Ykhjuy

And would you consider it a kiss of death when said by a potential
employer

Yes. It translates into: "We're done considering you and the result was negative. No, we're not going to tell you exactly what was wrong. It might be your personality, what we think is your skill set, work ethic, communication skills, or whatever. We've had this conversation lots with others and our lawyers inform us that we can say this without legal exposure."

Adding a slightly different perspective: Fit is NOT an empty phrase but the single most important part of the hiring decision. The job of the interview team is to figure out whether the candidate is a "good fit" for the role. "Fit" breaks down into a bunch of different components

1. Technical skills, stuff for the immediate role, adjacent and orthogonal skills.


2. Experience, learning curve, time required to fill gaps


3. General critical thinking, learning ability


4. Cultural fit: communication style, management style, amount of hand holding required, personality, ego to skill ratio, etc.


5. Career fit candidate: is that a logical step for the candidate or is she looking for something else and this is a stop gap


6. Career fit employer: can we see a credible long term growth scenario for that person here.


7. Family, personal stuff: relocation, commute, buy in from partner/family, etc.


8. Money: do candidate goals and employer range overlap enough

Any single one of these being out of whack can mean "not a fit" and, yes, that is the end of this application.

In most cases "not a fit" is GOOD outcome. It simply represents the facts and hiring a person that's not a fit for any of the reasons above, just makes everyone miserable: colleagues, manager, and new hire tend to have a bad time and the final outcome is never good.

I understand, it's frustrating to receive the "no fit" answer without further details. However, if you keep your eyes and ears open during they interview process and go mentally through your own fit check list, you can typically tell what's happening and why. You may actually come to the same conclusion yourself.

I would consider it the kiss of death in an interview process.

Odds are you believe in something that is fundamentally opposed within the organization, or there is some other reason (one the company would prefer to keep unsaid to avoid bad press) which is being expressed but not voiced.

I'd try to mentally recall the entire interview. Who did the talking? When did the facial expressions change to indicate displeasure? What was said before that happened, and if that couldn't be misconstrued badly, how was it said?

It's not a sure-fire formula for figuring out where something went wrong. It's just a starting place, adjust it to fit your needs.

Without further explanation, "You won't be a good fit" is as generic as it could be, and it is a kiss of death, unless you are assertive enough to ask questions (and persevere in doing so until you get answers).

As you have not much to lose anymore, you can take the risk to ask anything, like

• What would it take to fit in better?


• Do you see a mismatch with the function, the team or the company culture?


• Is there a different team or function in your company in which I would fit better?


• Do you know a company in your industry whose company culture would fit me better?

Beware you are in an exceptional position now: you do have access to a person who knows the industry. That person sees him/herself as the one who turned you down and would be much happier to see him/herself as the one who gave you advice.

Do both of you a favor and act now.

Update:

My optimism gets a lot of negative feed back, mainly from people that are afraid the hiring manager or recruiter you contact might not appreciate being bothered or even questioned by you. I aggree this is a risk, but it is one worth taking.

It is a risk because they might not want to discuss the reason why you are not hired.

(It could be embarrassing or even illegal, e.g. discrimination) Therefore ask what you could do better, never ask what is wrong. The first question I suggested is the most dangerous.

It is also a risk

because some people only see you as a resource, which accidentaly is human.
These recruiters and hiring managers don't care about you, not when you get the job and even less when you don't.
If they remember you needlesly bothering them in the past, they will reject you in the future.

But the riks is worth taking

because others see you as a human, which might become a resource.
They not only like to help humans, they also know humans are capable of improving themselves using feedback.
If they remember you valuing their feedback in the past, they will valuate your effort to fit in in the future.

I don't mind burning bridges to the first type of recruiter while building bridges to the second type. They will propose me jobs in which I will be productive and happy.

It does not have to be the total kiss of death, but it probably is.

• A candidate has to match a gap in the team. That covers hard skills, soft skills, and personality. Even if workers in a team are nominally equals, there will be leaders and followers, attention to detail and attention to the big picture, people who jolt the team out of the daily grind and people who take care of the daily chores.
  
  It could be that you do not fit now, but that there will be a phone call or email six months from now asking if you are still free. Because there is a different gap then.


• A company might have multiple gaps in multiple teams, and "not a good fit" is the preface to handing the candidate to another team than the one he or she applied for. In that case they'd make this very clear.

But most likely they're telling the candidate that there will be no job offer.

I have used the "Good fit" line a few times. Sometimes it's a personality thing (very Type A, etc), sometimes I felt like the person was overqualified (and I risked having a bored developer) for the role with no likelihood of the requirements changing, etc. For one person, I knew his personality would be a complete clash with what the CEO was used to (loud, very opinionated, very blunt, very chatty, etc -- qualities (other than loud) I would have hired for if it was my company).

I always took this response as the company relizing my capabilities were way to big, ground breaking, and exploritory for there narrow minded conseptionsons of the idle workplace idalagies of how to succeed that they have built of others previous work. So with no true drive for growth or success anywhere in there near future. This response was taken graciously by me for showing me my misconception of what I thought they were to begin with. So one may say kiss of death, however I like to look at it more as a foreplay for either they soon wish I was on there team, or the company never truly wanted to lead but just follow. So in that be forgiving and lead them to where they were looking for through the light of the compatition that they will only try to mirror. So Thank them for not putting you though the pain of a loveless relationship, and then help them succeed through building that bridge that Noone dared to for lack of forsite. My thoughts on it anyway, and also yeah your not getting that position as of that moment, but moments are just that. Also remember not every door won't reopen, most of others are call cell doors and you don't to go there anyway.😎😎😎

It basically means "We have enough class to respond to you, but not enough bravery to tell you specifically why you weren't hired."

Count yourself lucky they didn't just try to Ghost you.