imple truth of it.

By understanding that the offer had been reviewed with him, the salary, the benefits, the perks, insurance, and other details relating to the job, there was an expectation by the hiring authority that the candidate had already done his professional diligence, as illustrated by the candidate's attendance at the final interview. Having done so, by delaying his acceptance of the job offer, it expressed a flaw in the candidate's decision making process. It was assumed that after three interviews and the job discover those interactions suggested, the candidate should not have hesitated to execute the decision to accept the job right then and there, and should have negotiated a start date. To do any less than that told the hiring authority that the candidate had a wea

Recently, one of the job candidates we recruited and presented on a retail operations job search attended a final interview with the hiring authority. The company who had initiated the job search was in an expansion mode, so required two skilled operations specialists, and the candidate we had recruited and presented offered a nearly exact match to the skills the company was seeking.

The first three interviews went well, the candidate's background and personality and business strategies were a good fit for the approach utilized by the hiring company. Because the candidate had already agreed to and signed off on a comprehensive financial and criminal background check -- the check revealed solid finances and no criminal activities -- we felt confident that a formal job offer would be made at the final interview. Plus, we had verified with the hiring authority directly that, assuming the final interview didn't expose some question or another regarding the candidate, the job offer would be made verbally at the final interview with a written offer to follow by mail the next day.

Trying to be thorough, we further verified with the candidate that they would accept a job offer if extended at that final interview; even discussed the exact income range that the offer would cover, having discussed that with the hiring authority when they confirmed that an offer was likely. We didn't want our client to be surprised by making a job offer that was rejected by the job candidate. Nor did we want the candidate to feel they had been slighted by receiving a job offer that was not in the income range they were expecting.

Then, to top off our efforts to avert unforseen delays, we double checked both the client and the candidate on the day of the final interview, to see if either had changed their minds. Both confirmed their steadfastness to pursue the arrangement; so we reassured each to the other. What, then, happened to have me bring up this circumstance as an example? Well, the offer was made, as expected, and the candidate thanked the hiring authority, said they'd have to think about it, discuss it with their spouse, then get back with an answer in a couple days. At that point, the deal effectively died. Immediately following the interview the client called me and withdrew the job offer, as it had been a verbal offer that was expected to be accepted immediately. He left me with the task of informing the candidate.

In my follow up conversation with the candidate, the candidate was taken by surprise that the offer was withdrawn. After all, he cooperated with the interview process, attended all the interviews, even submitted himself to a deep financial and criminal background check. Add to that his genuine interest and excellent match to the requirements of the hiring firm. I asked him why he didn't accept the job immediately. He explained that it was professional diligence to consider a job offer, discuss it with the key players -- like his wife -- and then formally report the decision. He couldn't understand what happened. Why would they make a job offer just to take it off the table within a couple of hours? I explained the simple truth of it.

By understanding that the offer had been reviewed with him, the salary, the benefits, the perks, insurance, and other details relating to the job, there was an expectation by the hiring authority that the candidate had already done his professional diligence, as illustrated by the candidate's attendance at the final interview. Having done so, by delaying his acceptance of the job offer, it expressed a flaw in the candidate's decision making process. It was assumed that after three interviews and the job discover those interactions suggested, the candidate should not have hesitated to execute the decision to accept the job right then and there, and should have negotiated a start date. To do any less than that told the hiring authority that the candidate had a weak

e made at the final interview. Plus, we had verified with the hiring authority directly that, assuming the final interview didn't expose some question or another regarding the candidate, the job offer would be made verbally at the final interview with a written offer to follow by mail the next day.

Trying to be thorough, we further verified with the candidate that they would accept a job offer if extended at that final interview; even discussed the exact income range that the offer would cover, having discussed that with the hiring authority when they confirmed that an offer was likely. We didn't want our client to be surprised by making a job offer that was rejected by the job candidate. Nor did we want the candidate to feel they had been slighted by receiving a job offer that was not in the income range they were expecting.

Then, to top off our efforts to avert unforseen delays, we double checked both the client and the candidate on the day of the final interview, to see if either had changed their minds. Both confirmed their steadfastness to pursue the arrangement; so we reassured each to the other. What, then, happened to have me bring up this circumstance as an example? Well, the offer was made, as expected, and the candidate thanked the hiring authority, said they'd have to think about it, discuss it with their spouse, then get back with an answer in a couple days. At that point, the deal effectively died. Immediately following the interview the client called me and withdrew the job offer, as it had been a verbal offer that was expected to be accepted immediately. He left me with the task of informing the candidate.

In my follow up conversation with the candidate, the candidate was taken by surprise that the offer was withdrawn. After all, he cooperated with the interview process, attended all the interviews, even submitted himself to a deep financial and criminal background check. Add to that his genuine interest and excellent match to the requirements of the hiring firm. I asked him why he didn't accept the job immediately. He explained that it was professional diligence to consider a job offer, discuss it with the key players -- like his wife -- and then formally report the decision. He couldn't understand what happened. Why would they make a job offer just to take it off the table within a couple of hours? I explained the simple truth of it.

