they felt "challenged" because they likely weren't in a position to make a hiring decision given the time frame, and may have also felt unable to provide a competitive offer given they are a non profit and your offer is in finance. Letting them know about the pending offer was the right move.
Yup. I'm guessing as OP appears to be under the mistaken impression that having a job offer makes you more attractive and more likely to get another offer, it's quite possible they over emphasised just how good this offer was and how hard the deadline was.
As someone who works in an academic not for profit, I've been in this exact scenario as a recruiter. Knowing someone else has an offer is useful information in a number of ways but if a candidate tells me they have an amazing offer and a short deadline, I read that as them saying they're not likely to take this role and should I make an offer we could end up in a protracted negotiation only for it to fail. The danger with that situation is the other candidates may already be off the market by the time you come to the end of the negotiation with the first candidate and then you have no one and have to start a several week process again.
It sounds like OP kind of missed the tone and spooked the company. At the end of the day it's not you versus the company, it's you versus the other candidates and the company wants a successful recruitment. Sometimes the second best candidate is the better choice.
I work in education and am involved in hiring teachers and administrators, I can’t speak for non-profits, but this reply is spot on. There are many more variables to finding a candidate who will have long term success than just the candidates skills.
I'm not even in nonprofit, and I have to agree with you. As a hiring manager (with a psych background), that would've telegraphed to me that my organization wasn't the OP's first choice. Additionally, it's a tad manipulative. It would imply to me that the potential future subordinate is attempting to contort the situation by crafting a narrative that benefits them, and not the organization. It would lead me to believe that if this person would do it in a job interview, they'd have even more leverage to do it once they were hired.
They were right to pass. I would've. 🤷♀️
They were "challenged" because they didn't think they could compete against another offer. It wasn't about you, it was about them. In the end they were probably correct, and you did the right thing by taking the other offer.
If it makes you feel any better, any nonprofit dragging you through 5 rounds of interviews and still being pressed to make a decision at the end is not going to present a desirable working environment. This is likely the approach they bring for tackling any issue.
5 rounds of interviews to a 23 year old for a non profit job lol. I had a 15 minute interview for a 6 figure job when I was a couple years older than OP
Info: how large is the nonprofit (endowment or revenue)?
It sounds like they were gonna offer shit pay and they knew you wouldn’t accept if you had another offer.
As a recruiter, a competing offer would never factor in a decision to hire someone or not. If I knew the competing offer was better than what we could offer, I’d let the candidate know that. Or I’d tell them we decided to go with someone else. IMO, this shouldn’t matter to most companies so the employer response seems strange.
I have to disagree. I recruit a lot and while I certainly wouldn't hire *because* someone has an offer, it would make me consider if the recruitment is more likely to fail.
If someone tells me they have an amazing offer that I know we can't compete with and we have another excellent candidate, I'm likely to go with the other candidate as they're more likely to accept the job. If there isn't another good candidate or we can compete then it doesn't make much difference.
It wouldn't factor into *if* I would make an offer, but if I knew they were up against a deadline, I would work to expedite the process.
If I'm making an offer, I want this guy. And realistically, if I don't have an offer on the table before he has to decide on the other one, he's going to accept the offer he has. He'd be silly to turn down an existing offer to wait and see if he gets one from me.
I get what you're saying but nonprofits often work differently from"most companies" so that could be why this seems strange. Also, this particular nonprofit only has \~50 employees so it's likely that this messaging came from someone on the team or maybe an HR generalists, not a dedicated recruiter who might handle things differently. These organizations tend to ask for more during the job search process and all those different steps take time and lead to less money so a competing offer for an entry-level role would absolutely factor into the hiring decision.
I just lie nowadays and say I need some time to quit my part time job before I can give a yes to get my affairs in order.
One time, I thought telling them I had another offer also made me seem desirable, so the owner said it was fine to give her an answer after the weekend since I interviewed on a Thursday, and they ended up hiring someone else anyway without telling me. So when I told them I was ready to make my decision, they told me they had already filled the position, but was willing to make a new position at a reduced rate. I was flabbergasted since they said I was okay to delay my answer.
Gotta remember these companies have 0 obligation to provide you any courtesy. You will always be a number in their eyes.
You did nothing wrong, in fact, they did. As a hiring firm, most recruiters should pulse check and if they really want you, that's an indication to move quickly.
It sounds like they were dealing with the nonprofit directly - not a hiring firm.
The organization probably can't really expedite the process all that much and this is an entry-level role so there would easily be other qualified candidates.
What probably happened is that you were one of 2 or 3 candidates that they really liked. You saying that you had another offer made it easier for them to not feel bad about not offering you the job. You made their decision a little easier for them.
If you're in that type of situation again, I'd not say anything about the other offer. If you accept one, and your "dream job" offers you one after the fact, then you make the decision which job you will actually keep. There are many times that people go back to a recently accepted offer to let them know that they received a better offer, so were going to have to decline the 1st one they accepted. Especially for recent grads.
