Was having trouble finding an interview date, now interviewer sounds irritated - anxious over if I did something wrong

[HYHY02]

Hi everyone,

so some events transpired over the past week, which the outcome of is giving me anxiety.

So I applied to various programs at different schools, and for one of them, there was an upcoming open house of sort, where towards the end of it, professors could interview potential students. I received such an invite to this event, which is late next week. The invite itself came earlier this week. However, I am currently still wrapping up my masters, have a part time job since I'm currently a part time student, and am literally in the process of starting a new research related part time job, in a lab which I am hoping to secure a potential PhD placement (and which is in another department, but same school, as the one with the open house). I also had some personal issues in the past week, which required me to drive to another city on and off. Just a very hectic time.

Anyways, back to the invite, the professor offered an interview and dinner invite, all of which would be next week. I was very happy to have received an invite but I initially replied saying that the dates offered wouldn't work due to me needing to be at my masters lab, due to helping out with another student's project, which I agreed to way before. The professor once again requested an interview on another day next week, offering two potential dates. The problem is my schedule is very busy, with my focus on devoting time to my new part time research job which started literally today. I thus asked if it would be okay to wait until Friday (tomorrow), after which I would have a better idea of my schedule for the research job (which I want to make a good impression with), and I would agree to one of the two interview dates the professor suggested. All up to this point, it was my intention to have an interview next week, I just needed a couple of days to figure out my schedule. This is where things got a bit unconformable for me.

The professor replied saying something along the lines that "graduate school is serious stuff, that I should rearrange my schedule with this interview as the main priority, and they were confused as to why getting a meeting is so hard." To me it came off as being irritated, which I completely get, but at the same time, I thought I did nothing wrong by just requesting a couple of days until I would figure out my schedule, and then agree to one of the dates they suggested. At this time, I just felt an interview would be unconformable, and stated that with such a busy schedule, I'm going to wait for my schedule to clear, then I'll pursue PI interviews, and thanks for the time.

I don't know...did I really do something wrong? This all happened within a couple of days, and like I said, it was my honest intention to have an interview, but I also wasn't going to flake out on previous commitments.

[vestigialtraits]

I mean this is just my opinion but it kinda does sound like you're valuing your own time over the professor's which could be a source of irritation.

But at this point, what's been said has been said and there's nothing you can do about it but try to make up for it as respectfully as possible.

[rising_star]

I think the thing is that you're giving the professor both too much information and not enough, so it seems like you're making excuses. What I would've done in your situation is just not replied right away until I was more sure about my schedule. That said, the professor is right that you're probably going to need to rearrange your schedule some to make this interview happen, if you still want it to happen. Maybe that means calling in sick or getting someone to cover for you at one of your part-time jobs but, you do what you have to do. If the interview isn't that important to you, then withdraw your application.

[fuzzylogician]

Yeah, I bet the problem isn't so much that you couldn't commit to a date yet because of your busy schedule, but that you basically told this professor twice that he wasn't a high priority for you. In the future, you could wait a bit to reply, if you knew that you'd know more about your schedule within a day or two of the invitation arriving in your inbox. Otherwise, you could reply and express enthusiasm about the interview and just say that because you have other plans that are still up in the air, you can't commit to date X just yet, but you will be in touch again on day Y, when you expect your other plans to be finalized. You don't need to give details about your other plans, and you definitely don't want to say anything that makes it seem like you are not appreciative of this opportunity. 

[HYHY02]

thanks for the input everyone, I definitely could have gone about it in a better way. I did however wait from the initial email, in hope of replying once I got my schedule. I however got another following email a couple days after saying I hadn't responded and that they needed a response ASAP, which led to this whole exchange happening. I tried coming off as courteous as I could, but oh well, lesson learned I guess.

[peachypie]

I'm not going to contribute anything that hasn't been already said but in all honesty I am wondering if you actually want to interview at this program or not.  To me everything you've communicated is that something else is more important.  There is no way that a new part time research job should rank higher than a PhD interview with a professor offering you multiple interview dates.  Don't take this the wrong way but you have your priorities really messed up.  I take it you want to get into the other department of the same school of the part time lab that you are hoping to do your PhD in.  I hope you realize two things: 1.  people in the same school talk so hopefully this doesn't mess you up when it comes to admission to that department and 2. I believe this interview is just a back up to your other more interested PhD placement.  I'd be surprised if you were offered admission to this program at this point.

