Ari H
Influencing business and government policy makers with marketing, communications & new media; seeking new opportunities
Why do companies not follow-up after conducting an interview?
I notice a job ad, pitch myself to the employer, am asked to come in to their office for an interview, meet with senior managers, and am told I will receive a follow-up call or email in x number of days.
Time passes without a response. I wait another week for good measure and call/email my interviewer or their assistant to inquire and 9 times out of 10 I never receive a response.
I can cite numerous examples of this corporate behavior and I don't understand why. If *I* pitch *you* and you respond to me, that indicates I exhibit enough interest to warrant an hour out of your schedule to meet with me. Then you don't respond. I don't get it.
On the extreme, I was invited to meet with a firm last year THREE TIMES and was never told the outcome nor was responded to when I asked for a status.
Thoughts?
Clarification added August 22, 2008:
Wow! 37 answers in 9 hours and 6 days to go. This is not the response I expected, and it goes to show the power of networking sites like LinkedIn and that everyone has a unique voice to add to the social dynamic.
As Ted Kladopoulos mentions below, and as the existence of LinkedIn serves, we're living in a networked world and it's silly that after an interview gone sour for whatever reason, the dialogue and prospective network fizzles. Why? Why can't, as Ted implies, a would-be employer and would-be employee, continue building the collective network?
A few comments:
1. Responding to Gavin Barnard, Chitra Ravi, Tim Heard, Adam Endelman, etc., the examples I cite do not involve meeting with HR internal managers or external recruiters, predominantly because HR is not an option. Rather, I refer to C-level management, who in many cases are presidents or members of the boards of director for varied organizations.
2. Responding to Ian McAllister, that is a good suggestion to contact firms and ask for candid feedback on how one was perceived in the application and interview process.
3. Responding to Cheryl Seminara, I agree that it is hard to fire people, but I'd rather be told such than be led around the bush. Be direct with me and I'll be direct with you. That's called communication.
Good Answers (13)
Kristi C
User Experience Manager for Brands, Sites & Software
Best Answers in: Job Search (1), Staffing and Recruiting (1), Guerrilla Marketing (1), Search Marketing (1), Branding (1), Interface Design (1)
Ari, you have hit the nail on the head of my BIGGEST gripe about getting involved with companies and recruiting companies. This has happened to me so often, I find myself going into a situation with very skeptical vibes toward the new company I'm speaking to because I am wary they are just going to blow me off after a series of "good" conversations, interviews, and in several cases, telling me an offer is going to be made!
I chalk it up, and I hate to sound harsh, but it's the ugly truth, to simple lack of courtesy, compassion and empathy. I hope anyone that reads this will think twice the next time they have a candidate they have spoken to frequently and even interviewed contacting them for a status update.... when you are sitting at your desk in an office, cubicle or at home, busily working and earning a paycheck, think about how you would feel if you were unemployed or between projects, not earning anything, and someone thought you were potentially going to hire them. Wouldn't YOU want to know if it was likely or not going to happen? Even "We haven't made up our minds about you" is better than nothing, if it is The Truth. It's so boneheadedly obvious, but "the golden rule" of treating others as you would want to be treated is the only decent way of interacting with potential candidates.
Companies and recruiters interviewing or getting interviews rarely seem to consider the effort an applicant is putting into making a good impression, which includes, but is not limited to the following:
-- shopping for appropriate clothing
-- getting a haircut, mani/pedi, etc.
-- redoing or updating their resume
-- preparing a portfolio or gathering supporting documents together
-- creating a presentation
-- soliciting references from friends and colleagues
-- researching the company they will be speaking to, often spending hours reading everything they can to educate themselves
-- driving (in my case, nearly two hours each way recently!) to the interview
-- spending anywhere from 1 hour to most of the day at the interview site
It just makes me agitated to think that someone cannot spend 60 SECONDS of their time to craft an email, at the very least that says:
"I'm sorry, but we're not interested in hiring you at this time. Good luck with your job search and if something else opens up we feel you are a fit for, we will contact you."
