I made the mistake of opening my Twitter/X account this morning. My feed contained a familiar story of rejection from someone that I don’t know. After many previous attempts, it seems, this individual had been rejected from yet another academic job application. For the last time, they claimed. A last ditch effort, effectively ending a post-PhD campaign to become employed. They believed themselves to be suitably qualified for the role, which hindered even further their ability to comprehend the rejection.
The responses to this individual’s thread were very familiar. And, in many respects, they are infuriating. The litany of comments from friends and strangers alike shared similar tales of woe and contempt, supportive statements from like-minded people quick to cast dispersions on others for failing to recognize their unique talents and skillsets. The whole system of higher education itself was thrown under the bus as a result. A true ‘It’s not me, it’s them’, sort of situation.
All in all, a dangerous recipe for a pity-party.
Let me be clear: I despise this peculiar form of (online) whinging. It’s rampant in academic circles, and definitely worse owing to social media. Having a platform of this nature only perpetuates a community of souls whose collective misery binds them together. Very rarely is there any acknowledgement of personal responsibility or circumstances. Also absent is any recognition that, while they may indeed have been ‘qualified’ for the job, so too was every other candidate who applied.
Here’s another perspective: every academic job hire ends in success. That success might not always be long-term, but the immediate outcome of a committee’s decision to appoint a new colleague usually generates a wave of enthusiasm and hope for renewal within a department, Faculty, and institution. Hope is delivered in the form of another human, whose unique expertise and experience was sought out and delivered through a lengthy and robust hiring process.
There is, however, collateral damage along the way. And most of us have experienced it first-hand. Because the market is shit. Of the dozens and sometimes hundreds of applications received for open job searches, the long- and short-lists are painstakingly whittled down by a committee who, in my experience, takes their jobs very seriously.
The antithesis to a successful hire, however, isn’t failure or rejection. This is the pertinent point here. It’s also very similar to the publishing world, where a larger sample of submissions vastly outweigh those which are ultimately reviewed, accepted, and printed. The truth is that there are qualified and over-qualified academics across the world who are trying in vain to secure permanent positions in higher education institutions. And universities are producing far more graduates than the market demands. To take this personally is deleterious and counter-productive; to wallow in the outcome is understandable, but utterly self-defacing and demoralizing.
And let’s be honest: a committee is making their decision based primarily on a written cover letter and curriculum vitae. In other words, it’s not about you in the way that you think it is. You can’t be known until you really are. A list of your written accomplishments, or your own professed version of how you’re best qualified and suitable for the role, is no guarantee of anything. I’m not defending the process, which is archaic, sometimes inequitable, and ultimately flawed; I’m simply stating the facts, issuing a warning against equating your person, self-worth, and/or identity with a few pages of paper that you’ve submitted.
Complaining about rejection is pointless. The case above took things one step further by equating the rejection with life itself. That the person’s inability to secure an academic job in an extremely tight market somehow devalued their self-worth and identity. Therein lies the greatest tragedy and misunderstanding. It’s just plain wrong, and the chorus of supporters for this person – and everyone like them – only serves to amplify a victim mentality in a process that is designed to find the most complementary addition to existing skills, competencies, and environment.
There is an element of delusion at play. To think yourself ‘suitable’ for a position, or the ‘right fit’, means very little in real terms. To then, in turn, revile the hiring decision which didn’t include you is utter nonsense. It’s an easy path to deflection, to protect yourself, minimize the damage, and rationalize the outcome. But all this internal monologue, made public through social media posts, sways the needle in the wrong direction. Rejection is a natural part of life, an ever-present part of academia.
The job market doesn’t work out for everyone. Some people are more resilient and successful and lucky than others. Some people give in sooner than others. There are so many nuances and individual factors that lashing out against ‘the system’ as a whole serves no meaningful purpose. In the end, whichever way the decision goes – in your favour or against it – the outcome needs to be assessed and ultimately owned – not internalized to exacerbate desperation, but acknowledged in order to move on with life. While the experience always stings, it’s never personal.