[Pius Aeneas]

I'll be quite honest, I think most of the replies in this thread are a bit tone-deaf, as is the expectation on the part of professors and doctoral programs that everyone can drop everything to arrange for an in-person interview. In the age of such wonders as the telephone and the internet (skype), in-person interviews are superfluous. OP has stated that they are still working on their MA, they have a part-time job, and in addition are doing lab work. The idea that a professor should be annoyed because they can't take time out to meet with them in person is ludicrous.

Personally, I work a full-time job and in all likelihood will probably not be able to attend any in-person interviews this application cycle. The interviews I've had thus far have been over the phone and upcoming ones will be over the phone or skype. OP might have explained their situation more clearly to the professor, but from the professor's reaction they might want to seriously consider whether or not they want to spend years working with such an individual.

Edited January 23, 2016 by Pius Aeneas

[peachypie]

1 hour ago, Pius Aeneas said:

I'll be quite honest, I think most of the replies in this thread are a bit tone-deaf, as is the expectation on the part of professors and doctoral programs that everyone can drop everything to arrange for an in-person interview. In the age of such wonders as the telephone and the internet (skype), in-person interviews are superfluous. OP has stated that they are still working on their MA, they have a part-time job, and in addition are doing lab work. The idea that a professor should be annoyed because they can't take time out to meet with them in person is ludicrous.

Personally, I work a full-time job and in all likelihood will probably not be able to attend any in-person interviews this application cycle. The interviews I've had thus far have been over the phone and upcoming ones will be over the phone or skype. OP might have explained their situation more clearly to the professor, but from the professor's reaction they might want to seriously consider whether or not they want to spend years working with such an individual.

I understand you are from a different field so I'm guessing that is why there may be some differences.  In the biological sciences often acceptances are offered following an in person interview.  People who do not interview (at least that I know of and of course there can be rare exceptions) are not offered admissions.  Skype interviews are reserved to international applicants unable to attend interview weekend and extenuating circumstances (i.e. blizzards that shut down travel and cause an applicant to miss an official interview without any chance for rescheduling).  I was working a full time job when I interviewed and took time off, everyone at my job understood this was how it worked and although I missed work (often wed-friday) I often came in on Sunday if I got back by then to start work for the week so everything didn't end.  People also interview when they are still undergrads, missing class and having to make up exams or labs.  It is part of the field, for you to say we are all tone deaf in our response may be a reflection of the differences between a biomedical/biolgoical science graduate interview and a  classical archaeology graduate interview; to which I say I would expect more humility for a subject you have no experience in.

[Pius Aeneas]

"It is part of the field" really doesn't have as much to do with it as the insulated bubble in which a lot of academics live. In general most doctoral programs worth their salt expect some sort of contact with potential students beyond the applications, usually in the form of interviews. Fine. To get bent out of shape, however, when someone hasn't even turned down an in-person interview, but has merely stated they will have to figure out how to fit it into their schedule (which doesn't merely consist of sitting around waiting to hear back from doctoral programs), is indeed tone-deaf.

[vestigialtraits]

I would argue it's seen as a measure of priorities. 

[fuzzylogician]

1 hour ago, Pius Aeneas said:

"It is part of the field" really doesn't have as much to do with it as the insulated bubble in which a lot of academics live. In general most doctoral programs worth their salt expect some sort of contact with potential students beyond the applications, usually in the form of interviews. Fine. To get bent out of shape, however, when someone hasn't even turned down an in-person interview, but has merely stated they will have to figure out how to fit it into their schedule (which doesn't merely consist of sitting around waiting to hear back from doctoral programs), is indeed tone-deaf.

The bottom line is that students need to learn to operate within the norms of their fields, regardless of your opinion of them. That's what the responses here are about -- they're not about whether the prof is right, but about how to interpret his response and how to reply to it. 

[TakeruK]

5 hours ago, Pius Aeneas said:

I'll be quite honest, I think most of the replies in this thread are a bit tone-deaf, as is the expectation on the part of professors and doctoral programs that everyone can drop everything to arrange for an in-person interview. In the age of such wonders as the telephone and the internet (skype), in-person interviews are superfluous. OP has stated that they are still working on their MA, they have a part-time job, and in addition are doing lab work. The idea that a professor should be annoyed because they can't take time out to meet with them in person is ludicrous.

Personally, I work a full-time job and in all likelihood will probably not be able to attend any in-person interviews this application cycle. The interviews I've had thus far have been over the phone and upcoming ones will be over the phone or skype. OP might have explained their situation more clearly to the professor, but from the professor's reaction they might want to seriously consider whether or not they want to spend years working with such an individual.

I agree with you that it's not fair for PhD programs to expect applicants to drop everything and go to an interview. But, I don't think the professor was annoyed that there are other priorities.