Every person I have spoken to about the rude practice of no response these days would rather get a message like that than be left hanging.
Sergey B
Experienced IT specialist
Best Answers in: Government Policy (1), Computer Networking (1), Using LinkedIn (1)
Hi Ari,
There are, actually, several different dimensions of not calling back.
The fisrt case is obvious: the employee is not qualified. In this case, it is usually quite clear to both sides, that the further communication will get to nothing. In such case, the interviewer would probably tell you something like "don't call us, we'll call you". Usually in such case they would never call back, due to being dishonest (instead of just saying no, they gave false hope)
Second case is as following: the person is qualified, but is not the best fit: either due to missing experience, or too high demands. In such case, the employer would like to keep the card to himself - interview others while trying to maintain some sort of relationship with the attendee. But it never works the expected way, since nobody actually keeps in touch. Usually it goes like "well, tomorrow I have another interview, than I will definitely call him". At some stage, it is too late to follow up.
Another issue which often causes such a behavior is discrepancies inside the organization. For example, the interviewer realy wants to hire the applicant, but HR person insists on lower salary or so. This is the most problematic situation from my point of view: Usually the interview finishes with some sort of mutual expectation between the sides, since it is quite understood that there is a fit. From interviewer point of view - the person is a fit, and it becomes only matter of technics to bring him in. From the applicant side - this is a proposition. And then things start going wrong
Unfortunately, the dimension #3 is much more common than expected, especially in technology field
Well, i being a recruiter never leave a candidate without closing the loop. If its a reject, we generally send an email. It also depends on the time the management takes to process the resume. Sometimes the concerned person would be on vacation or leave, so the interview process will be on hold. Sometimes the positon would not exist any longer. So the recruiter would not be in a position to tell that to the candidate.
Ian R M
Recruiter
Best Answers in: Job Search (16), Resume Writing (12), Career Management (12), Staffing and Recruiting (6), Business Development (2), Personnel Policies (1), Employment and Labor Law (1), Advertising (1), Organizational Development (1)
Simply, its horribly unprofessional on behalf of the hiring company. Under EU law, there could be a case for legal duress, so most HR managers are on top of this. But in North America and other parts of the world where there is not so much focus on HR and Human Rights law, then such incidents can be common.
A professional would always close out - how ever badly the interview went, and even if it was clearly obvious to all in the room at the time that it was a "Don't call us, we'll call you" opportunity. Plus, a candidate deserves feedback on an interview, and how they can improve/apply more relevantly next time.
I would change your approach in one area, and review your performance in another. Firstly, the way you describe this situation it seems to be happening very often - so if after the stated time period you have heard nothing, go back with "Look, I am assuming I haven't got the position, but would appreciate your feed back on my application and interview performance." That's a far, far softer approach than a "have I got the job or not" question, and would allow even a wholly negative reaction to be delivered.
Secondly, I would review your choice of posts applied for, or your interview performance. Ask a friend before you apply for any new positions to check your application through for errors; if they think its appropriate and OK, then its probably your interview experience which needs a bit of buffing, so again ask a friend who has been a hiring manager to give you a mock interview, or take some training. Once you have learnt the skills, the situation should not repeat.
Good Luck!
Laziness it is......and lets be brutal seriously poor practice to leave a bad personal impression of them as an employer/business. We are all living examples of a networked generation.....you tell 3 people, they tell 3 and so on. Love to say these things come back to haunt companies but at the root of why they do it and why they get away with it must be the sense of temporary power they feel in the decision-making relationship.
Send them your disappointment.....make it clear that it's your standard approach to write to thank people for them time....make sure they pay your expenses, including the extra-Grande Starbucks you had on the way!
Hema I
Manager HR - C&B at HDFC Standard Life Insurance
Best Answers in: Staffing and Recruiting (1)
Hi Ari,
Yes I agree with you on this. I have faced this as well on a lot of occasions. There are a few possibilities that come to mind.