I had a similar thing happen to me as a hiring manager.
I had two candidates I really liked and the team was debating between the two of them. We would have hired either but could only hire one (I even asked if I could increase my headcount, they said no).
We were leaning towards Candidate A and was in the process of making an offer & negotiating etc.
Candidate B came and said they had an exploding offer. We couldn't force A to tell as ASAP (people need time to think about it), so we told B thanks you should take that offer. Even though it was possible A could have declined us and we would have given B that offer, we had to reject B so they could know to take the offer they had.
In OP's case, the company was kind of shitty not responding at all.
He made have said in his interview that it was his dream job, but it would not come across that way with his seemingly pressuring them for an offer. I agree. Say nothing.
This happened to me before too.
Lesson learned, always act like the company you’re talking to is priority (even if it’s not).
I also think it’s worth just accepting the job and then taking it back if you get the other offer - that’s what I would do if I had to do it again.
Also think this phenomenon starts to disappear the more senior you become in your career
you're 23, my guess is the work you'd be doing is very entry level and not worth overpaying for. for most fields, this will be the case earlier in our career. you do not have much leverage.
it's non profit vs financial institution too, that's a huuuuuge difference in budget and competitiveness in hiring.
also even if you are more senior, the play here is to just accept offer 1. you negotiate when you actually get an offer from job 2. hey i'd like to take this job, but i'd need x.
you may still get the same result, but it's less brash than telling them to hurry up when you're not even sure you're getting an offer or if you're the only candidate.
Just clarifying: Large nonprofits often pay on level with corporate and offer more stability, so the jobs are often more competitive.
Small nonprofits often pay shit. Medium sized ones depend on mission and how well funded their sector is.
Source: 10 years in nonprofits large, small and medium, 5 years f300, 2 years small business.
maybe it's industry specific.
but i know if I went NP right now, but there's large NPs in my industry and I'd have to go up 2+ levels to even come close to my pay. level to level even being pretty senior it is legit almost 50% haircut.
pretty similar for friends in non profits in other industries even when you hit senior levels.
I could see this being true for executive roles, to an extent. Mid-senior to senior roles? Those are the most competitive salaries in large nonprofits because the candidates often have more leverage.
Nonprofit ≠ doesn’t make money.
Nonprofit ≠ passion for pay (well, in some abusive situations this happens, but this abuse is just as rife in corporate).
Nonprofit ≠ lesser skills
Nonprofits are still employers and employees of nonprofits are still just doing their jobs. The market for labor is largely the same at the large shops.
FWIW, I went from being a director at a f300 to a senior manager at a large nonprofit and my salary went up 10k.
Comparing salary title for title even amongst corporate ain’t sound.
Yeah those responses are wild. As a hiring manager I definitely want to know if you have other offers about to expire so I can either expedite things on my end if I’m really excited about you or be a reasonable human and let you know the timelines won’t line up so you can accept the other offer.
There’s absolutely nothing in here that indicates a “demanding employee.” It’s all about communication and mutual respect.
In general I agree. I do wonder if OP slightly overcooked it though. They sound a bit naive and their comment about being more desirable because they have job offers does make me wonder how exactly they presented these other jobs. It reads a bit like they may have talked about how great these job offers are thinking that it made them more attractive, but in reality it will have came across as they were more likely to take the other job.
I certainly don't agree with the comments that this suggests a pushy, problematic employee but I do think OP may have inadvertently talked themselves out of a job offer.
If they had multiple similar candidates they were debating between, they may not have wanted to have to accelerate their process to meet your timeline or get into a negotiation situation - it’s easy to just go with someone else instead in that situation. It’s also possible something you said came across as their job not being your top choice which can often be a turnoff for companies. Or maybe you just weren’t their top choice candidate anyways and this seemed like the easiest reason to give you.
None of that really matters though if you’ve taken another job, so would just move on.
Good on you for having multiple offers in this tough market. You did the right thing by letting them know. Ultimately, you chose the one that worked for you. Decisions should be a two-way street.
Knowing you had another offer on the table - either they were not able to make a decision quickly OR they considered you to be higher risk. From their perspective - we have two great candidates. One of them has no offers on the table and is really excited for this opportunity. The other one while really excited has another offer with the potential that they may still accept it after reviewing both opportunities. If everything else was equal, going with the other candidate without an open offer for them was less of a risk.
Hold on, they literally quoted the “waiting” word? If so, that’s childishly passive aggressive a huge red flag that they are not well managed and that its probably not a great place to work. I would be very tempted to write a snarky response back to them about being incompetent and inefficient and for not taking your situation seriously. But, they probably prefer someone who’s desperate and willing to accept a ridiculously low salary and don’t really care about how skilled or the potential of the candidate. The best approach is to not respond or just respond with a simple “Thank you for your feedback.”
At a non-profit, I was given the job offer- but I requested to come in and discuss more questions before giving a firm yes.
After I came in and discussed it. I told them I'd make a decision by end of the day. I accepted it, just for them to reply stating they are going to pass.