By understanding that the offer had been reviewed with him, the salary, the benefits, the perks, insurance, and other details relating to the job, there was an expectation by the hiring authority that the candidate had already done his professional diligence, as illustrated by the candidate's attendance at the final interview. Having done so, by delaying his acceptance of the job offer, it expressed a flaw in the candidate's decision making process. It was assumed that after three interviews and the job discover those interactions suggested, the candidate should not have hesitated to execute the decision to accept the job right then and there, and should have negotiated a start date. To do any less than that told the hiring authority that the candidate had a wea

not in the income range they were expecting.

Then, to top off our efforts to avert unforseen delays, we double checked both the client and the candidate on the day of the final interview, to see if either had changed their minds. Both confirmed their steadfastness to pursue the arrangement; so we reassured each to the other. What, then, happened to have me bring up this circumstance as an example? Well, the offer was made, as expected, and the candidate thanked the hiring authority, said they'd have to think about it, discuss it with their spouse, then get back with an answer in a couple days. At that point, the deal effectively died. Immediately following the interview the client called me and withdrew the job offer, as it had been a verbal offer that was expected to be accepted immediately. He left me with the task of informing the candidate.

In my follow up conversation with the candidate, the candidate was taken by surprise that the offer was withdrawn. After all, he cooperated with the interview process, attended all the interviews, even submitted himself to a deep financial and criminal background check. Add to that his genuine interest and excellent match to the requirements of the hiring firm. I asked him why he didn't accept the job immediately. He explained that it was professional diligence to consider a job offer, discuss it with the key players -- like his wife -- and then formally report the decision. He couldn't understand what happened. Why would they make a job offer just to take it off the table within a couple of hours? I explained the simple truth of it.

By understanding that the offer had been reviewed with him, the salary, the benefits, the perks, insurance, and other details relating to the job, there was an expectation by the hiring authority that the candidate had already done his professional diligence, as illustrated by the candidate's attendance at the final interview. Having done so, by delaying his acceptance of the job offer, it expressed a flaw in the candidate's decision making process. It was assumed that after three interviews and the job discover those interactions suggested, the candidate should not have hesitated to execute the decision to accept the job right then and there, and should have negotiated a start date. To do any less than that told the hiring authority that the candidate had a wea

immediately. He left me with the task of informing the candidate.

In my follow up conversation with the candidate, the candidate was taken by surprise that the offer was withdrawn. After all, he cooperated with the interview process, attended all the interviews, even submitted himself to a deep financial and criminal background check. Add to that his genuine interest and excellent match to the requirements of the hiring firm. I asked him why he didn't accept the job immediately. He explained that it was professional diligence to consider a job offer, discuss it with the key players -- like his wife -- and then formally report the decision. He couldn't understand what happened. Why would they make a job offer just to take it off the table within a couple of hours? I explained the simple truth of it.

By understanding that the offer had been reviewed with him, the salary, the benefits, the perks, insurance, and other details relating to the job, there was an expectation by the hiring authority that the candidate had already done his professional diligence, as illustrated by the candidate's attendance at the final interview. Having done so, by delaying his acceptance of the job offer, it expressed a flaw in the candidate's decision making process. It was assumed that after three interviews and the job discover those interactions suggested, the candidate should not have hesitated to execute the decision to accept the job right then and there, and should have negotiated a start date. To do any less than that told the hiring authority that the candidate had a wea

imple truth of it.

By understanding that the offer had been reviewed with him, the salary, the benefits, the perks, insurance, and other details relating to the job, there was an expectation by the hiring authority that the candidate had already done his professional diligence, as illustrated by the candidate's attendance at the final interview. Having done so, by delaying his acceptance of the job offer, it expressed a flaw in the candidate's decision making process. It was assumed that after three interviews and the job discover those interactions suggested, the candidate should not have hesitated to execute the decision to accept the job right then and there, and should have negotiated a start date. To do any less than that told the hiring authority that the candidate had a weakened decision making process. Okay, maybe you or I wouldn't come to that same conclusion, but remember that the two people the client firm was to hire would be responsible for tens-of-millions of dollars, so they were taking no chances.

What this example tells us, is that once the offer is made, especially if it is proceeded by a detailed examination of the job offer elements, don't delay in accepting the job. If you have questions, ask them. If you are hesitant, don't tease the hiring firm, be certain whether you want to pursue the job or to leave it alone. If you have other job offers in hand or are expected, tell everyone involved. The prevailing wisdom is to play things close to the chest and accumulate job offers till you get the one you like the best, or negotiate your way to a better deal. Those strategies may work in some environments, but in my experience, decisive action and honest disclosure, when it comes to where you stand in relation to a job offer, will keep your resume in the running for the sort of job you are seeking.

BEST OF LUCK IN YOUR JOB SEARCH