1. The very visible reason which has already been highlighted by the others on this forum is the fact that a lot of companies might not want to be the "bearer of bad news". It is a little unpleasant to hear that you have been rejected. Therefore a lot of companies would let it slide till the candidate loses interest & stops following up
2. A lot of times, companies might just want to feel the pulse of the market to understand the trends. To know whether a particular skill set is easily hireable.
3. Companies take time to finalise on a candidate for a variety of reasons including the recruitment process which is internal to the organisation & also to tap more qualified candidates. However, at the same time, they might not want to clsoe on a particular candidate that they have met as yet. This would be because, in case the company is unable to find a suitable candidate after extensive search also, they might want to revert to this candidate that they have already met.
4. I have also seen that most companies these days do not wish to invest time in training new employees. By this I mean that if a ready resource is available, companies prefer this candidate as opposed to someone who is around 60% to 70% ready for the job in consideration. That's why companies would delay their decision in the hope of finding that "ideal" candidate.
I hope my replies have helped.
Regards,
Hema Iyer
Cheryl S
Director, Homeland Security Academy
Best Answers in: Job Search (2), Starting Up (2), Purchasing (1), Regulation and Compliance (1), Education and Schools (1), Resume Writing (1), Conference Planning (1), Sales Techniques (1), Writing and Editing (1), Organizational Development (1), Small Business (1), Using LinkedIn (1)
They:
1. are scared they will hurt your feelings
2. don't know how to tell you.
3. aren't sure of the person they hired and are scared to make a decision.
4. unprofessional and you wouldn't want to work for them anyways.
The hardest thing a manager must do is to fire someone. The second hardest thing is to tell someone that you will not be hiring them. Once you learn how to do both, you minimize the uneasieness for everyone. You learn to be supportive without saying "you suck and the other guy was better". You learn to offer some constructive criticism, "You answered the questions well, but we were looking for someone who has a little more experience in XXX. Perhaps when you have some more expeirence we can talk again". Just be honest. The person you are firing or not hiring is a person and deserves to be treated professionally and with respect.
Ari--3 times you met with them? Okay....never leave an interview without having the next step clearly defined. "Thank you for your time today. I am glad that we had a chance to discuss xxxxx, and the project you mentioned sounds very promising. What is the next step for me in this hiring process/when should I expect your decision?"
If they can't answer that, they don't know--or they may be stringing you along. Either way, send them a thank you for their time, but you wish to withdraw your application for consideration. Should a position become available within the next xxx days/months that they feel would be a good fit for you, you would appreciate hearing from them'. But, don't hold your breath--that just shows your level of professionalism and you may never know when they come across you again!
Maurizia G
Owner, Novilinguists Multimedia Localization and translation services into Italian and European languages
Best Answers in: Internationalization and Localization (1), Corporate Law (1), Advertising (1), Internet Marketing (1), Viral Marketing (1), Search Marketing (1), Corporate Governance (1)
Mature professionals (managers and entrepreneurs) are hard to find. Time is a scarce resource. Still, a response is worthwhile. To do this, you need an effort, energy and time to devote to it. It's much more a waste of time to interview someone if then no feedback is given. Maybe you were not the right resource, but as a human being (not a beast) you deserve an answer. Even a negative one. I always try to spend at least a couple of minutes to resp. We receive unsollicited requests from translators, sometimes..I look at those profiles, the ones I decide to sift, I follow up. The ones who are not relevant I can't respond as time is very scarce. You need to invest it. Even replying to you is time you invest. You invest in business culture and education and you make employees understand they are not just a factor of production but humans who deserve duly attention. Maturity means recalling your promises and keeping them. Many people talk, few take actions. Taking action requires time and dedication to provide a feedback and maybe saying a "no" to the candidate. Without a feedback, the candidate will never know what went wrong. Bosses have the task to stimulate empowerment not just let it go.. Some other times it's just that people talk and then they forget. As a trend people are like that. This is another lesson for me to learn that when I state something, I need to put into action my words.
Thank you
Maurizia Gregorio
Novilinguists
www.novilinguists.com
http://www.linkedin.com/in/novilinguists
Joanna B
Partner, Black Appointments Executive Search (blackster999@gmail.com) Open to Invites MyLink500.com
This is merely an example of human nature, nobody likes to be the bringer of bad news so in some companies they just......don't. And they will avoid calls to do do that.
