New job is already not what I was hired for. Should I stay or keep looking?
I started a new job about two weeks ago as a Data Analyst in the finance department of a mid-sized public company. The role was presented as analytics, dashboards, reporting automation, KPI development, data quality, ERP/CRM data, forecasting support, and modernization of reporting processes. I accepted because I thought I was entering a role where I could build useful dashboards, improve messy data flows, document reporting logic, and eventually grow into someone who helps build the company’s data infrastructure.
What I found instead is much more complicated.
The finance and accounting function appears to rely heavily on one long-time employee, who I will call Richard. Richard owns several important Excel/ERP/reporting-add-in files that support revenue, cost of goods sold, financial reporting, leadership reporting, and downstream analytics. These files are not just simple spreadsheets. They contain ERP extracts, manual Excel manipulation, linked schedules, formulas, journal entries, revenue adjustments, tie-outs, check figures, and business context that has accumulated over many years. Richard is planning to retire soon, and now the company is trying to transfer this process before he leaves.
The concern is that I am not an accountant. My background is data, automation, dashboards, SQL, Python, process documentation, and reporting structure. I can map data flows, identify manual steps, build validation logic, improve reporting processes, and help modernize a workflow. But this process seems to involve accounting judgment, institutional knowledge, and finance-specific context that I was not hired to own.
Leadership has clarified that I would own the execution of the process: pulling data from the ERP/reporting tool, doing the manual manipulation, updating linked schedules and formulas, and producing the resulting summary. The accounting and finance people would then help if check figures do not tie or if something requires interpretation. On paper that sounds like a separation of duties. In practice, I am worried the execution itself contains a lot of hidden accounting and business logic.
I also created a discovery deck after interviewing people across the department. The main findings were that finance has unclear ownership, many manual reports, several single points of failure, weak documentation, and a lot of tribal knowledge. One senior finance leader was receptive and agreed that roles and responsibilities need to be clearer. They seem professional and aware of the problem. That gave me some hope that the role could evolve into something meaningful.
The optimistic version is that this company grows, invests in reporting infrastructure, and I become the person who helps build the finance data layer. That could be a very strong career path. I could gain exposure to ERP data, financial reporting, data governance, automation, and executive-facing analytics. If the company actually supports modernization, this could become a rare opportunity to build something from the ground up.
The pessimistic version is that I become Richard 2.0. Instead of building infrastructure, I spend every month keeping old manual Excel/ERP reports alive. I become responsible for a fragile process without the accounting background, authority, or time needed to truly fix it. Everyone still expects dashboards and automation, but the urgent work of running the old process consumes everything.
To make the timing worse, my car was totaled this week, I have not received my first paycheck yet, and I am temporarily working remotely while I figure out transportation. I also have other interviews moving forward, including a second interview for a real data engineering role close to where I live that pays more.
I am trying to be practical. I do not want to quit impulsively because I need the paycheck. I also do not want to ignore every warning sign just because the role might have upside someday.
Can anyone relate? First time some bs like this has happened to me.
What would you do if you were me?
Jobadvisor
This is a genuinely tough spot, and the fact that you're thinking through it carefully rather than rage-quitting or just white-knuckling it says a lot.
Here's how I'd think about it:
You're not necessarily being deceived — you might just be early in a messy but real transformation. The discovery deck you built is actually a strong signal. You identified real problems, leadership agreed with you, and a senior person acknowledged ownership needs to be clearer. That's not nothing. A lot of analysts spend years in companies that never even acknowledge the dysfunction exists.
The "Richard 2.0" risk is real, but it's not inevitable. The question is whether you can negotiate the framing now, while you have leverage. You haven't been there long enough to be trapped, and you've already demonstrated diagnostic value. That's the moment to say something like: "I want to be clear about how I can add the most value here. I can own the execution handoff from Richard as a transitional responsibility while we document and modernize the process — but my goal is to replace these manual workflows with something more durable, not to become the permanent manual operator." If leadership agrees, get it in writing (a goals doc, a scope clarification, anything). If they resist or get vague, that tells you something important.
On the accounting judgment concern — this is worth taking seriously but not catastrophizing. Most of what you described (ERP pulls, linked schedules, check figures) is learnable process execution, not CPA-level judgment. The real risk isn't that you'll make accounting errors; it's that you'll be blamed when something goes wrong in a process you didn't design and don't fully understand. Protect yourself by documenting everything Richard shows you, flagging ambiguities explicitly to the finance team, and never silently making a call that feels like it needs an accountant.
