Dear all,
Why do candidates hide the real reason for leaving their current job?
While training job aspirants for interviews, they are often advised not to reveal the true reason for leaving their current company when asked by HR or any senior authority. Instead, they are encouraged to say they are leaving to pursue better opportunities and handle higher-order challenges. This type of response is believed to demonstrate positive thinking.
It is common knowledge that many people leave their jobs due to frustration. This frustration can stem from overwork, bullying by seniors, unreasonable targets, workplace politics, marginalization due to caste, creed, religion, groupism, underpayment, or unjustified work relative to their stature. However, HR often prefers that these real reasons remain undisclosed.
Why does HR prefer false replies to the truth?
Against this backdrop, the question arises: Why does HR prefer false replies over the truth? Is telling lies considered part of positive thinking? Why is telling the truth viewed as negative thinking?
Can HR/Training professionals share their views?
Thanks,
Dinesh Divekar
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)
Amend(0)
8074Why do candidates hide the real reason for leaving their current job?
While training job aspirants for interviews, they are often advised not to reveal the true reason for leaving their current company when asked by HR or any senior authority. Instead, they are encouraged to say they are leaving to pursue better opportunities and handle higher-order challenges. This type of response is believed to demonstrate positive thinking.
It is common knowledge that many people leave their jobs due to frustration. This frustration can stem from overwork, bullying by seniors, unreasonable targets, workplace politics, marginalization due to caste, creed, religion, groupism, underpayment, or unjustified work relative to their stature. However, HR often prefers that these real reasons remain undisclosed.
Why does HR prefer false replies to the truth?
Against this backdrop, the question arises: Why does HR prefer false replies over the truth? Is telling lies considered part of positive thinking? Why is telling the truth viewed as negative thinking?
Can HR/Training professionals share their views?
Thanks,
Dinesh Divekar
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
The Dilemma of Sharing Past Employment Issues
Yes, it is true. Candidates who have had issues with their past employer often hesitate to share these with prospective employers for several reasons:
1) The probability of getting hired by the new employer becomes remote.
2) They wish to avoid creating a negative image.
On the other hand, even if they share the real reason with HR:
1) They are viewed as troublemakers, even if they are technically sound and good at their work.
2) HR may not consider their application since there might be similar work patterns in their organization (like extended work hours or unrealistic work targets).
3) They are considered not to be good team players.
4) HR foresees that they may create issues within their organization as well.
Above all, the primary reason is that the new HR doesn't have the time to investigate whether the issues shared by the candidate are genuine, whether the real problem lies with the candidate, or if it is related to colleagues or supervisors of their past employer.
From India, Madras
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Yes, it is true. Candidates who have had issues with their past employer often hesitate to share these with prospective employers for several reasons:
1) The probability of getting hired by the new employer becomes remote.
2) They wish to avoid creating a negative image.
On the other hand, even if they share the real reason with HR:
1) They are viewed as troublemakers, even if they are technically sound and good at their work.
2) HR may not consider their application since there might be similar work patterns in their organization (like extended work hours or unrealistic work targets).
3) They are considered not to be good team players.
4) HR foresees that they may create issues within their organization as well.
Above all, the primary reason is that the new HR doesn't have the time to investigate whether the issues shared by the candidate are genuine, whether the real problem lies with the candidate, or if it is related to colleagues or supervisors of their past employer.
From India, Madras
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear Mr. V.M. Lakshminarayanan,
You have provided a response to my post but have not addressed my questions. Why does HR prefer to live in a world of pretensions? Why are lies accepted over the truth? Is this a weakness on the part of HR, or is it that HR has yet to grasp the concept of "positive thinking"?
Thanks,
Dinesh Divekar
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
You have provided a response to my post but have not addressed my questions. Why does HR prefer to live in a world of pretensions? Why are lies accepted over the truth? Is this a weakness on the part of HR, or is it that HR has yet to grasp the concept of "positive thinking"?
Thanks,
Dinesh Divekar
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear Colleagues, The poster of this question should have clarified the nature and scope of this poser. Does he mean by 'pretensions' only during the tenure of his service in a company or only at the time of citing reasons for quitting the job? Does he mean all HR persons are pretentious as a matter of habit in their approach to their job responsibilities? I am raising a counter-question as to who does not act pretentious on occasions for purely selfish gains? Why is only HR singled out? While so-called top leaders in the fields of religion, science and technology, judiciary, education, politics, and every walk of life are found deeply immersed in pretensions every now and then, singling out the HR profession is unjustified. All those who indulge in pretensions and gain advantages at the cost of others deserve to be condemned, including HR.