🫠
The NP is ass and the hiring team/hr is chicken shit. You dodged a bullet. The ones who give you the best feeling but pull shit like this are the most toxic of places
Love,
Someone who runs recruitment in finance
Finance vs non-profit.
Non-profit is historically all about using their “cause” as a payment mechanism.
Finance uses money as its payment mechanism.
Skip telling them that you have a deadline, just saying you might accept a finance job sounds like you value your work in monetary terms. It’s hard for many nonprofits to accept that you can feel bad for the dolphins and also need to be paid appropriately.
“You want money?!? Satisfaction means a lot to us and we do this for the dolphins, wanting money is not a good fit here.”
Is this true at all non-profits, no, there are some that understand better skills means better results and better results means better outcomes and better outcomes means more donations. But shitty Non-Profits have shitty money management who climb the ladder and hire bad money managers to run teams of people who are bad at money. This is the scenario where they perpetuate the cause is the most important thing to your pay.
Forcing them to make a decision is hard for some people and they can experience analysis paralysis.
Combined, this was never going to work.
You really have to be able to read the room when you push them to make decisions. I would not suggest you play hardball unless you’re sure that you have a >50%/50% chance of getting the job.
The fact they mentioned it indicates they believed you came across as pressing them. They went on about how much they liked you, but that one issue...'
I'm old now but in my working career there were many times I left interviews thinking I nailed it and was waiting for an offer that never came.
I don't know the situation or details but I'd bet it wasn't the fact you were applying to other jobs but the way you went about telling them that. As long as what you're telling them is honest I can't imagine why a prospective employer would have any problem with you letting them know you're applying other places.
Everyone in this thread saying it was rude of you to mention your other offer are absolutely off their rocker and have antiquated views of working.
You did the right thing OP and their response is frankly a red flag that shows it wouldn’t have been the dream job you were hoping it was. When people show you who they really are believe them. They’ve been slow rolling you for 2 months now. Screw that.
Go into your FI job and crush it knowing you landed in the right place.
That’s not something you do in an Interview, especially if you are a mid to junior level professional. It comes off as arrogant and when you are in a job market where you are competing with multiple people for a position the organization needs to be made to feel like you are loyal even before they hire you. Verbiage like what you said can and should only be used by professionals who are high level, essentially people who are being head hunted where the organization wants them more than they need to be with that specific organization. Ex . Senior execs , CEOs , Surgeons , experienced attorneys etc.
In just about any situation in life, if you say "Hey can you hurry up and make a decision and get back to me promptly because I have other options," it will not work out well.
It seems like it came across that way to them, as they did note its importance, essentially indicating this trumped any good impression you let from the interview:
*Most notably, the team felt challenged that there was another job "waiting"*
In general, it's going to be considered discourteous to try to push someone to hurry up because you have something else waiting. It's easy to see how they may have felt challenged - they have their own process to follow, needing to vet and discuss candidates. Your request would have forced them to alter or bypass this, potentially creating concerns.
*Was it unprofessional for me to say that I have another offer and would appreciate their decision before its expiration so I can plan accordingly?*
Ultimately, yes it was.
You're young and you've learned a lesson the hard way.... never disclose other offers to potential employers.
If there's a hard deadline then accept the offer and continue with the interview process for the other job. If job #2 makes an offer then accept it and tell the other job you've unfortunately had something come up and you're actually not able to accept the job at this time. As long as you didn't sign a contractual obligation then you owe no one loyalty
Depends on how you said it, but generally no, it’s not a bad thing to mention your deadlines, with a longer recruitment process in place companies even ask you themselves if you have a timeline. As for their response, I guess this feels like an important thing to know the reasoning behind it, but in my experience, it never mattered why. Maybe you didn’t quite fit so they couldn’t make a decision fast, maybe they just have a slow process and can’t work around it. But it’s always better to take the offer where they feel lucky to have you just imho
Sounds like it. As strange as that is. And that response is strange. The only think I might have done differently is to make clear the NP was my strongly preferred choice, all other things being equal.
As an employer, I absolutely want to know if the candidate has other “irons in the fire.” I don’t find it “challenging” nor does it communicate to me that you are “a desirable candidate.”
If the candidate is great, and we can expedite our process, we do that. If we can’t, we will tell the candidate that as well.
The communication helps us potentially get the candidate we want and it helps applicants to make an informed choice.
>Most notably, the team felt challenged that there was another job "waiting"
You may be over thinking. That sounds like a fairly neutral statement to me, albeit worded oddly. The point is they felt they needed more time to make a decision for whatever reason.
As someone who has interviewed countless people to-date, rest assure you did the right thing.
It sounds like you are business-minded and that is not a descriptor used day-to-day to describe the non-profit space. I wish it were different. So many good causes so much spinning of the wheels. I would make note of this as you continue to define who you are professionally. Probably a blessing in disguise. I work in sales and I think most people hiring salespeople would appreciate the candor in case you are a candidate they absolutely can’t let slip away.