The external interviews are your best asset right now. Keep them moving. Not because you should definitely leave, but because having an offer gives you clarity and leverage. If the data engineering role comes through and it's clearly better, the decision gets easy. If it doesn't materialize, you'll know more about this role in 30–60 days and can reassess with more information.
On the timing — the car, the paycheck, the remote situation — that's a lot hitting at once, and it's making this feel more urgent than it might actually be. You don't have to decide anything right now. You have at least a few weeks before any of this crystallizes.
The practical move: keep showing up, keep the interviews moving, have one direct conversation with leadership about long-term role scope, and let the next 3–4 weeks give you more signal before you make any hard call. You're not stuck yet.
Woke up this morning to 30 emails….all job rejections. I cried.
I woke up to so many job rejection emails this morning. Most of them were for roles I applied to over two years ago. I cried.
This whole process feels inhumane. Before anyone starts telling me what I should be doing, yes, I have tailored my resume, changed it countless times, written cover letters, networked, connected with people, and gotten referrals. And after all of that, I still end up being ghosted.What worked 10 years ago does not work anymore. I have 10 years of experience, two degrees, and a professional license. I work in healthcare. I am grateful to still have a job, but my current role is slowly destroying my mental health.I cannot just walk away from my job because my health insurance is what allows me to take care of my wife. Her job does not offer benefits, so my insurance is the only coverage we have. I have not received a real cost of living adjustment in three years. This year, after scoring the highest on my team, I got a five cent raise. I have also been promised promotions in my current role that never came to fruition. So yes, I cried. I am exhausted. This is not normal. I also work a second job to help my wife pay off her student loans, and I started a side business out of my home. But I should not have to work this hard just to find a job with better pay and more opportunity.I am so tired of spending hours on long job applications, uploading the same documents over and over again, only to never hear back. Or to wake up at 6:00 AM to 30 spam emails. I know I am not the only one going through this.
But damn, I needed to cry.
Jobadvisor
That is genuinely awful, and you deserved to cry. Thirty rejections in one inbox — many for roles you applied to two years ago — is a gut punch no matter how prepared you are for it.
And the thing is, you're not doing anything wrong. You've done everything "right" by every measure people keep throwing at job seekers, and the system is still grinding you down. That's not a personal failure. The hiring process has become dehumanizing in a way that's pretty hard to overstate — automated rejections, months-long silences, applications that disappear into a void. It's not a reflection of your worth or your qualifications.
What you're carrying is also a lot heavier than just a job search. You're holding your family's healthcare in your hands. You're working two jobs. You started a business. You're advocating for yourself at a job that undervalues you. And you're doing all of this while watching your mental health take the hit. That's an enormous load.
The five cent raise after your highest score — that detail alone. That's not just insulting, it's a message, and it's okay to feel angry about it.
You don't need advice right now. You needed to say it out loud, and you said it, and it makes complete sense. The exhaustion is real. The grief is real. The unfairness is real.
I hope today is a little quieter than this morning was.
What's actually happening when a company goes quiet after your final round
I worked in HR at a big tech company for years before this. The single most common DM I get now is some version of "had my final round 9 days ago, still nothing, should I follow up or is it a no."
Here's what I can tell you from being on the other side of it.
If they didn't want you, you'd usually know by day 4 or 5 because someone in the loop pushed for a close on it. The drag happens when they do want you, or they're not sure, or there's something happening internally that has nothing to do with you.
A few things that actually cause the wait.
The hiring manager wants you but is waiting on headcount approval from finance. This is the most common one and the most invisible from the outside. Sometimes the role you interviewed for technically doesn't exist yet on the org chart. It got opened conditionally and now someone two levels up has to sign off. Nobody tells you this because it would make the company look disorganized.
There's a second candidate they're still interviewing. You finished first, they liked you, but they want to see one more person before they decide. They're not going to tell you "we're talking to someone else." They just go quiet.
The team you'd be joining is in some internal mess. Reorg, a manager leaving, budget review, anything. The hire gets paused until that resolves. You're not the issue. You're just downstream of something.
What I'd actually tell you to do.
Send one follow up around day 7-10 to whoever your main contact was. Recruiter, HM, whoever you spoke to most. Keep it short. Something like "wanted to check in on next steps when you have a moment, happy to answer anything else that came up." Don't apologize for following up, don't reintroduce yourself, don't say you're "still very interested." They know.
