well qualified based on whose interpretation? I say that because too often recruiters have pumped up applicants to keep them interested by saying they are "great candidates". Do you have a degree that corresponds to the designator and are working in a field that aligns with the designator you applied for? Did your recruiter say that you had all 10's on your panel interviews? If those are all yes's then it just may have been luck of the draw that you missed out, if not then how close are you to being able to say yes to all those questions?
There are those that won't be able to say yes to what I asked but the more yes's you have the better shot you have. I would also do what was mentioned above.
Sure, a good point to consider. I was told I did very well with the interviews, although no numerical scores were given to me as feedback.
I have a JD and an MS in data analytics as well as an undergraduate curriculum that included advanced calc and linear algebra and 4 years of Japanese.
I have experience with AI\ML and currently work for a company in the space manufacturing industry. I’m hoping that qualifies me for the extra consideration criteria listed in the program approvals.
I do hope I am a decent candidate. I was told that I’d have to specifically address how I had improved as a candidate. I am trying to earn a CompTIA security+ certification and better highlight my leadership experience.
Again, I am looking for advice on strategies for my subsequent application which I have been encouraged to submit and is not all that much of an additional burden - so any relevant advice is helpful. Pushing through an individual who is not a good candidate, and already received a non-selection notice seems an unlikely strategy for any OR, as well as a complete time waste and a good way to get on the bad side of people in their chain of command . . . but I suppose it’s possible.