Posted by D. Daniel Sokol
In my last post I discussed one of my biggest pet peeves about entry level hiring - situations in which faculties puff (at best) about the inter-disciplinary nature of their school. I want to focus this post on my biggest pet peeve I have regarding candidates - the disingenuous interest.
There are many factors that go into a candidate's decision-making: location, pre-existing social network (family and friends), relationship constraints (job of spouse/significant other), money, prestige, exploding offer, course load, course selection, etc. A candidate oftentimes has multiple goals and there are any number of good outcomes regarding what school at which to accept an offer. I do not take such acceptances of offers elsewhere badly. I am happy for the candidate because they found the best possible fit for them given the complex circumstances under which they had to make their decision.
There are a number of people I met from various schools when I was on the market who are truly wonderful, smart and interesting people. I have stayed in touch with a number of these people and developed friendships with them, even though I did not end up at their school. Some have become mentors and provide very good feedback for drafts of articles.
My only piece of advice for candidates is to not outright lie to faculty. If you tell a faculty "I would accept an offer from your school on the spot" and then do you not do so but actually take your time, play the market and go somewhere else, this is very poor form. In an academic world of interlinking social networks, word will get out quickly that you are a jerk and a liar.
I have to admit that when I read about the entire process, one thing that strikes me is that just like law firm hiring, there is a lot of bad behavior on both sides that no one likes. I often wonder about the root causes of it all, especially in connection with empirical ethics studies.
Posted by: Stephen M (Ethesis) | November 02, 2009 at 04:52 PM