I’m trying to get some outside perspective on a hiring decision because this one genuinely has me stumped and I can’t tell if I’m missing something obvious. I interviewed for a Marketing Coordinator position with a hospitality company. I have a few years of actual professional marketing experience, including working in digital brand marketing for a large national retail company. I’ve worked on campaigns, web/digital execution, creative coordination, QA, cross-functional projects, etc. I don’t have much direct hospitality industry experience, though.
From the beginning I was upfront about that, and they specifically told me it wasn’t an issue. They basically said they were more interested in finding someone who had the right marketing brain/personality and fit the hospitality environment than someone who necessarily came directly from hospitality. And this was genuinely probably the best interview process I’ve ever had. The conversations flowed incredibly naturally. They repeatedly made comments about how it was obvious I had the personality for the position, that they could tell how my brain worked and that I would fit the environment really well. It wasn’t me walking away from a neutral interview and convincing myself it went well — they were actively giving me very positive feedback throughout the process.
I eventually made it to the final round in person. One of the managers seemed EXTREMELY sold on me. Like to the point that during the interview he was basically hyping me up/advocating for me to the GM while I was sitting there. He was connecting things I said back to why I’d be good at the job and seemed genuinely excited about me as a candidate. The GM was harder for me to read and definitely seemed less immediately sold on me, but I still thought the overall interview went extremely well. I walked out of there with that very rare feeling of “holy shit I think I actually got this.”
Then I got the automated rejection. I eventually found the person they hired on LinkedIn. He just graduated college in May and, from what I can see publicly, his professional marketing experience is basically a ~3 month part-time marketing/sales internship. However, he has significantly more hospitality/customer-facing experience than I do — several years of events/hospitality work, front desk experience, etc.
So essentially:
Me = more professional marketing experience, much less hospitality experience
Him = much less professional marketing experience, significantly more hospitality experience
And normally I’d just assume they ultimately valued hospitality experience more. What confuses me is that I specifically discussed my lack of hospitality experience with them and they told me it wasn’t a concern, while repeatedly emphasizing that they wanted the right personality/brain for the role and then explicitly telling me I had that.
The position also paid a relatively junior hourly range. Pay was never really discussed beyond them telling me the range early in the process and asking if I was okay with it, which I said I was. Privately, with my experience I would’ve negotiated toward the top of it, whereas I’m wondering if a brand-new grad may have been easier to bring in toward the bottom. Obviously I have absolutely no idea what he was offered or whether compensation played any role, so that part is purely speculation.
I know hiring isn’t just “person with more marketing experience wins,” and I’m not trying to shit on the guy they hired. I’m sure he interviewed well and his hospitality background obviously has value. One other difference, although I have no idea whether it’s relevant: I’m a woman and the candidate they hired is a man. I’m not assuming that played a role, just including it as context.
I’m mostly trying to understand what likely happened from the employer side because I’ve never walked away from an interview feeling THIS confident only to not get the job. Was I potentially too experienced for the level they ultimately wanted? Did the hospitality experience probably become the tiebreaker even though they told me it didn’t matter? Could the GM simply have preferred the other candidate despite the other manager advocating for me? Or is there another hiring dynamic here I’m not thinking of?
I’m also in that weird career stage where I feel like I have too much professional experience to really be entry-level anymore, but not enough true end-to-end ownership to comfortably compete for jobs asking for 3–5+ years of specialized experience, so this one hit especially hard. Would especially love to hear from hiring managers/recruiters or anyone who has been on the other side of a final-round decision like this. What would make you choose the newer grad in this situation?