Why get rejected if you meet the minimum requirements?
In almost all employment situations, Minimum Requirements aren't a ticket to a sure job. They are the simply the least you need to even be considered in the running.In almost all employment situations, Minimum Requirements aren't a ticket to a sure job. They are simply the least you must have to even be considered in the running.
Most often, many, many folks meet the minimum requirements and apply. It's up to the hiring manager to choose among the many to hire the best candidates - those who meet the minimum, but also have the potential to be great hires. You might well find several candidates who have the right background to meet the requirements, but are jerks to others. You might find an otherwise-qualified person who has absolutely no people skills. You might find someone who meets the minimum requirements, but has never been able to keep a job for more than 9 months at a time. You might find a candidate who has all the minimum requirements, but will demand a higher salary.
The requirements are the minimum, they are almost never the complete picture of what you want in an employee.
If you were an investor in IBM, would you want them to hire the first person who happened to apply and met the minimum requirements? Or would you want them to hire the best candidate among all the applicants? I know where I'd want to place my investment dollars.
When you prepare to purchase a new car, you likely either have a written list of requirements or one in your head. Most likely you don't purchase the fist car that ticks all the boxes, instead you find several, and then weigh other factors (like negotiated price, etc) before ultimately making your decision. Doing so in a hiring situation only makes sense.