Take the 2-minute tour ×
Academia Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for academics and those enrolled in higher education. It's 100% free, no registration required.

It is not unusual for institutes to advertise positions (faculty or not) for which there is an internal candidate. In such situations, for external candidates, it may be difficult if not impossible to get in. When a position is advertised, is it appropriate and useful to inquire if a position has an internal candidate already? It might save a lot of time for the external candidate and possibly others (such as recommendation-letter-writers).

share|improve this question
5  
The question you didn't ask, but that everyone seems to want to answer, is "Short of directly asking, are there other ways to tell?" –  Nate Eldredge Mar 31 at 10:00
3  
It's always appropriate to ask, as long you're careful not to suggest that internal and external candidates are being treated differently. But by far the most likely (and most appropriate) answer is "We can't tell you." So, no, it's not useful. –  JeffE Apr 1 at 0:26

3 Answers 3

up vote 25 down vote accepted

I assume that there are often-if-not-always internal candidates for open positions, in academia and outside. There are always students looking for Ph.D. slots, Ph.D. students looking for postdoc positions, assistant and associate professors looking to move up to the next level. (Same for non-faculty positions, but that seems OT.) Sometimes the people responsible for the position may not even know yet about such internal candidates, because they may not yet have sent in their application.

So the question probably rather is whether these internal candidates are already frontrunners. The professor may want his extremely productive Ph.D. student to continue in the postdoc slot but may need to advertise externally for some procedural reason. The department may want to continue a certain research specialization and plan on promoting the retiring professor's assistant prof. In such a situation, external candidates will need to be very convincing to win.

But: how often will the external candidate be told this? If the external advertisement is legally required, the hiring people may even open themselves up to litigation if they openly tell an applicant that they are only soliciting outside applications as a fig leaf.

On the other hand, the department may explicitly be searching for "new blood", so internal candidates may actually have worse chances than external ones. Which, again, nobody will tell you (or the internal candidate).

Of course, it makes sense to tap your network and see whether the grapevine can tell you more than official channels. However, this kind of information can be unreliable. So if you hear from multiple sources that a given position will be filled internally, it may make sense to not make the effort.

Thus: there will likely be internal candidates, but you will probably not know how good their chances are. If you are a good match for the position, go and apply. Don't worry about internal candidates. This is one part of the hiring situation you can't control, just like the mood of your interviewers. Giving up on an application because there is an internal candidate will be counterproductive in the long run.

share|improve this answer
5  
"the hiring people may even open themselves up to litigation if they openly tell an applicant that they are only soliciting outside applications as a fig leaf" -- they might open themselves to litigation just by doing it, depending who (if anyone) audits their processes. But sure it's even worse if the person directly harmed by your law-breaking knows that you're breaking the law! –  Steve Jessop Mar 31 at 9:28
3  
This answer hits the nail fully on the head. I will also quote the key passage: "But: how often will the external candidate be told this? If the external advertisement is legally required, the hiring people may even open themselves up to litigation if they openly tell an applicant that they are only soliciting outside applications as a fig leaf." Right: this is why it would be pointless and perhaps even inappropriate to formally ask about this. Inquiring openly whether someone is up to skullduggery is liable to get a negative reaction whether they are or not! –  Pete L. Clark Mar 31 at 13:01

I think it is only really useful if you know somebody at your target institution personally and are able to inquire "off the records". Formally asking a stranger whether an application procedure is just for show seems pointless - as Stephen says, the only realistic answer will be No, of course not.

However, note that your connection does not necessarily need to be somebody on the hiring committee. Oftentimes, it is enough to know another PhD student, who can then open his ears a bit for you. If there already is an internal "favorite" for a given position, this is often not really a secret internally. For instance, I have seen a case where, when the contract of a highly distinguished postdoc ended, a call for a assistant professor appeared out of thin air with a scope that looked as if it was copied and pasted (which it might actually have been) from the postdocs research website. From the outside, this might not have been insanely obvious, but internally, everybody knew who will be hired for this position.

share|improve this answer

It's usually a good idea to make some informal contact with the person offering the job before you submit an application. Send an email to briefly introduce yourself and maybe ask some questions (are there teaching opportunities for example). I've heard of cases where there will be a delayed or curt reply which may indicate that they're not interested in you. On the other hand if someone is genuinely looking for someone they are more likely to reply promptly and positively.

share|improve this answer
13  
I would be careful about reading too much into the promptness of an answer, especially in an academic context. These people have a lot of other things to do, unlike an HR rep in industry, so some tardiness and curtness could simple be a consequence of the latest grant round/paper revision/manuscript review/student difficulty/interminable committee meeting... –  Stephan Kolassa Mar 31 at 8:11

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.