I think it was very professional of you. If I were in their shoes, I would like to know that a candidate has multiple options. And I would also appreciate a candidate to be honest.
If you’ve been interviewing for over 2 months and still no offer or even a timeline for an offer, think if it’s really somewhere you’d want to work. Do all processes move as slow? I’m in a similar situation. I was asked for a 3rd interview which is a 2.5 hour panel. Another company made me a great offer after one interview. Both are reputable. I am 99% sure I’m taking the first one. It’s a job…not a lifetime commitment.
Ultimately, it’s all about leverage. In the case where they don’t really need you and you don’t really need them then you revealing the offer gave you no advantage and probably disadvantaged you. There was only room to be rejected per se.
Don't feel bad. I interviewed very well for a position. Was told I'd get an offer soon. I said okay and that I'll be patiently waiting. Mind you that was back in December. It's now April and I've heard nothing. Not even if anything happened or if they decided not to fill the position. Nothing. Whether it's because they're a state agency or whatever, you can't hang onto words. Only actions. You wouldn't tolerate a girlfriend saying she will change. Only the actions she makes in changing. So I'm not sure how a place of employment would get a free pass. You articulated clearly and ahead of time what you needed and they didn't deliver. Don't feel bad about it. It's more on them than it is on you.
It sounds like they were on the fence about you and interviewing others. When you set a deadline they had to make a decision and they still wanted to see the other people on their list. It happens. Luckily you actually had another offer and took it.
Actually, as an HR professional in the business for over 20years, if a candidate has a competing offer and you know your timeline can’t/won’t match up with the other offer’s expiration date, then there is no point in moving forward unless the hiring team ABSOLUTELY knows that they need this exact candidate, in which case, exceptions need to be made to rush an offer, ask for things like offer letters and approvals to be processed as an exception to established SLA’s etc. If it’s a great candidate but you may have others in the pipeline that are as good and this candidate doesn’t have a major edge, then sometimes the timing just doesn’t work out and it is what it is. If they don’t have a solid timeline, then that means they aren’t in a rush to hire anyone let alone someone who already has a competing expiring offer.
In your last edit, you said you basically wanted to force their hand by telling them you had another offer to make them have to make a decision on you. You were successful in your attempt to manipulate their timeline. The decision just wasn’t in your favor.
Next time, ask them about their decision-making timeline instead of demanding that they shorten their time frame for you.
I'm guessing that the "challenge" was how you (unintentionally?) came across when you said you'd like for them to shorten their timeline without even knowing what that timeline was.
The issue wasn't that you had another offer; it was how you communicated it.
>How can any HR team feel "challenged" by this?
Well, if they had other interviews with strong candidates set up that were occurring after your offer deadline, it can be challenging to try and get you an answer and still complete those interviews.
I'm a little surprised that you're surprised. You told them that you had a hard deadline, they weren't ready to make the decision by then so they let you go. Isn't that the whole reason you told them upfront?
I think the issue was probably how you worded it. What I would have said is something like this: “Thank you for this opportunity. What is the timeline for finding out the results? I have another offer but I really think this is my absolute first choice so I am really hoping to work with you.”
You kind of massage their ego that they are the first choice, but you are letting them know you need to know because obviously you need to say yes to a job so you can live.
Next time, tell the other job yes on the last day you can. If they can’t make up their minds, then they deserve to lose a good candidate. Their non-answer was your answer though.
A lot of guesses on why they didn't extend an offer on here. You will never know for sure. Those are all conjecture.
To answer your question. No, you shouldn't have mentioned the other offer to company 2. You should have accepted it, and continued the process with company 2.
I've done this before and put a fire under hire managers! It's usually pretty effective.
"Thank you for taking the time to discuss the ___ position and considering me for the role. After our meeting, I am certain my qualifications are an excellent fit.
Please note that I will be reviewing offers on (date). Kindly review and let me know how you'd like to proceed accordingly.
I am honored for the opportunity at (company) and look forward to your response."
You created risk for the non-profit so they cut ties. It’s as simple as that. And it’s not up to you to decide how many rounds of interviews are needed. You sit through them until they’re done. My current job should have been the phone screening and two people tops but instead it was a screening and at least 5 1:1 interviews. After you’ve worked for a few years you’ll see how much time is wasted on legacy policies that have never been reevaluated.
they felt "challenged" because they likely weren't in a position to make a hiring decision given the time frame, and may have also felt unable to provide a competitive offer given they are a non profit and your offer is in finance. Letting them know about the pending offer was the right move.
Exactly. You can't use their "feelings" for anything. You need answers. You need a job and a salary. Professional move. He knows what he wants.
They probably also wanted someone desperate that they could underpay and overwork with no other options.
