More detailed feedback can be tainted with personal bias and potentially skewed personal perspective based on how well you got along with an interviewer Absolu

More detailed feedback can be tainted with personal bias and potentially skewed personal perspective based on how well you got along with an interviewer Absolutely. Two weeks ago, interview at a certain top-10 liberal arts college. Meetings with 4 or 5 faculty members, the usual. Chitchat throughout, nothing substantial is being said, certainly nothing pertaining to the role. There is a tour of the facilities, the research labs are empty, even though the semester is still ongoing. You marvel at the unstructuredness of it all and ask: is this Potemkin's Village? The general impression is that the institution is living on past glories. The rejection arrives in less than a week, and just for grunts, you ask if there is any feedback to be had. There is feedback: the interviewers could not assess your competence. Guys, it was your job to convey expectations and bring the conversation back on track, if necessary. You just managed to turn a disappointed candidate into a completely enraged one. What a waste of time. People talk to each other, if anyone asks about the institution I would strongly recommend not to have anything to do with it, not as student, not as faculty, not as staff.