The problem is that this attitude causes a lot of unneccesary distress and anger in candidates and lasting hostility towards their company.
You MUST tell unsuccessful candidates what the score is at the earliest possible opportunity, the only reason for putting off telling them they didn't get the position is that they are 2nd or 3rd choice and the 1st choice hasn't been signed up yet. That said you must still take their call even if your response can't be a firm "you're hired" or a polite rejection.
Why make enemies when you don't have to?
Many of these answers hit the target - unprofessional, avoiding bearing bad news. However, it should be considered that those people that make the hiring decisions as well as those that are in direct contact with the candidate are wasting an opportunity to network. Although a candidate may not be the best fit they could be a HR resource in the future. Thus, following up with the candidate is beneficial to all.
Tim H
President at eSearch Associates
Best Answers in: Job Search (14), Staffing and Recruiting (3), Career Management (3), Business Development (1), Small Business (1)
I have scanned a whole page of these responses. Certainly the behavior is inexcusable. However, contrary to what many are saying, it's not necessarily that someone is being lazy or unprofessional. ... Though it does reflect poorly in any case.
At Humana, we're fortunate to have an automated system that allows recruiters to update the status of an applicant. At the very least, the person gets an emailed response when they submit theur resume for a position online, and another notification when the position is filled or closed. ... If a candidate is rejected, the emails can be tailored with a bit of an explanation. (Someone more qualified was selected, you lacked the right education or experience, the position was closed and left unfilled, etc.) On occasion though, even this system may break down. ... It still depends on the recruiter going back into the system and generating the emails once the position has been filled. And if they have a ton of openings and a position gets placed on hold indefinitely, the candidate may not get notified. ... Anyone who's interviewed SHOULD get notified of the status, or at least replied to when they inquire.
Now, let's look at recruiters and HR managers who lack the benefit of such systems. There are some companies where the HR departments are spread really thin. The person doing the recruiting may also be handling employee relations, benefits, new hire paperwork, orientation, etc. Let's then say that this person has 30 to 40 varied open positions to fill. (That's undoubtedly too high of a number for a person in that position, but it's not unusual.) The HR person has managers leaning on him ever day because they have open positions. Then he sends them resumes, but they're too busy to repond in a timely fashion. Then they finally interview ... several candidates are brought in over a period of several weeks. Then it takes the manager another week to get around to filling out all of the right forms to extend an offer. Then maybe the offer is rejected and they're trying to figure out what to do next. ... Multiply this out by several openings. ... Now give the same person the job of trying to do a salary survey and figure out what it's going to cost the company if they give everyone raises to keep up with the market.
My point is that sometimes there just aren't enough hours in the day to get everything done, even if you want to. And maybe in a depressed economy, the HR person doesn't have the luxury of quitting to find a better job. Maybe she's a single mom in a relatively small town with few opportunities...
It sounds far-fetched, but I promise you that none of that is unrealistic. While many companies are improving their processes tremendously with automated processes and better HR applications, many don't have that luxury.
I know firsthand ... Years ago I was in a job in which I had 100+ open positions, wasn't just doing recruiting, and we were behind the market with regard to pay. I was working 70 to 80 hours per week ... weekends holidays... was up before the sun was up and often got home after dark. I don't remember specifics, but there were certainly people I didn't follow up with. I regretted it, but couldn't do a thing about it.
Like many have said. That type of treatment, while totally unacceptable, is fairly common. Generally, if you're a candidate that the company is interested in, you'll know it. If you have followed up twice and still gotten no reponse, write that company off as a company you wouldn't want to work for anyway. Picture how stressed that poor recruiter is because he can't do his job as well as he'd like to, and know that if it's that bad in HR, it might very well be that bad in the department you interviewed for. Shake it off and move on...
Best of luck.
