Candidate Feedback Pays Brand Dividends

Most job candidates who aren’t selected to be screened and/or interviewed after they apply want feedback. If they do happen to get screened further and/or are interviewed, and then are dispositioned (rejected, declined), many still want feedback. If they’re a finalist post interview and don’t get the job offer, they want feedback as to why not.

But most companies don’t give candidate feedback at any stage. And legally, they don’t have to.

Over the past 14 years that we’ve been benchmarking candidate experience for companies big and small across industries, there are many differentiating factors we’ve found in our research. Differentiating factors that ensure a more positive business impact because more candidates who don’t get the job offers are still willing to engage a business and a brand. Apply again. Refer others. Be a brand advocate. Become and remain a customer for consumer-based businesses. 

Candidate Feedback Is A Differentiating Factor

Giving candidate feedback is one of those differentiating factors. It’s fluctuated over the years in our research, but feedback – general and specific – increases a candidate’s willingness to refer others. In fact, we’ve seen their willingness to refer increase 30-75%. CandE Winners, the companies that receive our CandE Awards each year for having a near-to-above average CandE Score (our ultimate NPS measurement based on four key ratings), always give more candidate feedback to finalists.

I’m referring to feedback for finalists, not feedback for candidates right after they applied and are dispositioned, although that will change in the future with more algorithmic improvements in conversational AI and automated personalized candidate communication. 

I’m also talking about job fit and qualification status feedback, not cultural fit feedback or anything else that could be construed as judging “personal attributes”. I don’t even play an employment lawyer on TV, so I would never give legal advice, but instead I’ll quote the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC): The main legal requirement for employers in hiring is to avoid discrimination based on protected classes (race, gender, age, disability, etc.) per laws enforced by the EEOC.

The Wrong Feedback

That also means if feedback is inconsistent (for example, two similarly-situated candidates get very different feedback), an employer may face claims of unequal treatment. Obviously, employers need to keep documentation (applications, interview notes, etc.) because dispositioned candidate records may be relevant in discrimination investigations (not advice, just an employer fact). Also, feedback that reveals internal comparisons (for example, “we chose someone younger”, “we chose someone with less experience”, etc.), could inadvertently disclose sensitive selection criteria and open up an employer to potential litigation.

So again, the optimal feedback path is giving job fit and qualification status feedback. A brief “why” the candidate didn’t get the job offer in the end. Usually these responses are brief calls and/or emails that tell a candidate: 

“There were so many qualified finalists, including you, but in the end we went with another candidate because you didn’t have X, Y, or Z. We recommend you go get X, Y, and Z, and in the meantime, you might consider one of these other roles at our company [insert jobs].”

That’s oversimplifying the exchange, but we are suggesting these are usually very concise conversations and well received by finalists. Or, as a longtime large CandE-winning healthcare employer reminded me of this year, not all finalists want to talk much after they’re given the final “no thank you”. Offering them feedback can also increase positive sentiment and perception of fairness, even if they don’t ask for it in the end. 

CandE Winners Give More Consistent Feedback

This year, giving feedback was a very clear differentiating factor for the highest rated companies in our CandE Benchmark Research Program and all CandE Winners around the world. Here are the biggest differences in North America (see the data tables below):

• The top 10 North American overall highest rated CandE Winners this year gave 54% more candidate feedback than all employers in our research, and they gave 35% more candidate feedback than all CandE Winners in our research in North America.

• All North American CandE Winners gave 20% more candidate feedback than all employers in our research.

• The top 10 large North American CandE Winners (10,000+ employees) gave 40% more candidate feedback than all large employers in our research.

• The top 10 midsize North American CandE Winners (2,500 – 10,000 employees) gave 48% more candidate feedback than all midsize employers in our research.

• The top 10 small North American CandE Winners (less than 2,500 employees) gave 67% more candidate feedback than all small employers in our research.

If we just look at our North America data by job type – hourly, professional (salaried), and management / senior leadership – the same positive differences continue, albeit smaller:

• The North American CandE Winners gave 18% more hourly candidate feedback than all employers in our research.

• The North American CandE Winners gave 12% more professional (salaried) candidate feedback than all employers in our research.

• The North American CandE Winners gave 21% more management / senior leadership candidate feedback than all employers in our research.

This also extends into our global data as well, except for Latin America, which is a very small sample size overall compared to the other regions (North America is the largest part of our research):

• The EMEA CandE Winners gave 24% more candidate feedback than all EMEA employers in our research.

• The APAC CandE Winners gave 32% more candidate feedback than all EMEA employers in our research.

Based on our CandE Benchmark Research over the years, providing candidate feedback is unequivocally a differentiating factor that can yield substantial positive business impacts. While most candidates who are dispositioned (rejected, declined) desire feedback, and legally companies are not required to give it, our research shows that companies recognized as CandE Winners consistently offer more feedback than their peers across various sizes and job types. They don’t necessarily do it for 100% of all dispositioned finalists, but they’re more consistent giving feedback over time. 

Again, candidate feedback must be the right kind, focusing on job fit and qualification status rather than personal attributes, which helps employers navigate legal requirements to avoid discrimination based on protected classes. Ultimately, our research data demonstrates that embracing this consistency and transparency – whether is given directly or simply offered – significantly boosts a candidate’s willingness to apply again, refer others, and engage in overall brand advocacy, paying brand dividends from job candidates not hired.