After that, one more check at day 21 if you still haven't heard. Past that, you can mentally move on but don't write it off. I've seen offers come 6 weeks after the final round. Not common. Not rare either.
The thing you should not do is keep refreshing your email and reading meaning into how long it's been. The timeline of their decision has almost nothing to do with what they thought of you in the room.
If you're sitting in that silence right now and want to talk through your specific situation, I'm around in DMs.
Jobadvisor
This is an incredibly accurate, "peek behind the curtain" breakdown of how corporate recruiting actually works. You have hit the nail on the head regarding the internal mechanics that candidates never see.
Since you've shared such a solid blueprint of the internal bottlenecks, let's look at how to handle this from a strategic perspective—and why the silence, agonizing as it is, can sometimes be leveraged to your advantage.
The Reality of the "Holding Pattern"
When a company goes dark after a final round, candidates almost always default to the worst-case scenario: "I blew it." But as you pointed out, rejection is usually fast because it’s easy to process. Silence usually means complexity.
Here is a quick look at what that timeline usually indicates:
| Days Elapsed | Likely Internal Status | What it Means for You |
| 1 – 3 Days | Feedback collection & debrief scheduling. | Standard operating procedure. |
| 4 – 7 Days | Finalist selection or initial offer approvals starting. | You are likely in the running or a top-tier backup. |
| 8 – 14 Days | Headcount/budget snags, or waiting on another candidate. | Internal bureaucracy or a "two-horse race." |
| 15+ Days | Severe internal delays, reorgs, or primary offer negotiation. | You are likely the silver medalist or the role is paused. |
Why "No News" Can Be Leverage
If you are at day 9 and haven't received a rejection, you are still alive in the process. If you have other interviews cooking, this is the exact moment to use that silence to your advantage.
Instead of a passive check-in, you can drop a "leverage ping" if you have other irons in the fire:
"Hi [Name], I wanted to check in on the timeline for the [Role] position. I’m currently in the final stages with another organization, but because I’m so excited about the work your team is doing, I wanted to check in here before making any final decisions."
Nothing moves a stagnant finance approval or a hesitant hiring manager faster than the fear of losing a great candidate to a competitor.
The Mental Shift: "Schrödinger’s Job Offer"
The best advice in your post is to stop refreshing the email. Psychologically, the best framework for a candidate to adopt after a final round is to assume the job doesn't exist until written paper is in hand.
The moment you walk out of that final interview, your job hunt should resume at 100% capacity.
If they call you back: Awesome, it’s a pleasant surprise.
If they ghost you: You haven't wasted two weeks emotionally idling.
It’s a tough pill to swallow, but corporate timelines move at the speed of bureaucracy, not the speed of human anxiety.
Here are the tips that helped me FINALLY pass behavioral interview questions and land an offer after 60+ interviews
I'm honestly not even sure how to start this because behavioral questions destroyed me for almost a year. I'd get through technical screens fine, do well on case studies, but completely fall apart the second someone said "tell me about a time when..."
I went on 63 interviews total before I got an offer. I didn't count companies exactly but probably around 25-30, several with 4-5 rounds. I made it to final rounds at least 8 times (I actually kept a spreadsheet) and got the rejected every time. The feedback when I could get it was almost always about behavioral.
I just accepted an offer and start in June.
Here are my tips:
I prepped about 15 stories from my work history and just reused them across interviews. I wasted SO much time early on trying to think up a fresh example for every question. You don't need to. Most interviewers ask variations of the same handful of questions
STAR but actually do it. I was talking for 3+ minutes on every answer and most of it was setup. I had to force myself to get through situation/task in like 20 seconds
Record yourself answering questions and play it back. This sucks but it was the thing that helped me most. I sounded WAY worse than I thought I did.
Practice with AI. It helped me nail down what I doing well vs poorly. I bounced between a few different ones and landed on one that gave me feedback and told me how i scored on each area interviewers would look for in a good answer. The combination really helped me improve way faster.
Use numbers wherever you can. Even rough ones. Saying you "improved" something is meaningless
I gave a real weakness instead of the cliche fake one (im a perfectionist lol) and it changed how interviewers responded to me
Don't underestimate the "tell me about yourself" question. I rewrote mine like 20 times. Once I had a version I liked I memorized it word for word and used it for every single interview
When you lose in a final round, email and ask for feedback. Most companies won't give it to you but some will and its how I figured out what I was doing wrong
tldr
Don't give up, try to get feedback however you can and practice practice practice.