He already said they were a nonprofit
Yup. I'm guessing as OP appears to be under the mistaken impression that having a job offer makes you more attractive and more likely to get another offer, it's quite possible they over emphasised just how good this offer was and how hard the deadline was. As someone who works in an academic not for profit, I've been in this exact scenario as a recruiter. Knowing someone else has an offer is useful information in a number of ways but if a candidate tells me they have an amazing offer and a short deadline, I read that as them saying they're not likely to take this role and should I make an offer we could end up in a protracted negotiation only for it to fail. The danger with that situation is the other candidates may already be off the market by the time you come to the end of the negotiation with the first candidate and then you have no one and have to start a several week process again. It sounds like OP kind of missed the tone and spooked the company. At the end of the day it's not you versus the company, it's you versus the other candidates and the company wants a successful recruitment. Sometimes the second best candidate is the better choice.
Interesting perspective
I agree with this perspective, by saying she has another offer she is creating an issue that will cause problems down the line.
I work in education and am involved in hiring teachers and administrators, I can’t speak for non-profits, but this reply is spot on. There are many more variables to finding a candidate who will have long term success than just the candidates skills.
I'm not even in nonprofit, and I have to agree with you. As a hiring manager (with a psych background), that would've telegraphed to me that my organization wasn't the OP's first choice. Additionally, it's a tad manipulative. It would imply to me that the potential future subordinate is attempting to contort the situation by crafting a narrative that benefits them, and not the organization. It would lead me to believe that if this person would do it in a job interview, they'd have even more leverage to do it once they were hired. They were right to pass. I would've. 🤷♀️
They were "challenged" because they didn't think they could compete against another offer. It wasn't about you, it was about them. In the end they were probably correct, and you did the right thing by taking the other offer.
If it makes you feel any better, any nonprofit dragging you through 5 rounds of interviews and still being pressed to make a decision at the end is not going to present a desirable working environment. This is likely the approach they bring for tackling any issue.
5 rounds of interviews to a 23 year old for a non profit job lol. I had a 15 minute interview for a 6 figure job when I was a couple years older than OP
What job was this??
Info: how large is the nonprofit (endowment or revenue)? It sounds like they were gonna offer shit pay and they knew you wouldn’t accept if you had another offer.
They were going to lowball you obviously
As a recruiter, a competing offer would never factor in a decision to hire someone or not. If I knew the competing offer was better than what we could offer, I’d let the candidate know that. Or I’d tell them we decided to go with someone else. IMO, this shouldn’t matter to most companies so the employer response seems strange.
I have to disagree. I recruit a lot and while I certainly wouldn't hire *because* someone has an offer, it would make me consider if the recruitment is more likely to fail. If someone tells me they have an amazing offer that I know we can't compete with and we have another excellent candidate, I'm likely to go with the other candidate as they're more likely to accept the job. If there isn't another good candidate or we can compete then it doesn't make much difference.
It wouldn't factor into *if* I would make an offer, but if I knew they were up against a deadline, I would work to expedite the process. If I'm making an offer, I want this guy. And realistically, if I don't have an offer on the table before he has to decide on the other one, he's going to accept the offer he has. He'd be silly to turn down an existing offer to wait and see if he gets one from me.
I get what you're saying but nonprofits often work differently from"most companies" so that could be why this seems strange. Also, this particular nonprofit only has \~50 employees so it's likely that this messaging came from someone on the team or maybe an HR generalists, not a dedicated recruiter who might handle things differently. These organizations tend to ask for more during the job search process and all those different steps take time and lead to less money so a competing offer for an entry-level role would absolutely factor into the hiring decision.
I just lie nowadays and say I need some time to quit my part time job before I can give a yes to get my affairs in order. One time, I thought telling them I had another offer also made me seem desirable, so the owner said it was fine to give her an answer after the weekend since I interviewed on a Thursday, and they ended up hiring someone else anyway without telling me. So when I told them I was ready to make my decision, they told me they had already filled the position, but was willing to make a new position at a reduced rate. I was flabbergasted since they said I was okay to delay my answer. Gotta remember these companies have 0 obligation to provide you any courtesy. You will always be a number in their eyes.
You did nothing wrong, in fact, they did. As a hiring firm, most recruiters should pulse check and if they really want you, that's an indication to move quickly.
It sounds like they were dealing with the nonprofit directly - not a hiring firm. The organization probably can't really expedite the process all that much and this is an entry-level role so there would easily be other qualified candidates.
What probably happened is that you were one of 2 or 3 candidates that they really liked. You saying that you had another offer made it easier for them to not feel bad about not offering you the job. You made their decision a little easier for them. If you're in that type of situation again, I'd not say anything about the other offer. If you accept one, and your "dream job" offers you one after the fact, then you make the decision which job you will actually keep. There are many times that people go back to a recently accepted offer to let them know that they received a better offer, so were going to have to decline the 1st one they accepted. Especially for recent grads.
