Anyone who has ever applied for a job knows that it can be a mentally exhausting and stressful process. One of the reasons for this is that job seekers often complete countless of applications and never receive any feedback or status updates. They may only get what is often known as the “thank you but no thank you” letter. That is, an often auto-generated template response telling them that they were not selected for an interview. These letters rarely provide any reasons or explanations other than that there were many candidates who applied for the opening. While it is good to receive at least a final update, these responses are often sent after the position has already been filled and all interviews completed. In many cases, a job applicant has at this point already realized that they were not selected for an interview, and they have moved on with a bad impression. 

The available research data supports the importance of giving feedback to applicants during the application process. Brothwell collected some of the recent survey data in his meta-analysis and collection of 2023 Job Application Statistics. For example, he shares that “76% of job seekers say not hearing back after submitting a job application trumps the frustration of not hearing back after a first date.” He also found that “63% of job seekers will reject a job offer due to a bad candidate experience,” and “72% of job seekers who had a bad candidate experience told others about it online or in person.” Understanding of the organizational culture is also very important as 72% of job seekers said that they need to fully understand the work culture before accepting a job offer, according to Brothwell. In addition, he stated that CareerBuilder found in their survey that candidates said that it would significantly improve their candidate experience if they were provided a transparent and accurate depiction of the hiring process. Furthermore, he found that “76% of employers feel they do a good job setting expectations from the get-go, but only 47% of job seekers agree.” That is, employers seem to overestimate the quality of the job announcements that they post. In terms of the timeliness of the feedback provided to job applicants, Brothwell found that “66% of job seekers said they would wait only two weeks for a callback, after which they consider the job a lost cause and move on to other opportunities.” Job applicants seem to move on quite quickly if they do not receive any feedback. Finally, he asserted that “64% of job seekers say that a bad candidate experience would cause them to stop purchasing goods or services from a company.” This shows that there are long lasting and far-reaching negative consequences for poor job search experience and lack of communication. 

Providing feedback to job seekers clearly matters. It can prevent many negative impressions that can have long reaching and damaging consequences. Abaneth, Hackett, and Schat (2013) found that “organizations should satisfy justice rules in employee selection processes because such rules affect applicant attributions, which in turn predict perceptions and behavioral intentions.” That is, applicants make positive attributions when they feel like they are treated justly and fairly. When this occurs, they form favorable perceptions that lead to positive behaviors. Applicants tend to feel that they are treated justly and fairly when they receive constructive feedback during the application process. Therefore, organizations can maintain a positive image of themselves by providing such feedback.

There are reasons for HR sending updates late or not providing any feedback at all. Sometimes they hold on to the resumes received until the position has been accepted by the top candidate. They do not want to reject applicants too early just in case they want to reconsider. They want to be able to keep their options open if the top candidate chosen does not accept the position or if something else goes wrong. Also, there are legitimate legal reasons for not providing substantive feedback to job applicants. Organizations fear that when it is provided, a job applicant may disagree with the feedback and dispute it. In some cases, they feel that it could even lead to discrimination lawsuits. Therefore, the policy is often not to provide any feedback at all. Sometimes feedback is not provided simply because hiring managers do not feel comfortable providing it because giving quality feedback is difficult. They are not trained in communicating constructive feedback especially to applicants that they have not managed. They may also perceive it being the role of HR to provide feedback to early-stage applicants. However, HR rarely has the expertise to do so. The problem with this is that when no feedback is provided job applicants never gain any important information about their qualifications. They do not receive feedback that would allow them to identify weaknesses or opportunities for growth. They are left feeling rejected without any understanding of the reasons. While the reasons may not be anything that job applicants should take personally, it would be beneficial for applicants to gain some understanding of their perceived shortcomings. Without communication, nobody learns anything new, and the job search process continues to be a negative experience for everyone. HR departments are also not benefiting because hiring managers are not asked to provide clear reasons and criteria for their hiring choices and required to communicate the reasons for their hiring decisions. This leaves room for nepotism and bad hires. 

A mandatory feedback and communication loop would improve the job search experience for applicants and help organizations to maintain a positive image. After all, there could be an opening in the future that a rejected applicant could be ideal for. Also, a rejected applicant could become a customer or refer a friend to apply for other positions. It would be beneficial for an organization to maintain a positive impression by a job applicant. It would also help to keep the process transparent and honest, which in turn would protect again legal risks. There are many reasons for candidates not being selected for an interview, and they should not be a secret to anyone. Sometimes a candidate could even be overqualified for the position. Other times there may simply be a perceived lack of cultural fit. Job announcements do not always do a good job explaining the organizational culture or the qualifications needed for a job. It is, therefore, very understandable that job seekers may accidentally apply for positions that they are not qualified for. It would be beneficial for everyone if this misunderstanding would be clarified. The feedback provided could be relatively automated and an evaluation system could be developed to do it relatively quickly and without conflict. Job seekers typically like communication and are open to feedback. Most of them genuinely want to improve themselves and understand what they need to do to become better candidates for the job openings they are applying for. They want to receive timely acknowledgments for their efforts to apply and to feel that their applications were taken seriously. All this can be accomplished by a simple process of providing timely and transparent updates and feedback to job applicants. 

There are some easy steps that employers should take to provide proper communication and feedback during the recruitment and application process:

  1. Send an acknowledgement email of the application being completed immediately when the application has been received. If any additional information is needed, this would be a good time to request it. The email should be personalized and substantive as to not give an appearance of an impersonal template answer. This email should clearly specify the next steps in the process and thank the applicant for taking the time to apply.
  2. If the application has been chosen to be forwarded to a hiring manager, the applicant should be informed of it and the name of the hiring manager should be provided. If the application has not been chosen for further consideration at this point, a candidate should be provided a brief explanation and invited to reapply for future positions with the company. The applicant should be assured that the application would be kept active for other positions for a certain timeframe.
  3. If the applicant is shortlisted for interviews, the process and what to expect should be communicated clearly and in detail. If the applicant, after a review of their application by a hiring manager, has not been shortlisted, feedback should be provided with as much detail as is appropriate and possible. The feedback should be objective and nonjudgmental, and directly linked to the job specifications for the job posting in question.
  4. All applicants should receive a survey to inquire about their experience during the application process. This feedback should be used to continually improve the process.

The above steps could be automated to a great degree and structured within an AI powered “smart” job search portal. A portal like this could make it easy for companies to follow these steps and gain the benefits of providing substantive feedback to candidates. Applicants would make positive attributions towards the portal itself as well as the company that chooses to post job announcement in this portal. 

References:

Ababneh, K., Hackett, R., Schat, A. (2013). The Role of Attributions and Fairness in Understanding Job Applicant Reactions to Selection Procedures and Decisions. Journal of Business and Psychology v29 n1; 111-129. Springer Science+Business Media, New York, NY. 

Brothwell, P. (2023). 2023 Job Application Statistics. Retrieved from: https://blog.hiringthing.com/job-application-statistics.