Following up With Candidates is Not Only the Polite Thing to Do, But It’s Also Good External com‘ !
By: Christophe Depernet
Tags: Courtesy, Communication, HR, Recruitment, External Communication

Following up With Candidates is Not Only the Polite Thing to Do, But It’s Also Good External Communication!

A few weeks ago, I asked my followers to answer two short polls. I had a hunch that companies who post jobs most of the time don’t follow up with candidates they don’t pick. These polls are not based on a representative sample of the population, as more official polls would be, but they will have to do for now. In an excellent article published on LinkedIn in 2016, Hélène Ly was already noting that, in March 2015, 81% of candidates never received any follow-up for job positions they applied to. Therefore, my results are reasonably close, and the five added percent could be a sign of a negative trend.

> Survey in English: When you apply for jobs, how often do companies follow up with you and let you know that your application has been rejected? Very often 0% — Often 14% — Rarely 62% — Almost never 24%

-> Survey in English: Do you think it’s useful / important / necessary that companies give you negative feedback to explain why they rejected your application? Very useful 77% — Useful 21%- Somewhat useful 0% — Not useful at all 2%

The first poll showed that 86% of candidates, i.e., almost nine people out of 10, get no or very little feedback after applying for a job offer

In the meantime, 98% of those surveyed are waiting for an answer, as shown in the second poll, and they think that feedback is very useful, important, or necessary. Only one person out of 43 said that the feedback is entirely unnecessary. If this person could explain his position in the comments, I would really appreciate it as I have a hard time understanding.

The dichotomy between the expectation of feedback from 98% of candidates and the absence of follow-up from companies for 86% of candidates puzzles me. Considering there is such a high demand for feedback, therefore communication and company’s image, why don’t employers take the time to do it?

This is what I would like to talk about in this article.

Aside from the apparent lack of manners evidenced when you don’t follow up with candidates, feedback from Human Resources, even negative, is in itself a tool for external communication and conveys a particular image of the company!

In her analysis, Hélène Ly explains the six reasons for this absence of follow-up: the recruiter who lacks time, the bad mannered and unethical recruiter, the recruiter who doesn’t know how to phrase negative feedback, the recruiter who has no idea why the candidate has been rejected, the recruiter who doesn’t want to discriminate (or show discrimination), and finally the unorganized recruiter.

To paraphrase Hélène, recruiters should not forget they are the first contact a candidate has with a company. Not following up with candidates says volumes about your company, and not in a good way. Don’t forget that, in this digital world, a company’s reputation can be built or destroyed in a matter of minutes.

First, let me say that I am not a Human Resources Director, and I don’t wish to give any HR lessons. What we are talking about here is communication and communication only!

We can imagine three different types of follow-up letters that would require more or less time and engagement on the part of the Human Resources department (supported by the Communication department for the template and the IT department for the mass mailing). Each type of follow-up shows a different level of communication and impacts how the company is perceived.

1- An automated email with minimal customization, including the candidate’s name on a standardized message.

🕛 This is for a Human Resources department that is either novice or lacks time. A simple mass mailing can process 100 follow-up letters in less than 10 minutes with customizable fields such as [first name last name], [reference of the offer], and a completely standardized body of email.

☁ It’s the base level that each company should reach when they ask people to apply for jobs. It shows common courtesy and efficiency! The candidate gets an answer and will see the company as professional and forthright, even though a bit cold. But he will probably think along the lines of: “It’s normal, they must receive hundreds of applications, and they can’t spend 15 minutes to answer each and every one of them”. It’s still a better look for the company than if there is no follow-up at all.

2- A semi-automated email, including the candidate’s name on a standardized message, as well as a few reasons for the rejection.

🕓 This is for a Human Resources department that is well organized and has compiled in a spreadsheet or on each resume the reasons why each candidate was rejected. A simple mass mailing can process 100 follow-up letters in 100 minutes. It contains customizable fields such as [first name last name], [reference of the job offer], and X predefined fields for rejection reasons that you can check (so that they will only appear in the final email if the box has been checked). All this with a completely standardized body of email.

⛅ It’s the second level. It’s not entirely customized (but will the candidate actually notice?). It will still give the candidate some real feedback, which will help him better understand why his application was rejected and give him tools to become a better candidate for other job offers. For the company, the brand image is better reinforced than with the base level as the customization showcases its commitment to people and gives some understanding as to why the application was rejected.

3- The completely customized email that clearly explains the reasons for the rejection.

🕖 This is for a Human Resources department that is well organized and professional and has put down for each resume the X reasons why the candidate has been rejected. A customized mailing can process 80 to 100 follow-up letters in 200 to 220 minutes. It contains two automated fields [first name last name], and [reference of the offer], and a customized email body that details the reasons why the candidate was rejected and also gives some advice on how to improve the candidate’s application (readability of the resume, spelling mistakes, a discrepancy between the candidate’s profile and the job offer, standardized cover letter, etc.). You will indeed have to hurry but, with some practice, you should discover that there are not ten different friendly ways to tell someone that his resume is packed with spelling mistakes ( which is a big no-no for jobs like journalist/writer or press relations/communication), that the job requires the candidate to be bilingual (for someone who will be working in the USA or France), or to have a driver’s license (to drive for ZombiCar).

☀ This is the ultimate level that will provide the candidate with a complete answer, entirely customized (and trust me, he’s going to notice!), that will allow him to really understand why his application was rejected, and that will help him markedly improve his future applications. This is the type of feedback everybody would like to get when they apply for a job! The company will then be perceived as putting human capital front and center (which it does by setting up this good HR process), attentive to the well-being of its employees (miles above the other 86% that don’t even bother to follow up), giving feedback to the applicant about why his application was rejected and how he can improve.

As we saw with these three HR/Com‘ options, it is possible to mix common courtesy with external communication to benefit both parties, with an approach that is sound, ethical, and not too time-consuming! Today, you are a recruiter; you can start that process (HR quality, courtesy, and communication). Tomorrow, you might well be a candidate looking for a job; getting feedback, even negative, will then be essential to you. You will undoubtedly have a new appreciation for companies that would have taken the time to adopt this kind of benevolent HR/Communication process.

On to you, dear readers!

║ Let’s talk about COM #4 ║ © Christophe Depernet ║ 16 Nov 2020 ║