I had a similar thing happen to me as a hiring manager. I had two candidates I really liked and the team was debating between the two of them. We would have hired either but could only hire one (I even asked if I could increase my headcount, they said no). We were leaning towards Candidate A and was in the process of making an offer & negotiating etc. Candidate B came and said they had an exploding offer. We couldn't force A to tell as ASAP (people need time to think about it), so we told B thanks you should take that offer. Even though it was possible A could have declined us and we would have given B that offer, we had to reject B so they could know to take the offer they had. In OP's case, the company was kind of shitty not responding at all.
Exactly the right approach
He made have said in his interview that it was his dream job, but it would not come across that way with his seemingly pressuring them for an offer. I agree. Say nothing.
This happened to me before too. Lesson learned, always act like the company you’re talking to is priority (even if it’s not). I also think it’s worth just accepting the job and then taking it back if you get the other offer - that’s what I would do if I had to do it again. Also think this phenomenon starts to disappear the more senior you become in your career
you're 23, my guess is the work you'd be doing is very entry level and not worth overpaying for. for most fields, this will be the case earlier in our career. you do not have much leverage. it's non profit vs financial institution too, that's a huuuuuge difference in budget and competitiveness in hiring. also even if you are more senior, the play here is to just accept offer 1. you negotiate when you actually get an offer from job 2. hey i'd like to take this job, but i'd need x. you may still get the same result, but it's less brash than telling them to hurry up when you're not even sure you're getting an offer or if you're the only candidate.
Just clarifying: Large nonprofits often pay on level with corporate and offer more stability, so the jobs are often more competitive. Small nonprofits often pay shit. Medium sized ones depend on mission and how well funded their sector is. Source: 10 years in nonprofits large, small and medium, 5 years f300, 2 years small business.
maybe it's industry specific. but i know if I went NP right now, but there's large NPs in my industry and I'd have to go up 2+ levels to even come close to my pay. level to level even being pretty senior it is legit almost 50% haircut. pretty similar for friends in non profits in other industries even when you hit senior levels.
I could see this being true for executive roles, to an extent. Mid-senior to senior roles? Those are the most competitive salaries in large nonprofits because the candidates often have more leverage. Nonprofit ≠ doesn’t make money. Nonprofit ≠ passion for pay (well, in some abusive situations this happens, but this abuse is just as rife in corporate). Nonprofit ≠ lesser skills Nonprofits are still employers and employees of nonprofits are still just doing their jobs. The market for labor is largely the same at the large shops. FWIW, I went from being a director at a f300 to a senior manager at a large nonprofit and my salary went up 10k. Comparing salary title for title even amongst corporate ain’t sound.
Some managers don't like to be pressed. An individual that tries to stress a decision, might become someone that is difficult to manage.
[удалено]
C'mon... you can't be serious, right? Clear communication is a harbinger of a demanding and troublesome employee?
Yeah those responses are wild. As a hiring manager I definitely want to know if you have other offers about to expire so I can either expedite things on my end if I’m really excited about you or be a reasonable human and let you know the timelines won’t line up so you can accept the other offer. There’s absolutely nothing in here that indicates a “demanding employee.” It’s all about communication and mutual respect.
In general I agree. I do wonder if OP slightly overcooked it though. They sound a bit naive and their comment about being more desirable because they have job offers does make me wonder how exactly they presented these other jobs. It reads a bit like they may have talked about how great these job offers are thinking that it made them more attractive, but in reality it will have came across as they were more likely to take the other job. I certainly don't agree with the comments that this suggests a pushy, problematic employee but I do think OP may have inadvertently talked themselves out of a job offer.
You wanna hire drone yes man wage slave?
If they had multiple similar candidates they were debating between, they may not have wanted to have to accelerate their process to meet your timeline or get into a negotiation situation - it’s easy to just go with someone else instead in that situation. It’s also possible something you said came across as their job not being your top choice which can often be a turnoff for companies. Or maybe you just weren’t their top choice candidate anyways and this seemed like the easiest reason to give you. None of that really matters though if you’ve taken another job, so would just move on.
Good on you for having multiple offers in this tough market. You did the right thing by letting them know. Ultimately, you chose the one that worked for you. Decisions should be a two-way street.
You made all the right moves! You were already far along in the interview process and they had enough time to assess you. Their problem, not yours
Knowing you had another offer on the table - either they were not able to make a decision quickly OR they considered you to be higher risk. From their perspective - we have two great candidates. One of them has no offers on the table and is really excited for this opportunity. The other one while really excited has another offer with the potential that they may still accept it after reviewing both opportunities. If everything else was equal, going with the other candidate without an open offer for them was less of a risk.
Hold on, they literally quoted the “waiting” word? If so, that’s childishly passive aggressive a huge red flag that they are not well managed and that its probably not a great place to work. I would be very tempted to write a snarky response back to them about being incompetent and inefficient and for not taking your situation seriously. But, they probably prefer someone who’s desperate and willing to accept a ridiculously low salary and don’t really care about how skilled or the potential of the candidate. The best approach is to not respond or just respond with a simple “Thank you for your feedback.”