Tim
Clarification added August 22, 2008:
One additional note. Subsequently I was fortunate to move on to better opportunities. I take a lot of satisfaction in the fact that when I was a 3rd party recruiter, many candidates would tell me that I was the only recruiter who would regularly return their calls. (Sometimes I do respond with emails, especially if I don't have any new news. ... It's just faster, and my time is still limited.)
Adam E
Financial Analyst at Morgan Memorial Goodwill
Best Answers in: Equity Markets (1), Ethics (1), Web Development (1)
Excellent responses - only one thing I'd like to add. You will generally encounter this behavior with internal recruiters, not so much with headhunters or staffing/placement agencies (whose businesses depend on networking and relationships).
Human Resources exists as a department so that a business can manage the costs and risks associated with having employees. Basically, one of HR's jobs is to protect the business from its own current, former and prospective employees. When a recruiter tells you that you weren't hired, he or she knows that you're going to ask why not. So the recruiter needs to have an ironclad reason , and the recruiter needs to be able to articulate it convincingly. The recruiter's nightmare scenario is that one of his or her applicants will litigate against the company, alleging that he or she was passed over for something like race, veteran status, citizenship, marital status, etc.
If the recruiter leaves the applicant hanging, the conversation is avoided and the company is protected. It isn't professional, but it's safe.
Caitlin K
Paid blogger at trueslant.com
Best Answers in: Mentoring (4), Public Relations (4), Staffing and Recruiting (3), Freelancing and Contracting (2), Writing and Editing (2), Change Management (2), Organizational Development (2), Career Management (2), Ethics (2), Using LinkedIn (2), Customer Service (1), Travel Tools (1), Occupational Training (1), Customer Relationship Management (1), Sales Techniques (1), Planning (1), Philanthropy (1), Professional Networking (1), Blogging (1)
While it's an unpleasant and perhaps rare possibility, you may -- if you supplied them -- have been shot down by a reference. This happened to me after a good interview with one of the country's top magazines. It had been pretty clear they were very interested then....nothing. I called until I got the interviewer on the phone and asked what had happened. I learned never to rely on this prior employer (who had promised a good reference). I doubt most people would have been so candid but it's a good thing this man told me what changed their minds.
Links:
More Answers (26)
Sad to say....that's the reality in life :)
Just move on in life ya *wink*
Andrea Z
On/Offline Reader, Writer and Resource Wrangler
Best Answers in: Using LinkedIn (8), Career Management (2), Professional Networking (2), Events Marketing (1), Internet Marketing (1), Public Relations (1), Non-profit Management (1), Market Research and Definition (1), Ethics (1)
they're passive agressive that way. rejecting you is ugly for everybody, thus they just pretend you don't exist.
Ari,
That is common practice. Interviewers would say that they will contact you after the interview but most likely they would only contact applicants that are highly qualified. Some companies they would say that you are qualified to get a second interview from another person, then there is a chance you get the job, but if not, it's time to move on and probably don't count that as your prospect. As an applicant, it is better for you to follow up with the person who interviewed you within 24 hours to find out if there's a possibility, other than that, just keep trying until you get one somewhere.
Good luck,
Charita King 562-276-8681
Hi Ari
There is no excuse. It is simply people being lazy or not having the courage to tell you that you are not right.
A simple reject email takes a few seconds to send.
Best of luck.
Chris
Unfortunately, this happens across all industries and more often than not comes down to either forgetfulness or cowardice. Nobody likes to have to give bad news and quite often a manager will put of the call. After a few days it will leave your mind and, while you had every intention of calling with the bad news, you will simply move on to other things. The other more sinister reason is that the manager in question does not like to be the bearer of bad news and will refuse to put himself through the process. It is very rare that you would not receive feedback as they would like to spare you the pain of receiving bad news.
Personally, I believe that is essential to receive feedback after an interview no matter what the outcome. Every interview is an experience and it is very difficult to learn from that experience if you have no idea how it went.
