“We regret to inform you that we have chosen to proceed with other candidates whose experience and qualifications more closely align with the role requirements.”
Sound familiar? It’s a message we’ve all received at some point from one or more of our dream companies. A polite rejection, sugar-coated in formal language, but ultimately disheartening.
This blog isn’t here to dive into sadness or frustration, though. I’m not about to lament about being “inexperienced” or incapable of getting hired. Instead, I want to explore a crucial irony that many of us have faced—and one that companies need to reflect on.
Have you ever applied for a role, brimming with excitement and hope, only to be told that you don’t have enough experience? We’ve all been there. Even just browsing job portals like LinkedIn, Indeed, or Naukri.com reveals a common trend: every company, whether it’s a large multinational corporation (MNC) or a local business, seeks “experienced” candidates. It’s admirable to see companies aiming for high standards in employment, particularly in competitive markets like India. But here’s the paradox: everyone wants to hire the best, yet no one seems willing to create the best.
If you don’t hire me, how am I supposed to gain that critical experience you’re looking for? And if you won’t offer me the opportunity, why would anyone else? It’s a vicious cycle that many candidates find themselves trapped in—wanting to work, capable of working, but being denied the chance to prove it.
Every company thinks they’re too big or too important to take a chance on talent that isn’t already “established.” They all display their glossy “careers” or “join us” tabs on their websites, yet, ironically, they only seem interested in seasoned professionals who already have impressive CVs. This exclusionary mindset—favoring experience over potential—raises the question: when did we become so risk-averse?
Let’s take a moment to unpack what “experience” actually means. Experience is gained over time, through learning, growth, and exposure to different challenges. But here’s where it gets tricky: even if I’ve worked at Company A and now I’m applying to Company B—both of which might be in the same industry or market—can you honestly expect the work culture, processes, and methodologies to be identical?
Even if by some chance they were, the reality is that no two companies operate in exactly the same way. Yet, candidates are frequently told things like, “It’s different here compared to your previous company,” or, “Leave your prior knowledge at the door; we have our own methods.” So, what is this “experience” companies are so adamant about? Is it purely about knowing the job, or is it about adapting, evolving, and learning new skills?
The truth is, experience in one company doesn’t guarantee success in another. Different environments demand different strengths, and adaptability is often more important than prior experience. Dismissing candidates simply because they don’t fit the narrow criteria of past experience is short-sighted.
Oddly enough, this rigid insistence on experience has led to an unintended consequence: it has driven people to create their own opportunities, start businesses, and seek alternative paths. When companies refuse to hire promising candidates, those individuals often pivot to entrepreneurship or join smaller ventures where they can learn and grow without being judged on their résumé alone. Many of today’s success stories in startups and small businesses are born from this very frustration.
Think of Ratan Tata’s acquisition of Jaguar. He famously purchased the luxury car brand after being dismissed by the company’s former owners, who underestimated the knowledge and capability of an Indian industrialist. The moral of the story? Never overlook someone’s potential based on assumptions or prejudice, because they might just end up owning the very entity that rejected them.
Companies that rely solely on “experience” as a hiring criterion may be losing out on exceptional talent. While experience often equates to knowledge, it can also lead to complacency, entitlement, and resistance to change. The more experienced someone is, the more they rely on what they already know, which sometimes stifles innovation and growth. What’s worse, experience can breed power imbalances, where individuals feel too indispensable to truly engage in the work or collaborate effectively with others.
As companies search for the perfect, experienced hire, they may overlook candidates who bring fresh perspectives, adaptability, and hunger for growth. These are the individuals who could help the company evolve, innovate, and stay ahead in a rapidly changing world. Yet, time and again, they are passed over for candidates who may have the years but lack the drive or fresh ideas.
My partner often says, “You’ll never get the job by applying for it. The company has to come to you—they need to be attracted to your value.” It’s an interesting perspective, and one that my father echoed. But here’s the irony: these same companies, who are supposedly looking for the crème de la crème, flood job portals with applications. They want us to apply, they want us to chase them, but then they filter us out based on arbitrary requirements. Are they testing our desperation? Or are they simply trying to gauge how visible they are in the market?
In either case, the logic is flawed. Why expect another company to provide a candidate with the experience you want, only to hire them later when they’re already “ready”? If you want skilled, loyal, and motivated employees, you have to invest in them early on. You can’t wait for someone else to do the work for you.
It’s time for companies to rethink their obsession with experience. Skills, potential, and willingness to learn should take precedence over the number of years someone has spent in a particular role. After all, every experienced professional was once an inexperienced candidate, looking for their first break. Isn’t it about time we gave them the chance to prove themselves?