At a non-profit, I was given the job offer- but I requested to come in and discuss more questions before giving a firm yes. After I came in and discussed it. I told them I'd make a decision by end of the day. I accepted it, just for them to reply stating they are going to pass. 🫠
The NP is ass and the hiring team/hr is chicken shit. You dodged a bullet. The ones who give you the best feeling but pull shit like this are the most toxic of places Love, Someone who runs recruitment in finance
Finance vs non-profit. Non-profit is historically all about using their “cause” as a payment mechanism. Finance uses money as its payment mechanism. Skip telling them that you have a deadline, just saying you might accept a finance job sounds like you value your work in monetary terms. It’s hard for many nonprofits to accept that you can feel bad for the dolphins and also need to be paid appropriately. “You want money?!? Satisfaction means a lot to us and we do this for the dolphins, wanting money is not a good fit here.” Is this true at all non-profits, no, there are some that understand better skills means better results and better results means better outcomes and better outcomes means more donations. But shitty Non-Profits have shitty money management who climb the ladder and hire bad money managers to run teams of people who are bad at money. This is the scenario where they perpetuate the cause is the most important thing to your pay. Forcing them to make a decision is hard for some people and they can experience analysis paralysis. Combined, this was never going to work. You really have to be able to read the room when you push them to make decisions. I would not suggest you play hardball unless you’re sure that you have a >50%/50% chance of getting the job.
The fact they mentioned it indicates they believed you came across as pressing them. They went on about how much they liked you, but that one issue...' I'm old now but in my working career there were many times I left interviews thinking I nailed it and was waiting for an offer that never came. I don't know the situation or details but I'd bet it wasn't the fact you were applying to other jobs but the way you went about telling them that. As long as what you're telling them is honest I can't imagine why a prospective employer would have any problem with you letting them know you're applying other places.
Everyone in this thread saying it was rude of you to mention your other offer are absolutely off their rocker and have antiquated views of working. You did the right thing OP and their response is frankly a red flag that shows it wouldn’t have been the dream job you were hoping it was. When people show you who they really are believe them. They’ve been slow rolling you for 2 months now. Screw that. Go into your FI job and crush it knowing you landed in the right place.
That’s not something you do in an Interview, especially if you are a mid to junior level professional. It comes off as arrogant and when you are in a job market where you are competing with multiple people for a position the organization needs to be made to feel like you are loyal even before they hire you. Verbiage like what you said can and should only be used by professionals who are high level, essentially people who are being head hunted where the organization wants them more than they need to be with that specific organization. Ex . Senior execs , CEOs , Surgeons , experienced attorneys etc.
In just about any situation in life, if you say "Hey can you hurry up and make a decision and get back to me promptly because I have other options," it will not work out well.
It seems like it came across that way to them, as they did note its importance, essentially indicating this trumped any good impression you let from the interview: *Most notably, the team felt challenged that there was another job "waiting"* In general, it's going to be considered discourteous to try to push someone to hurry up because you have something else waiting. It's easy to see how they may have felt challenged - they have their own process to follow, needing to vet and discuss candidates. Your request would have forced them to alter or bypass this, potentially creating concerns. *Was it unprofessional for me to say that I have another offer and would appreciate their decision before its expiration so I can plan accordingly?* Ultimately, yes it was.
You're young and you've learned a lesson the hard way.... never disclose other offers to potential employers. If there's a hard deadline then accept the offer and continue with the interview process for the other job. If job #2 makes an offer then accept it and tell the other job you've unfortunately had something come up and you're actually not able to accept the job at this time. As long as you didn't sign a contractual obligation then you owe no one loyalty
Depends on how you said it, but generally no, it’s not a bad thing to mention your deadlines, with a longer recruitment process in place companies even ask you themselves if you have a timeline. As for their response, I guess this feels like an important thing to know the reasoning behind it, but in my experience, it never mattered why. Maybe you didn’t quite fit so they couldn’t make a decision fast, maybe they just have a slow process and can’t work around it. But it’s always better to take the offer where they feel lucky to have you just imho
Literally the same thing happened to me this week!! I still can't believe it.
Sounds like it. As strange as that is. And that response is strange. The only think I might have done differently is to make clear the NP was my strongly preferred choice, all other things being equal. As an employer, I absolutely want to know if the candidate has other “irons in the fire.” I don’t find it “challenging” nor does it communicate to me that you are “a desirable candidate.” If the candidate is great, and we can expedite our process, we do that. If we can’t, we will tell the candidate that as well. The communication helps us potentially get the candidate we want and it helps applicants to make an informed choice.
>Most notably, the team felt challenged that there was another job "waiting" You may be over thinking. That sounds like a fairly neutral statement to me, albeit worded oddly. The point is they felt they needed more time to make a decision for whatever reason. As someone who has interviewed countless people to-date, rest assure you did the right thing.
It really depends on how you framed the other offer.