Instead, like rising_star said, the problem was that the OP kept saying no to dates without offering a date that would actually work. Instead of letting the professor keep suggesting dates and then the OP shutting them down, I believe the best response should have been to either:

1. Commit to an in-person interview and clear out a date where possible. It might not be possible to do it in one week, but maybe 2 or 3 weeks from now. In their first reply to the professor, they should explain that they cannot leave with less than X weeks/days notice, and instead offer 3 potential dates for the professor to choose from instead.

2. Give up on the in-person interview and offer a Skype interview date/time instead. (Or try #1 and offer Skype as an alternative if the professor cannot wait 2-3 weeks).

I do agree that the professor seemed more annoyed/frustrated/irritated than justified though and I agree that I would be slightly concerned.

---

Another note though: I was also doing my MSc and had other work commitments while applying for PhD programs. It's up to each person to determine what is the right priority for them. Even outside of academia, if you are applying to a new job while currently working at your old job, you will be expected to prioritize interviews if you want this new job. It will mean you will have to shirk some of your duties in your old job to interview. Most people I know will call in sick or take a personal day from their current job in order to interview at any new job (whether it's a PhD program or another job). It's part of life. Our school recently hired a senior level administrative person for Student Affairs. We expected the candidates to fly out with about 2 weeks notice from across the country to do the in-person campus visit (and in-person is absolutely essential, given the nature of their job and that we already did phone interviews). Every serious candidate agreed to do so.

[knp]

It's the TMI trap! As a recovering over-explainer, I am a big advocate for reducing the amount of information you tell people in situations like this. I used to say "I'm sorry I'm late! The bus broke down when the wheelchair lift got stuck outside because the driver hadn't checked if it was working, so we couldn't leave until they fixed it, so oh my god, we waited for like twenty minutes for the bus to get fixed, and then it didn't, and then another bus came, and man if it didn't just take forever until it showed up, and so we all got off on that bus, and then the replacement wasn't quite the right bus, and—" Look, that's too much information. Nobody cares! It was just a brain dump of all the irrelevant things that had stressed me out. It often made my listener feel bad about their place in my priority list! So now? "Hey, I hope I didn't keep you waiting!" is my mantra. (For short periods: "Hey, I should let you know my flight was delayed four hours" is an exception, e.g., of course.) This applies more generally, and TakeruK's analysis of what to do instead is spot-on. That said, I assume OP's situation is recoverable from here, and I hope the professor's reaction was just symptomatic of an off day, not a perpetual state of being.

[Eigen]

5 hours ago, Pius Aeneas said:

"It is part of the field" really doesn't have as much to do with it as the insulated bubble in which a lot of academics live. In general most doctoral programs worth their salt expect some sort of contact with potential students beyond the applications, usually in the form of interviews. Fine. To get bent out of shape, however, when someone hasn't even turned down an in-person interview, but has merely stated they will have to figure out how to fit it into their schedule (which doesn't merely consist of sitting around waiting to hear back from doctoral programs), is indeed tone-deaf.

You say the "bubble in which academics live", but I think this is a case of the opposite. 

Most people offering an interview for a job wouldn't put up with this much rescheduling, not when they have plenty of candidates who want the spot. 

Frequently job interviews, even on the other side of the country, expect you to be able to drop what you're doing and show up when they want you to. If you can't do that, chances are you won't get the job. I even know companies that assume that about half of the applicants invited for an interview won't show up, and use that as a way to weed out the serious candidates from the non-serious ones.

So rather than the professor being in an academic bubble, I'd argue that in this case the OP (and perhaps yourself) are expecting a job interview and offer in academia to be different than a job interview and offer in the rest of the world. 

[emmm]

10 hours ago, knp said:

That said, I assume OP's situation is recoverable from here, and I hope the professor's reaction was just symptomatic of an off day, not a perpetual state of being.

I wouldn't assume this situation is recoverable. When I was interviewing in the biological sciences, I definitely got the impression that if you turned down the interview date you were given, you would not be considered. Some programs had multiple interview dates (generally two) and some of these gave students a pick of dates while others told you wich one you were invited to. And if you had a conflict, you could ask for a different date (if one existed), otherwise, you had to pick which one you were going to go to and which program you were essentially telling to remove you from consideration. Other schools may do things differently, but this is one data point, I guess. I applied to different programs at the same school, and how many dates a program had depended on how big the program was.

[knp]

That was a throwaway line based on my impression of what earlier posters had said—this is so not my field! So I have no idea whether that was wrong or not, but all I meant was to end with a sentence of generic support/positivity.