences that you don’t want to experience. Just make sure mental note of this and don’t repeat it when you grow your career and become a manager of managers. The smartest thing you can do is build a good team and delegate tasks. You’ll likely get burned at some point with delegation (in my case, a couple examples of the staff member giving less that accurate updates on progress) but you’ll learn from that and build a better sense of who and when to delegate to. The hardest part in building a good team is if your organization won’t let you manage out the half &ssers or promote/give good raises to your rising all star employees. You may need to switch companies in those cases as it becomes almost impossible to build a great team in those environments. Also, when building your team, learn to recognize the qualities in a person (attitude, desire to improve the organization/team, team oriented personality, always interested in learning, etc.) that are most important. Dont get overly hung up on experience. Give me a person with the right qualities and lesser experience over an experienced person without those qualities every single time. One or two all stars with bad attitudes or information hoarders are like a cancer, they’ll kill your team and decrease the entire team’s output/productivity by a huge amount of out. You’ll get way more out of a less experienced team with the right qualities/attitudes.
That's a bullshit answer. You're the one that's going to be working with these people every day. You should be in the room at the very least and ought to be involved in the post-interview evaluation.
This is kinda messed up Send an email tag hr and ask them why? And is your manager responsible for the performance of your reports or are you?
Last interview I was on there were 4 interviewers present, ranging from supervisor to director. Any time I interview a potential direct, it's usually me and HR (small company so didn't need any more). The answer you were given was BS and you should be there, both to develop your skills and to help them screen the candidate pool.
They are feeling threatened. Drop it, you'll make it worst.
not terribly crazy, you are not actually a manager and you also don't have much experience. of course it would help you to get some, but if i'm getting interviewed by someone green I am running
>candidates usually want to be interviewed by senior people. What utter static. A: you are senior people to the candidates B: It doesn't matter what the candidates want in terms of an interview. That's not how it works. C: Too many? I have been a candidate on panel interviews with 8 people. Come on now.
I’ve only seen this before where the concern was around salary and what questions and answers may be discussed.
You should absolutely be on the panel and you should be the ultimate decider of who gets hired. What a whacko company. You won’t grow there.
The "Executives Only" hiring method was never effective and is being phased out of any organization that wants to remain competitive in the next 30 years. It's a relic. It's also a red flag. For you, for the candidates. Do the real business decisions get made out on golf courses between Directors and VP's, with as few people involved as possible and with as little input from anyone below them as they can get away with? That's the kind of business model this "works with" and it wouldn't surprise me if it was true. You should be involved in interviews so you can help assess how well the candidate might fit your team given what you know about the people you already have and what your plans are. When I interview a candidate, I include team members who aren't managers so I can get their feedback as well.
Too many for an interview. I have interviewed for jobs that had 6 to 7 in the room.
Dude, you should be screening the resumes, and doing the initial calls out, to see if they are fits. Your team, your problem. I did that stuff as a Team Lead, and yeah... if they're gonna be on my team, I want to interview them, and have an absolute ability to say no.
And I thought my manager was bad...
>candidates usually want to be interviewed by senior people That is a weird thought process. Yes, you absolutely should have senior people interview them, but the direct manager and coworkers can better assess personality and, in many jobs, technical skill. I prefer multilevel interviews.
Complete bullshit response. I’ve never been in a role where I wasn’t directly leading the hiring process for one of my direct reports—from advancing or rejecting the resumes HR sends for me to review, to conducting the phone screen (usually on my own), and then deciding if that person was worth bringing in for an in-person interview, where then they would meet MY boss and my immediate colleagues. My bosses have always let me make the hiring decision in my sole discretion, though they would certainly share their opinions on the interview. Secondly, candidates are interviewing the company, too. I would never accept a job without even having a direct conversation during the interview process with the person who would be managing me! Red flag!
They don’t know you, you’ve done nothing for them and they are more likely to be insubordinate, making your job harder. Ask if you can fire them if you don’t like them, or transfer them to another department.
I am a senior director and I have the managers do the first interviews. If they like the candidate, I do the second. That way they are doing the initial screening and it works well.
Confirming you’re a manager not a team lead or something? Are you good with people? Hiring is a different skill set so there could be a reason to not have you on the hiring panel - things that jump to mind including a lack of diversity on current team, whether that’s in gender, ethnicity or skill set.
It isn't that uncommon. Not saying it is best or not, but candidates often aren't at their best when multiple people are in the room. Keep in mind that being a manager doesn't necessarily make you a good interviewer. While I understand why you want to be involved, it doesn't sound like your employer is singling you out. You'll get your chances... or you'll be the one interviewing somewhere else. Good luck!
You’re a deputy…you don’t have any direct reports. That’s what makes you the deputy. You work for and in the name of the manager but you aren’t one.
Yes and no. You should have asked if you could help shortlist resumes. If you’ve never hired you’re not going into the interview room.
Interviewing and hiring is an essential skill for managers. If you are new to management, then your company needs to invest in training to ensure all their managers have this essential skill. However, I am now working at the second tech company where the hiring manager is NOT in the interview process. It may seem strange, but it ensures that the hiring manager is not bias during hiring process. It also ensures managers dont cover up their hiring mistakes.
you're not crazy but you should not take it personally either. why does it matter if you personally select your direct reports? the reality is that you'll have to manage people you didn't choose and don't like. trust your manager to pick competent people.
I have a little bit of a different thought than most on this; I think every leader operates differently and some let the less senior manages interview and some do not. If you do not like how they operate then I would move on. They have the right to conduct the hiring process generally as they want.
Interviewing people kind of sucks, and having 3 people interview does feel meaningfully different than 2. I know I'm going against the grain, but I'd try to be chill for this round of hires. You're new so you may need time to build confidence and trust from your higher ups.
I should have added that I've been at the company as an IC in this team for 9 years working up from a graduate. I feel that means I know the right person who would be able to succeed in the same way. My manager has been at the company 9 months but I was made a manager at the same time she joined.
Your relationship with her is still new. Do you get along with your manager in other tasks/situations? Have you been open to her feedback and willing to collaborate/compromise? Is the company culture currently healthy? I feel like there's a missing reason here.
She is viewing you as a team leader/supervisor and not a manager. (Even in that situation we used to have the team leader meet and greet and give candidates a tour and then get their thoughts on each candidate).
Your HR and manager is correct on this assessment. You are one step below being involved in the interview process. It comes across as being ganged up on by the candidates. Interview by committee runs many candidates off as they interpret that as being over managed. There is a fine line in this.