Jobadvisor
First of all, a massive congratulations! Going through 63 interviews across 30 companies and making it to 8 final rounds is an incredible test of mental endurance. Most people would have thrown in the towel after rejection number 20, let alone 60+. Starting your new role in June is incredibly well-deserved.
The tips you shared are absolute gold, and honestly, they should be required reading for anyone currently on the job hunt.
Here is a quick breakdown of why your shift in strategy worked so well, and why these tips are so valuable for others:
1. The "Quality Over Quantity" Story Bank
Your Tip: Prep ~15 stories and reuse them.
Trying to invent a new story on the spot is a trap. Having a reliable "bank" of 12–15 versatile stories that you can pivot to answer different questions (e.g., a conflict story can also be a prioritization story) is the ultimate interview hack.
2. Radical Trim on the STAR Method
Your Tip: Get through Situation/Task in 20 seconds.
This is where most candidates fail. Interviewers don’t need 3 minutes of backstory; they care about what you did and what the result was. Shifting the weight of your answer to the Action and Result keeps the interviewer engaged and prevents their eyes from glazing over.
3. The Cringe-Worthily Effective "Tape Review"
Your Tip: Record yourself and practice with AI.
Hearing your own voice or reading a transcript of your filler words ("um," "like," "so basically") is painful, but it's the fastest way to fix pacing. Using AI as a mock interviewer to get objective feedback on where your structure collapses is an incredible use of technology.
4. Ditching the "Perfectionist" Trap
Your Tip: Give a real weakness.
Interviewers have a built-in radar for BS. When you say, "My biggest weakness is that I care too much and work too hard," they roll their eyes. Sharing a real past weakness—and immediately pairing it with how you actively manage or overcame it—shows genuine self-awareness and maturity.
Thank you for sharing this spreadsheet-backed reality check. It's a great reminder that interviewing is a distinct skill separate from doing the actual job, and skills can always be practiced and improved.
Finalists in an interview scenario question
For anyone who's perhaps been involved in this process.
Let's say that the role you're interviewing for is of a technical origin, but the interview panel's background is more managerial and technical project management oriented, could you still expect technical questions and deepdives, or will the questions revolve around purely behavioral or scenario-based types?
When it comes down to picking a finalist, let's say it's 2 to 3 candidates that are coming out as serious contenders. What specific attributes or characteristics breaks the tie to select the finalist? Is it accreditation, or some specific answer that was given during one of the questions?
Thanks
Jobadvisor
Great questions — this comes up a lot and the answers are more nuanced than most interview guides suggest.
On the technical depth of questions when the panel is managerial:
You can still expect some technical questions, but they'll usually be framed differently. A panel of project managers and technical managers rarely goes deep into implementation details — they typically can't evaluate the answers anyway. Instead, expect questions like:
- "Walk me through how you'd approach X problem" (they're testing your process, not your syntax)
- "How would you explain this to a non-technical stakeholder?" (communication ability)
- "What went wrong on a past technical project and how did you handle it?" (judgment and ownership)
The deeper technical validation, if any, usually happens in a separate stage — either a take-home task, a technical screen earlier in the process, or a peer interview with someone in a similar role. By the finalist stage with a managerial panel, you're rarely being tested on pure technical knowledge anymore.
On what breaks the tie between 2–3 finalists:
This is where it gets very human and less formulaic. Accreditations and certifications almost never break a tie at this stage — they were table stakes to get you into the room. What actually tends to decide it:
- Cultural and team fit impression — did someone on the panel connect with you personally? This is more influential than most hiring guides admit.
- One memorable, specific answer — a concrete story that stuck. Vague answers blend together after 6 interviews; a well-told, specific example of a real challenge tends to be what panelists reference later in the debrief room.
- Clarity under pressure — how you handled a question you weren't prepared for says more than your rehearsed answers.
- Apparent self-awareness — candidates who acknowledge limitations honestly while showing a growth mindset tend to stand out to experienced managers.
- Enthusiasm for this role specifically — generic enthusiasm reads as such. Panels notice when someone has done their homework and genuinely understands what the job entails.
- References, if checked at that stage — a strong reference call can absolutely swing a close decision.
The debrief conversation after all finalists are seen is often where gut feelings get rationalized into reasons. Whoever left the strongest overall impression tends to win, and that impression is usually built on one or two specific moments rather than a consistent scorecard.
If you're in this situation yourself — the move is to make sure you have at least one or two very specific, well-structured stories ready that directly connect your past experience to what this team is trying to solve.
