Applying again to jobs that rejected you?

In our newest "how can we help you?" thread, a reader writes:

I got a virtual interview a few years ago for a TT position. I did not advance to the next round. They have advertised a similar position this year. There is a slight difference in emphasis for the job this year. Still, should I bother applying again?

This is an excellent question, and I've heard it asked more than a few times before. Here's my hot take, as someone who has served on 5 search committees now: yes, you should bother applying again. In fact, even if you didn't get an interview, apply again. Why? Here's a short list of reasons:

1. Search committees aren't always comprised by the same people. Even if you weren't at the very top of the list of last year's committee, the committee might be a little different this ear.
2. Search committees can sometimes wish they had decided differently. Seriously, suppose they invited a couple of their top candidates and neither of the candidates impressed. Or suppose they hired their top candidate, and the person then left for a job at another university. This year's committee might be worried about 'hiring another flight risk' - so they might weigh things differently when evaluating candidates.
3. How committees 'rank' candidates depend upon the candidate pool. Maybe you were the committee's third or fourth choice the previous time you applied, but they could only invite 2 people to campus. Given that this year's applicant pool is different, you could well end up ranked higher and get an on-campus interview.
4. If the committee liked you enough to interview you, they may do so again...and anything can happen. Perhaps last time you interviewed, you only came across decently in the interview. Maybe this year you'll knock the interview out of the park. And maybe the other candidates that the committee ranks higher than you bomb their interviews. Seriously, I've seen stuff like this happen. You never know what will happen at the interview stage.
5. Your dossier might be better: maybe you've added things to your CV. Maybe you have a better research statement, teaching portfolio, etc. If it's been a year or a few (as the OP implies), this is probably the case--so you may be a more competitive candidate on your merits.

I'm sure that I'm leaving a few things out here. But anyway: what do other search committee members think? Should candidates who applied for a job with you previously apply again? If not, why not? If so, why? For the kinds of reasons I gave, or for other reasons?

Comments

[SLAC Associate]

If the job is within your area (i.e., if the change in emphasis hasn't somehow written you out of the ad entirely), you should absolutely apply again, for all the reasons that Marcus mentioned. It's impossible to know from the outside what is going on with the internal dynamics of the search committee, and it's very possible that someone who got overlooked in one search turns into a committee darling the next year. Now, it's equally possible that someone on the committee recognizes your application, says, "Huh, this philosopher again? Well, we didn't advance them last time, to the trash can again," or the like, but apart from the time you spent putting the application materials together, there's little harm done to you in that case, and again, there's absolutely no way for you to know beforehand which of those possibilities is more likely to be realized.

[anonymous tenure track at R1]

while 1-5 seem right to me, I just want to add that when I've been on search committees, with a few exceptions, we've wished we could have brought all the people we interviewed to campus, and it's always a "plethora of riches" situation, not a "oh god which of these people is good enough to get to the next stage" situation. If you make it to the interview stage. Also, often decisions about who to bring to campus are based on things like fit with dept needs (which it sounds like are slightly different this time around). Finally (I'm in an R1 but not top dept) we sometimes make choices to try to ensure that we actually get to hire. So we might invite one person who we worry will get a better offer, or who already has a job we aren't sure they will leave, but then we might balance that out with two-three people who we think we have a better chance with. There are so many weird factors that go into decisions of who to bring to campus. Needs change. But mostly: if you made it to the first round, at least in my department, we probably all wished we could hire you and thought you were amazing.

So, in short, I wouldn't even worry about whether you can do *better* this time around--if your dossier is better, if you're more competitive, etc. Definitely always apply in this situation! Do not hesitate!

[Marcus Arvan]

anonymous tenure track at R1: what you say matches my experience too. On virtually all of the hiring committees I’ve served on, the committee was very high on all of the candidates interviewed—so decisions about who to invite to the on-campus are often very hard and uncertain. So, it’s entirely possible that this time around, the same candidate might be interviewed again and get the on-campus—especially (but not only) if some of the committee members remember the candidate and sort of wish in retrospect that they had made the on-campus. There are just so many variables that the best thing to do, I think, is to absolutely apply!

[Rosa]

Yes, for sure apply! Hiring a TT line is basically never about hiring *the best philosopher* and almost always about hiring *the best person for this particular job at the time in light of all relevant needs and constraints.* Even if it's the same AOS in the same department, there will be a different set of needs and constraints now, and you might be exactly the right person this time around.

[oat milk]

I wonder if the same advice applies to the open AOS postdoc positions that are advertised once every cycle or every other cycle. Assuming one is still eligible, is there a point in applying if one was rejected the previous year?

[keep going, if you want to]

I know the OP had in mind jobs for which one was previously *interviewed*, but it's worth mentioning that if you've been on the market for a few years you've likely applied to most schools that will be hiring in a given year. So if you didn't apply to places that had rejected you in the past, you wouldn't apply to very many places at all.

@oat milk. I've applied to the same competitive postdoc three times. I wasn't interviewed until the third try.

[Tt prof]

The TT job I’m in now I was unsuccessful for the first time around (failed search)

[RJM]

I applied for a job at the place where I now have a permanent job (UK so not TT) the year before I was hired and didn't get an interview. Simple case of them wanting different things in different years, and maybe a bit extra on my CV (I suspect the former was far more important). I imagine this happens quite a lot: someone who isn't a great fit for one job might be a great fit for another.