5 hours ago
3
March 6, 2026 — 5:01am
I have applied for a position that is internal to my organisation. My issue is that sometimes it seems in the organisation I work for, people are earmarked for positions before they have been advertised. For this role, I found out from a reliable person, that it is the same situation.
I have reached the next stage of the application process, but am now in two minds about interviewing for the role. I think potentially I would have a really slim chance of getting the role even if I performed well in the interview. Should I even bother to commit to the interview?
This earmarking you’ve been told about is something I think a lot of us either suspect or know to be a feature of modern recruitment. While policies, and in some cases laws, mean that for many jobs a thorough recruitment process is a requirement, in some situations this process is all for show. It’s a mere pantomime preceding a result that was never in doubt.
But just because this open role has a whiff of fait accompli about it, I wouldn’t necessarily say that you should pull out of the interview. There are a few reasons for this:
I’ll start with one that I think of as a bit of a cliché – but a cliché with some merit. It’s simply that doing an interview, even one that seems futile, builds important skills or “muscles”. It lets you hone your technique.
If you want to be a touch more cynical, think of interviews as dramatic presentations, and treat this one as a kind of rehearsal or perhaps a preview. You can make notes and improve on your “performance” before the more important “shows” to follow.
Being an internal candidate, you won’t be forgotten in the same way an external candidate could be.
The second reason is that, as an internal candidate yourself, you’re not at the massive disadvantage an external prospect would be. If there is even a small opening – a tiny chance that the hiring team who already has a firm favourite for the position might change their mind – your familiarity with the cultural idiosyncrasies, politics and central requirements of working in the organisation put you in good stead.
If, as you say, you were to perform well in the interview, the panel could not fall back on “Well, that was impressive, but our internal candidate is lower risk, so we’ll stick with them anyway.”
The third reason is related to the first. Being an internal candidate, you won’t be forgotten in the same way an external candidate could be. If the hirers like how you interview but still think their fave edges you out, word of your strong performance may still get around.
It sounds from your longer email that you like this organisation but that you’re becoming a touch bored in your current role. If you have an interest in seeking a new role in the same organisation again, a strong interview here could demonstrate your seriousness about progression and perhaps even make you the preferred candidate when the next applicable job comes up.
Once you’ve considered all these things, my next question would be: how disruptive will proceeding with the interview be to your life? All job interviews take time and preparation. But some more than others. And for jobs we’re iffy about or, as in your case, where you know your chances are slim, there’s a point at which the commitment simply becomes too big to justify.
In other words, even if you can see that this would be good practice and would put you in a better position to seek future jobs within the organisation, you’re well within your rights to skip it if it’s going to put a hugely inconvenient dent in your existing schedule.
One more thing that’s worth considering is that, even if the source of your inside info is entirely trustworthy, is it absolutely certain that this race is all over bar the shouting? As I mentioned earlier, what if the panel members are fairly certain but not totally convinced?
Or what if they’re more open-minded than your “informant” assumed? Or what if the shoo-in has a shocker of an interview and their assumed superiority suddenly evaporates? Could it be that your interview performance might still change the decision-makers’ minds?
My advice is not a simple “do it” or “don’t do it”. Instead, my suggestion is to look ahead and, as objectively as possible, try to imagine how you’ll respond if you’re told, “Sorry, you didn’t get the job.” If deep down you know you’ll be intensely annoyed and feel your time has been thoroughly wasted, perhaps err on the side of pulling out.
But if you can see yourself not getting the job and nonetheless taking something – even something relatively small – from the interview experience, perhaps lean the other way.
Send your questions through to Work Therapy by emailing [email protected]
Get workplace news, advice and perspectives to help make your job work for you. Sign up for our weekly Thank God it’s Monday newsletter.
