The Fair Hiring Process: What Matters Most to Job Candidates
By: Eliran Rubin
Tags: Tech, HR, Hiring, Recruiting, Job Hunting

Written By: Iris Shoor

This article was first published at startupiko.com, by Iris Shoor the founder & CEO of Oribi (TLV Partners portfolio), after a large survey Oribi’s team conducted over the past two weeks. We thought that it should be also distributed over Medium and our publication at a shorter piece.

What matters most to you in the interview process?

A new job is fun and exciting. The way to it… not so much. We were all once in that position — it demands lots of energy and strength to interview at various places, answer endless personal and technical questions, and in many cases get ‘no’ for an answer. So, it may not be a great pleasure but nevertheless, the process can be done in a respectable and sensitive manner.

Here are the answers and the conclusions. I must admit, many of them surprised me and raised super valid points I didn’t consider myself.

What matters most to you in the interview process?

Transparency. The subject that came up the most was transparency. Many candidates feel during the process they have no idea where they’re standing, what the next step is, how much they impressed the company, what the interviewing company considers problematic and so on. Even when we asked about the most successful of processes, the matter of transparency repeated over and over again.

At eye level. True, we are talking about a job interview but still we really don’t want to feel like we’re taking a test. Another subject that came up from most of the questionnaire repliers was that an interview is a two way street — they would like to have a pleasant conversation, rather than being bombarded with questions, and would like to have enough time left to ask questions about the company.

Professional interviewers and seriousness. Many of the negative feedbacks referred to the HR departments. Many shared stories about initial interviews done by HR where the interviewer could not specify the job sufficiently or asked questions that are too generalized. A repeated subject that emerged was that the interviews lacked professional seriousness (not thorough, questions not related to the job) and caused candidates to recoil. The matter of seriousness referred also to the process itself: a clear definition of each step of the process, explanation about the essence of each interview, ending each step with explaining the next one, and if you commit to a timeline- make sure to meet it.

# In favor of Brief interviews

Initial brief Zoom interview — to the point or rather insulting?

In Oribi, like many other companies, the first interview would likely be a brief Zoom interview (in pre-Covid times as well) of 15–30 minutes. We asked whether it’s perceived as a practical move to check for a basic fit or an insulting one that doesn’t allow the applicant to express him/herself.

80% think that a short interview is great, respects the time of both parties and is enough to get a first impression. 20% think it’s degrading and doesn’t leave one sufficient time to present oneself.

Explain the essence of the interview beforehand. Many supported the brief interview but emphasized the importance of proper communication about it beforehand. They mentioned that if they would show up to such an interview anticipating a comprehensive one, they would feel degraded. As long as it is emphasized that this would be a reciprocal interview for initial introduction and examination of whether the job prescribes to what the candidate is looking for — that’s excellent.

Many supported the brief interview but emphasized the importance of proper communication about it beforehand. They mentioned that if they would show up to such an interview anticipating a comprehensive one, they would feel degraded. As long as it is emphasized that this would be a reciprocal interview for initial introduction and examination of whether the job prescribes to what the candidate is looking for — that’s excellent. Don’t neglect to leave sufficient time for questions. Even though the goal is for this interview to be short and to the point, the candidates too hold the right to use it to decide whether they want to proceed to the next stage or not.

Even though the goal is for this interview to be short and to the point, the candidates too hold the right to use it to decide whether they want to proceed to the next stage or not. Brief interview? Make sure to go over the CV before it. Some of the repliers mentioned that despite the fact that the interviewers had had their CV beforehand, they still insisted to “waste the time” asking them to specify their professional experience. Since it’s meant to be brief, it’s better to ask more practical questions rather than having them read their CV out loud.

Some of the repliers mentioned that despite the fact that the interviewers had had their CV beforehand, they still insisted to “waste the time” asking them to specify their professional experience. Since it’s meant to be brief, it’s better to ask more practical questions rather than having them read their CV out loud. Zoom rules of conduct. A lot of anecdotes came-up about initial (along with advanced) interviews where basic Zoom etiquette was not upheld. For instance, interviews that didn’t begin on time (if being late is a big no-no for the candidate it should be so for the interviewer as well), interviews conducted with the camera turned-off, and interviewers texting (or Whatsapping) while conducting the interview.

Since it’s meant to be brief, it’s better to ask more practical questions rather than having them read their CV out loud.

How many interviews overall should a respectable process include?

According to the majority of repliers, the number would be 3–4.

A subject related to the number of interviews, which came up several times, is of the optimal time gap between them. The preference was to squeeze them in the shortest amount of time possible. More than few, described processes where all the interviews were squeezed within 2–3 days as very positive experiences. On the other hand, some mentioned that for them the interviewing process in general is very stressful and it would be difficult to have several interviews conducted one after the other. It seems that the bottom line is that compressing the interviews into a short amount of time is the best option, but regarding to holding a few of them in the same day — it’s worth asking the candidate whether it’s something that would work for them or not so much.

How to say ‘no’? How would you prefer to receive a negative response?

Surprisingly (to me at least) 40% said they would rather get a phone call, while 60% said an email would be better. I usually send-out an email since I don’t want to catch them in a bad time to talk and prefer to write down my feedback in an organized manner. Seems that many people feel a phone call is better and more dignified.

Of course, a crucial point mentioned was that it’s best to return with a negative response as soon as possible. Many repliers shared how some companies for which they interviewed never came back with any answer at all, while others replied weeks after the final interview.

A common request was not to get the decline from HR. They had been in contact with people from the company and would like to get the reply (along with feedback) from them rather than receiving an email from just someone whom they had never spoken to.

The most frequently mentioned subject in regards to the declining response was the importance of a detailed feedback. Many candidates view the feedback as an important tool for them and a demonstration of respect for their time. Some also wished generic responses such as “we’ve decided to proceed with other candidates” to be excluded.

I’d like to add my own point of view as an interviewer: I 100% agree that a feedback should be granted and to be as detailed as can be. However, in many cases that could be rough. I often feel that I am highly impressed by some candidates and the good connection is there, but then a slightly more compatible candidate comes along and we decide to proceed with him/her instead. Meaning that there are cases where there is no actual negative feedback to be given, just a better candidate that’s out there. In other cases there are feedbacks that could be difficult to share: lack of chemistry, a sense of lack of seriousness from the candidate, candidates giving long and convoluted answers for each question and make it hard to get a concrete answer. So, even though in some cases giving a feedback is hard, mostly you can and should provide one.

How would you react if you had been asked to give a feedback about the interviewing process after being declined?

70% considered the request for feedback about the process, even if they were not accepted, as a blessed initiative. 30% viewed it as a complete waste of time and even an insult. What was interesting about the replies we got was that each side was very firm regarding the positivity/negativity of such a request. The 70% find it necessary, respectable and lovely, while the 30% were completely against the idea and couldn’t understand how something more could be demanded from them after they were rejected.

Respect for one’s time? How about a gift? Some shared that in certain companies in case they weren’t accepted they received a gift certificate for the time they have “wasted” on the home exam. This was highly regarded even though the sum of it was of course minimal, but it showed the recognition for the time and work that was put into it.

If you’d like to continue and read the full article it’s >> here!

Thanks,