Regards, Vinayak Nagarkar HR Consultant
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Regards, Vinayak Nagarkar HR Consultant
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear Mr. Vinayak Nagarkar,
My post is self-explanatory; hence, I do not deem it necessary to provide any further explanation. My point is limited to the replies given by the interviewees during job interviews. They are often advised not to disclose the real reasons for leaving their previous jobs as HR might perceive it as negative thinking on the part of the job candidate.
Thanks,
Dinesh Divekar
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
My post is self-explanatory; hence, I do not deem it necessary to provide any further explanation. My point is limited to the replies given by the interviewees during job interviews. They are often advised not to disclose the real reasons for leaving their previous jobs as HR might perceive it as negative thinking on the part of the job candidate.
Thanks,
Dinesh Divekar
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Let me start with the caveat that I am not holding a brief for HR, or for that matter, any other profession. Having made that clear, I find the title of the debate itself is rather pretentious, if not facetious. The narrative below proceeds on the following fundamental assumptions:
1. The HR is guilty of deliberately misguiding the job aspirants to lie to get a job.
2. The interviewer is gullible enough to be led up the garden path.
3. The interviewee is an unwary victim who deserves our sympathy.
My Take on the Assumptions
1. A sweeping assumption that an HR professional is by instinct dishonest is unwarranted in the absence of any empirical evidence to support this view. It is possible that some people may have anecdotal experiences to the contrary or there are those HR professionals who may be indulging in such practices. To paint the entire profession with such a broad brush is at best a travesty. There could be exceptions just as there are exceptions in every professional field.
2. An experienced HR professional trains the job aspirants to respect the interviewer and his credentials. It is a common refrain of an HR guy in every coaching exercise of job aspirants to be honest and, more importantly, not to fib. Of course, there could be exceptions; but they are just that – exceptions. A man does not become an HR professional merely because of his designation.
3. At the end of the day, an interview is all about the interviewee and his capabilities, including his value systems. Among one of the virtues that is expected of a job aspirant is his ability to express himself not only fluently but also in a civilized manner. That calls for some diplomacy, restraint, and a degree of decency with which he talks about his previous employer and his previous boss. Someone who does not care for these niceties may not be a good employee to start with. That is a lesson in decency and not necessarily an exercise in concealing the truth.
Finally, a candidate must be honest in his views and about his past. A wrong choice of person for a particular job may not only affect the employer but the employee himself. The candidate in an interview should be able to separate the issue from the person even while commenting on his previous employers. It is fallacious to say that the HR tutors the job aspirant to lie. But in the name of truth, a candidate also is not allowed to carry his dirty linen from his previous job to someone else's boardroom. It is an HR man's duty to preempt that.
The Defense rests.
From India, Nasik
Acknowledge(1)Amend(0)
1. The HR is guilty of deliberately misguiding the job aspirants to lie to get a job.
2. The interviewer is gullible enough to be led up the garden path.
3. The interviewee is an unwary victim who deserves our sympathy.
My Take on the Assumptions
1. A sweeping assumption that an HR professional is by instinct dishonest is unwarranted in the absence of any empirical evidence to support this view. It is possible that some people may have anecdotal experiences to the contrary or there are those HR professionals who may be indulging in such practices. To paint the entire profession with such a broad brush is at best a travesty. There could be exceptions just as there are exceptions in every professional field.
2. An experienced HR professional trains the job aspirants to respect the interviewer and his credentials. It is a common refrain of an HR guy in every coaching exercise of job aspirants to be honest and, more importantly, not to fib. Of course, there could be exceptions; but they are just that – exceptions. A man does not become an HR professional merely because of his designation.
3. At the end of the day, an interview is all about the interviewee and his capabilities, including his value systems. Among one of the virtues that is expected of a job aspirant is his ability to express himself not only fluently but also in a civilized manner. That calls for some diplomacy, restraint, and a degree of decency with which he talks about his previous employer and his previous boss. Someone who does not care for these niceties may not be a good employee to start with. That is a lesson in decency and not necessarily an exercise in concealing the truth.
Finally, a candidate must be honest in his views and about his past. A wrong choice of person for a particular job may not only affect the employer but the employee himself. The candidate in an interview should be able to separate the issue from the person even while commenting on his previous employers. It is fallacious to say that the HR tutors the job aspirant to lie. But in the name of truth, a candidate also is not allowed to carry his dirty linen from his previous job to someone else's boardroom. It is an HR man's duty to preempt that.
The Defense rests.
From India, Nasik
Acknowledge(1)Amend(0)CiteHR is an AI-augmented HR knowledge and collaboration platform, enabling HR professionals to solve real-world challenges, validate decisions, and stay ahead through collective intelligence and machine-enhanced guidance. Join Our Platform.
Job Description - HR & Admin.doc