Hi,
This usually happens. Generally very few companies are clear about what their requirements are and whom they want to hire. I will give you some examples:
1) Some companies want to hire new staff/engineers as they are expecting new projects. Many a times it happens that the new project which is going to come in gets delayed or never comes in and the companies on the other hand have already started interviewing candidates for the new project which is yet to come in. Due to this they keep the interviewed candidates on hold and do not provide any outcome to them with the fear that the candidates already interviewed might go somehwere else and they again have to do the entire recruitment process again.
2) In todays time, everything has become very competitive. The companies want the best talent and want to pay less in order to minimize their costs. So they keep interviewing people and do not provide a feedback to the earlier interviewed candidates thinking that if the person whom they are interviewing currently doesnt click then they may call back the earlier candidates. Again this process takes long and the interviewed candidate has to keep waiting for a response.
Thanks,
kamlesh
Subhas C B
Management Consultant
Best Answers in: Using LinkedIn (21), Staffing and Recruiting (12), Career Management (10), Change Management (4), Organizational Development (3), Education and Schools (2), Job Search (2), Mentoring (2), Offshoring and Outsourcing (2), Guerrilla Marketing (2), Public Relations (2), Writing and Editing (2), Professional Books and Resources (2), Ethics (2), Professional Networking (2), Purchasing (1), Business Dining and Entertainment (1), Certification and Licenses (1), Occupational Training (1), Conference Venues (1), Accounting (1), Budgeting (1), IPO (1), Venture Capital and Private Equity (1), Economics (1), Risk Management (1), Personnel Policies (1), Internationalization and Localization (1), Advertising (1), Internet Marketing (1), Business Development (1), Labor Relations (1), Planning (1), Option Markets (1), Non-profit Management (1), Quality Management and Standards (1), Supply Chain Management (1), Personal Investing (1), Personal Real Estate (1), Distribution (1), Market Research and Definition (1), Pricing (1), Business Plans (1), Small Business (1), Green Business (1), E-Commerce (1), Computers and Software (1), Telecommunications (1), Web Development (1)
It is uncomfortable to take a decision to reject a candidate and difficult to say 'no'. So, people avoid this.
You should imply that 'no follow-up' means 'not interested in you'.
Sometimes, the selection process ends after a long time, when a suitable person joins. By that time it is too late to follow-up all candidates interviewed.
Multiple visits and multiple interviews raise the expectations of a candidate, but it becomes more difficult for the organization to give their opinion to the candidate.
They are just lazy, unprofessional and if this is how they conduct themselves do you really want to be a part of that organisation?
Also, how would you have dealy with the rejection? This may have a small impact. But Sod them, life goes on and dont dwell on what you cant control.
Happy hunting.
Hi Ari,
The main reason is a lack of empathy with the client , a hidden agenda in their recruitment process and down right ignorance which indicates a very poor employee /employer relationship moving forward. One of reasons recruitment agencies now flourish is because of such poor handling of the recruitment process......
I empathise with you totally,
please see www.spectrum-personnel.com for our recruitment experience
Gary Dixon
Alan C
Now Settled In Malaysia and Interested in Exploring All Management, Training and Business Writing Opportunities
Best Answers in: Staffing and Recruiting (1)
I have to agree they are lazy. We are a recruitment company and WE cannot get answers for our candidates.
We try by phone the person goes missing. We send e-mails no answer.
When we send a good candidate they reply instantly, when that candidate what's a status report they all run and hide.
byomjeet M
HR Professional with more than 13 years of experience in HR & OD
Best Answers in: Staffing and Recruiting (2), Compensation and Benefits (1), Personnel Policies (1), Change Management (1)
It is always better to inform the candidate about the result of her/his interview. By doing this, you, not only are helping the candidate to look for alternatives without waiting for your response but also help yourselves in bulding up the image of the company. It helps in employer branding.
I also have faced the same thing in the past when one of the highly professionally maanged MNCs informed me, after the interview, that they liked my profile and shortlisted me for some more rounds of interviews but they never got back to me even after couple of weeks. They even didnt bother to respond to my mails, requesting them to inform me about the dates of the next phase of interviews so that I can plan my time accordingly. In such a situation I will have to forced to think whether the comany is really professionally managed.