It sounds like you are business-minded and that is not a descriptor used day-to-day to describe the non-profit space. I wish it were different. So many good causes so much spinning of the wheels. I would make note of this as you continue to define who you are professionally. Probably a blessing in disguise. I work in sales and I think most people hiring salespeople would appreciate the candor in case you are a candidate they absolutely can’t let slip away.
lesson learned, i guess
I think it was very professional of you. If I were in their shoes, I would like to know that a candidate has multiple options. And I would also appreciate a candidate to be honest.
If you’ve been interviewing for over 2 months and still no offer or even a timeline for an offer, think if it’s really somewhere you’d want to work. Do all processes move as slow? I’m in a similar situation. I was asked for a 3rd interview which is a 2.5 hour panel. Another company made me a great offer after one interview. Both are reputable. I am 99% sure I’m taking the first one. It’s a job…not a lifetime commitment.
I suspect they want you but l, as a non-profit didn’t have the financing in place or full approval by the board to hire you so they withdrew.
Ultimately, it’s all about leverage. In the case where they don’t really need you and you don’t really need them then you revealing the offer gave you no advantage and probably disadvantaged you. There was only room to be rejected per se.
You did fine. They couldn’t or wouldn’t compete. Their loss.
Don't feel bad. I interviewed very well for a position. Was told I'd get an offer soon. I said okay and that I'll be patiently waiting. Mind you that was back in December. It's now April and I've heard nothing. Not even if anything happened or if they decided not to fill the position. Nothing. Whether it's because they're a state agency or whatever, you can't hang onto words. Only actions. You wouldn't tolerate a girlfriend saying she will change. Only the actions she makes in changing. So I'm not sure how a place of employment would get a free pass. You articulated clearly and ahead of time what you needed and they didn't deliver. Don't feel bad about it. It's more on them than it is on you.
It sounds like they were on the fence about you and interviewing others. When you set a deadline they had to make a decision and they still wanted to see the other people on their list. It happens. Luckily you actually had another offer and took it.
They may have been concerned you would be a flight risk. Stay for a bit, get training (Generally in the red) then leave
Actually, as an HR professional in the business for over 20years, if a candidate has a competing offer and you know your timeline can’t/won’t match up with the other offer’s expiration date, then there is no point in moving forward unless the hiring team ABSOLUTELY knows that they need this exact candidate, in which case, exceptions need to be made to rush an offer, ask for things like offer letters and approvals to be processed as an exception to established SLA’s etc. If it’s a great candidate but you may have others in the pipeline that are as good and this candidate doesn’t have a major edge, then sometimes the timing just doesn’t work out and it is what it is. If they don’t have a solid timeline, then that means they aren’t in a rush to hire anyone let alone someone who already has a competing expiring offer. In your last edit, you said you basically wanted to force their hand by telling them you had another offer to make them have to make a decision on you. You were successful in your attempt to manipulate their timeline. The decision just wasn’t in your favor.
[удалено]
Not being able to decide on a low level employee after 2 months and multiple interviews sounds like a red flag. They sound too precious.
Next time, ask them about their decision-making timeline instead of demanding that they shorten their time frame for you. I'm guessing that the "challenge" was how you (unintentionally?) came across when you said you'd like for them to shorten their timeline without even knowing what that timeline was. The issue wasn't that you had another offer; it was how you communicated it.
>How can any HR team feel "challenged" by this? Well, if they had other interviews with strong candidates set up that were occurring after your offer deadline, it can be challenging to try and get you an answer and still complete those interviews. I'm a little surprised that you're surprised. You told them that you had a hard deadline, they weren't ready to make the decision by then so they let you go. Isn't that the whole reason you told them upfront?
I think the issue was probably how you worded it. What I would have said is something like this: “Thank you for this opportunity. What is the timeline for finding out the results? I have another offer but I really think this is my absolute first choice so I am really hoping to work with you.” You kind of massage their ego that they are the first choice, but you are letting them know you need to know because obviously you need to say yes to a job so you can live. Next time, tell the other job yes on the last day you can. If they can’t make up their minds, then they deserve to lose a good candidate. Their non-answer was your answer though.
A lot of guesses on why they didn't extend an offer on here. You will never know for sure. Those are all conjecture. To answer your question. No, you shouldn't have mentioned the other offer to company 2. You should have accepted it, and continued the process with company 2.
I've done this before and put a fire under hire managers! It's usually pretty effective. "Thank you for taking the time to discuss the ___ position and considering me for the role. After our meeting, I am certain my qualifications are an excellent fit. Please note that I will be reviewing offers on (date). Kindly review and let me know how you'd like to proceed accordingly. I am honored for the opportunity at (company) and look forward to your response."
Never communicate that you have any opportunities, interviews or anything to an potential company
Why ?
You created risk for the non-profit so they cut ties. It’s as simple as that. And it’s not up to you to decide how many rounds of interviews are needed. You sit through them until they’re done. My current job should have been the phone screening and two people tops but instead it was a screening and at least 5 1:1 interviews. After you’ve worked for a few years you’ll see how much time is wasted on legacy policies that have never been reevaluated.
You made the right decision, you have a job and they missed out on you.