Is It Fair to Leave Candidates Hanging After Interviews Without Feedback?

Hi friends/seniors,

Many times we have been told after the completion of the interview, "we will let you know the result," and similarly, we would have also told our interviewees. However, it is very rare that we inform the candidate if the result is negative. Providing feedback is even rarer, which could help the candidate improve for future opportunities. Is this a good practice, considering we often emphasize providing feedback after every interview? Your valuable suggestions/comments, please!

Cheers,
Devashish.

You are right. You can prepare a letter to each candidate showing the areas that need improvement and send it to them.

Shows good results. 😛😛

Dear Soju,

Anyway, we take notes while interviewing, the same could be mailed to the candidates. This will not only help them but create goodwill for the organization as well. (This may not work with the "grand walk-in" though.)

Cheers,
Devashish.

Dear Dev,

Why is the letter not helpful to them? Can you clarify that point? Do you have any experiences?

Soju

Soju,

Letters and emails are the same, even though the way is different. But the matter is the same, and Dev mentioned to take notes so that afterwards the HR can expand the points.

And the people who don't intimate candidates, ask yourself if you are spoiling candidates' time and fooling candidates. 🤷🏻‍♂️🤷🏻‍♂️

Dear Ravi,

I mean letters as opposed to emails. I definitely recommend informing candidates about areas where improvement is needed. Ravi, any doubts? :-P:-P:-P:-P

Dear Ravi,

What do you think of HR functions, and what would an ideal HR professional be? :-P:-P

Dear Soju,

I never said that the "letter is not helpful to them," the candidates. I said email because it's the preferred medium these days. It's difficult during walk-ins because you will end up sending feedback only.

Cheers,
Devashish.

Thus, in my opinion, we should not only provide feedback to the candidates within a limited period (say 2 days) but also state our policy of re-applying after 3 months or so. If the candidate reapplies after 3 months, they would not only have worked on their weaknesses but also have higher chances of selection and will stay longer, thanks to the rapport maintained by the company even when they were previously rejected.

Seniors, your comments please.

Cheers,
Devashish.

"Nindak niyare rakhiye angan kuti chabaye, bin pani sabun bina nirmal kare suhay."

If we, as candidates, receive feedback, it will be really beneficial for us to improve ourselves.

Regards,

Shine

Hi All,

It is a very good practice to have, but there should be commitment from the top to drive the process. There will be issues of implementation according to the frequency of the vacancies, still for all, it can be taken as a best practice. Good luck with implementing.

Ikraam. (Junior member).

Search "citehr" for information on sending rejection letters or emails. The topic and the merits of doing so have already been discussed, perhaps last month.

Hi,

Greetings for the day! :icon1: It's really a nice place to learn and gain HR knowledge. Truthfully speaking, even after having 2+ years of experience, I had not been sending feedback to rejected candidates. However, after going through discussions with HR experts, I have decided to provide feedback via email to every rejected candidate (though it may be challenging for large walk-ins). I will make it a habit. This action could greatly benefit them in improving their weak areas and enhance our brand reputation. It's also a great idea to reach out to them after 3 months, as the candidate might have worked on their weaknesses by then.

I recommend all HR freshers to join citehr as they can learn a lot daily. Thanks a billion to all the HR intellectuals at citehr.

Regards,
Ram
Sr. Executive
H.R

Mr. Ram,

It's great that the above discussion is not only informative but also leading to implementation. I hope there will be fewer frustrated souls due to your initiative. I'm glad :)

Cheers,
Devashish.

Hi Asha,

I will certainly search the thread. Just to mention, we are looking for the implementation aspect - should we do it in practice and how - rather than the format and theories. Anyway, thanks for the info.

Cheers,
Devashish.

As an interviewer, the shortlisting of a candidate depends mainly on two things: whether I have "liked them" and whether I have "found them suitable." Please try to understand the significant difference between these two factors.

Those whom I have not liked, I will always shy away from giving direct or indirect feedback. However, for those whom I have not found suitable, I can always tell them the reasons then and there. I do it that way only. It is better to tell the candidates, "your profile is somehow not matching our requirement, and hence I'm afraid we cannot take your candidature further," rather than infusing false hope by saying, "we will let you know."