I guess the age old addage of treat others how you would expect to be treated yourself could apply here.
Not responding to an applicant after an interview is just unprofessional and speaks volumes for your business in my opinion. I know of someone who was interviewed for a senior role within a canadian telco manufacturer and after a few positive interviews received no response. I have even heard of staff applying for internal roles at the same company, being interviewed and hearing no response which is ludicrous. At the end of the day anybody, no matter who they are would prefer to be notified that they didn't get a position due to x and y than being left not knowing where they stand. Surely that is why we have HR departments or internal/external recruitment teams so this simple process can be carried out. It's common courtesy.
As a recruiter I will always give my candidates feedback on interviews, how will they learn from their mistakes or failings otherwise? How are you supposed to develop a relationship and work together if you cannot be frank and open with your peers. I think the same goes for CV applications too. It is true that we only have so many hours in a day but how long does it take to send someone a reject template email along with a personal line containing one or two specific reasons why an applicant is not suitable for a particular role?
This is happening universal. Being a recruiter and asking response from the Hiring Managers. Be it an mnc or a small corporate. They take forever to reply. If they dont reply us, how can we revert to our candidates.
Its disappointing and managements should really change the way they work. Or people will lose their faith in these companies and start spreading news about these companies.
Dont you agree?
I would say that most commonly it is simply incompetence on the part of the hiring company.
I Agree with Oliver West's comments - organisations that do this should be careful, as every time this happens it is bad PR.
The only pragmatic advice I can offer, is that when you end the interview, ask how the interviewer feels you have performed, and be very clear about when/if you can expect to hear from them.
This simply obliges or commits them to some form of feedback. If they don't respond after this, then you most certainly don't want to work for them anyway.
Hope your job-hunt improves.
Steve
Gavin B
Senior EMEA Recruiter at Pegasystems
Best Answers in: Resume Writing (1), Staffing and Recruiting (1)
Scenario for you to consider Ari - As a recruiter, i have 40 live jobs, each job receives 10 applciaitons, plus my head hunting to try and find the 'best' person in the market, say another 5 per job. Thats 600 candidates i have to go through, screen, educate on the job and company and then reject or move forward, all whilst ive got the next quarter's headcount of 30 jobs being approved and which im pipeling for. As you can see it's not always possible to provide an individual tailored response to every candidate. In an ideal world this would be great, but in reality there just isnt the time. I would also suggest you dont attempt to book an hour of a recruiters time until you have had an initial phone conversation with them first to establish IF you are actually the right person for the job.
Michael L
Founder, Artisan Search Ltd
Best Answers in: Staffing and Recruiting (2), Job Search (1), Resume Writing (1)
I think most of the answers here are spot on. It's rude, frustrating and unprofessional, but I'm afraid all too common - many hiring companies just lose interest in unsuccessful candidates with no thought for what they are doing to their employer brand and reputation by behaving like this.
I suppose it's also a fear or reluctance to be the bearer of bad news. Although in my experience unsuccessful candidates are far more likely to leave a recruitment process with a positive impression if they are given constructive or even critical feedback, rather than just left hanging.
Clarification added August 22, 2008:
I don't agree with the answers that suggest you shouldn't get feedback - if you have made it as far as a face to face interview then it is absolutely reasonable for you to receive at least a phone call to give you feedback.
We just cant balme only HR's for this ,Sometimes the HR temselves would not have got feedback form the Person who took the interview ...
Also There is one fancy word these days..."candidate is on hold"...,Person who interviews would have liked the candidate but still wants to see if he gets another candidate with lower cost..then he would put the candidate on hold..so its like hanging in between yes and no ..in such cases HR cannot convey what it is ..
In few cases after the interview is done ..the position will go on hold due to companies situation ...wherin even the best candidate cannot be conveyed that he is been selected.
Also many candidates when give negative feedback ...gets offended ..they do not have open ears to hear what is that they need to improve on ..recruitment consultants may require their contact for any other job opening ..so not to spoil the relationship with the candidate the consultant would not give proper feedback when it is negative.