Any feedback on my style?

Prashant

Hi all,

I am an IT recruiter with over 2 years of relevant experience and an MBA in HR (Regular, 2006). My total experience is in a recruitment firm only. Now, I am looking for corporate exposure in Delhi/NCR. I aim to grow in the HR generalist profile rather than focusing solely on staffing. However, no company is hiring generalists without experience. In this case, I am willing to compromise on my salary. Despite this, I am struggling to find good opportunities. Can anybody guide me on how to proceed? Should I consider taking a course on HR generalist activities? Please help.

If anybody can refer me somewhere, I would be grateful.

Regards,
Yukta :-P

Dear Yukta,

I will let you know if I come across a corporate opening in your location. In the meanwhile, I'd suggest you open this request as a new post so that the views will be more, and you can expect a good response.

Thanks

Mr. Prashant,

If we are considering feedback as a systematic practice, there is no place for likes or dislikes. How would my prejudices and stereotypes (which amount to my likes) result in not giving a person feedback? We are the representatives of the organization and not mere individual beings.

Moreover, it's not always possible to give feedback then and there because hiring decisions are taken by HR and the technical team, and there are various factors to be compared. What if you found a candidate not suitable (let's say you rank him 7/10 on your "like" scale) and others are even worse, which you came to know later? In that case, it's not a wise decision to let go of the best among the available talent pool.

Hope you understood what I meant to say.

Cheers,
Devashish.

Hi Asha,

Just went through the thread and your post as well. It was a perfect example of the 'sandwich' message, informative indeed.

Cheers,
Devashish.

I am a HR Consultant. I receive many profiles for my job postings (say about 500 profiles a day). Most of the profiles may not meet the requirements. In this case, should I reply to them, pinpointing the reasons why I cannot proceed with their profile to my client? However, replying to each one might consume a lot of my time, potentially causing me to miss my daily target.

No, buddy, these feedback (rejection letters) should be given to the interviewees, not to those who have merely forwarded their resumes. Practically speaking, even if a candidate applies to numerous jobs and doesn't expect feedback. However, what you can do is customize your email client so that the candidates automatically receive an acknowledgment. This would add value to your image. Open for suggestions. Cheers, Devashish.

Gentleman,

We will let you know means they will think over the letter and will inform you about their decision on the outcome of the interview. This is a customary phrase used to express the interview panel's inability to give you immediate feedback on your interview performance, which most companies express by providing feedback.

Regards,

Rashid

Dear Rashid,

I disagree with you that most of the companies provide feedback to rejected candidates. They simply don't.

Cheers,
Devashish.

Dear Devashish,

This process depends on which kind of organizations we have been interviewed by. If they are midsize or proprietary companies, don't bother. We are referring to the good public limited, stock exchange-listed companies, or MNCs. They care about their market image and practice good HRM.

If I am interviewed by some narrow-minded management whose business ethics mean only making money by exploiting man, machinery, money, and material, they do not care for value addition or culture. So, we don't consider them companies run by professional management. Therefore, the question of giving feedback does not arise for these companies.

Regards,
Rashid

Someone from the industry will advise me? If the government is paying Rs 4000.00 per month as minimum wages, are we allowed to sort it to basic/washing allowance/CCA/CA/Site Allowance to reduce PF liability.

It's a good sign that in the same way we mail a candidate an interview call letter, we can also send a feedback email to the candidate by mentioning that he was not selected and providing genuine reasons (if possible). That actually improves the company's image a lot in the minds of the candidates.

Truly said, bro, but theoretical. Are you talking about MNCs and good PSUs, eh? How about Barclays, FIC (Singapore NBFC), and Mizuho Bank (Japan's second-largest bank)? I never found any feedback for the rejected candidates. The same goes for Indiabulls, Unicorns, and Shriram Group, to name a few. But yes, of course, there are many organizations that do provide. Guess you got my point, Rashit bhai.

Cheers, Devashish.

Hi Naveen,

I advise you to create a new thread where your questions will be more visible and thus easily solved.

Cheers,
Devashish.