Candidates often comment to me about their experiences interviewing for jobs. I hear more disappointment expressed about how a company communicates with them during the process than about the final decision being NO. Candidates can handle the answer NO when it is delivered in a timely, respectful way. Too many companies work really hard to recruit talented candidates and then fail to communicate effectively throughout the process.
Candidates know they are competing with other candidates for the job. They know they aren’t always going to get the job. Even when candidates are disappointed in the outcome, they don’t have to be disappointed by the process. A company’s reputation among the talent pool is not solely built by how they handle the people they hire. The people a company doesn’t hire also contribute comments to the talent market about their interviewing experience.
In the worst situations, the company never clearly tells the candidate NO. The company just stops communicating with the candidate.
In the words of Maya Angelou, “I’ve learned that people will forget what you said, people will forget what you did, but people will never forget how you made them feel.”
Here are three thoughts on delivering the news when the answer is NO.
1. When to Tell the Candidate NO
The best time to tell a candidate the answer is NO is as soon as the employer knows. Most delayed responses are not due to a company’s reluctance to deliver the news. The delayed responses are due to the company’s failure to make a decision. Failure to make a decision is usually because the decision makers lacked a clear process to follow to arrive at a decision.
MAYBE is an easy out from making a decision. Employers sometimes decide to “keep a candidate warm,” asking the recruiter or the candidate to wait on a decision, without providing information about what the employer is waiting for.
Sometimes, the wait is valid. Waiting for the completion of the process of interviewing the candidate pool is a valid reason for asking a candidate to wait. However, at every step of the process, the decision makers can ask a few important questions to help determine if it is time to tell the candidate NO.
- Is this candidate someone we could see hiring for this role?
- If we don’t meet anyone else, would we hire this person for this role?
- If our preferred candidate declines, would we hire this person for this role?
If the answer to any of those questions is NO, then it is time to tell the candidate NO. If the decision maker asks to “keep the candidate warm” while a fresh pool of candidates is recruited, then it is time to tell the candidate NO. If there is a need to see a new pool of candidates, then the employer is clearly not confident about committing to the person, and that person should be told NO.
I’ve had clients ask me to delay conveying a NO to a candidate because the employer thinks they may change their mind and decide to hire the person. Delivering a timely, dignified NO actually increases the chances of recruiting that candidate in the future and of getting referrals to other talented people. A company can always go back to a candidate and say they have now identified a role they think the candidate would be a better fit for and ask them to interview again.
A dragged-out decision-making process makes a candidate feel less valued. Decision delays also cause candidates to be concerned about what the process indicates about the company’s ability to make other important decisions.
2. What to Tell the Candidate
My favorite answer to the question, “What are you going to tell the candidate?” is “I plan to tell them the truth.” I stick to the simple truth, “The client doesn’t see you as the best fit for them in this role at this time.” If I have other relevant, useful feedback for the candidate such as comments on their presentation style or experience compared to other candidates, then I share it.
I also remind candidates that competing for a job is like swimming in the Olympics. Michael Phelps won his seventh gold medal by besting Milorad Cavic by one hundredth of a second, essentially by a fingertip. Coming in second or third doesn’t mean the candidate wasn’t a strong competitor. It just means they didn’t win the race.
As an employer, commit to making a decision and delivering the news as soon as you have decided.
3. Who Should Tell the Candidate
The recruiter representing the candidate should deliver the news first. That person has consistently communicated with the candidate throughout the process and has represented the interests of the candidate.
If a recruiter (internal or external) was not involved, then the person who handled communicating with the candidate throughout the process should deliver the news. If your company has a habit of interviewing candidates without identifying a person responsible for communicating with the candidate, you should fix that.
At times, it is smart and appropriate for a company to also reconnect with the candidate after the recruiter has delivered the news. Paying attention to how candidates feel about the company at the end of the process is a smart strategy. This is particularly true when recruiting senior executives, but it applies to all levels.
Getting a brief call from a key decision maker who expresses appreciation for the candidate’s interest can launch a beneficial long-term business relationship. Every candidate who interviews, from a custodian to a CEO, should walk away feeling appreciated and feeling positive about their interactions with company. Allow those interactions to be bridges to future recruits. That junior accountant you passed over may someday be the CFO you need.
Don’t let your company’s lack of communication throughout the process, or the delivery of the answer NO ruin your chance to get a second opportunity to recruit that candidate. Companies who graciously deliver the answer NO are more likely to be referred to other talented people by the same people they choose not to hire.
It is important to make a great first impression, and it is equally important to make a great last impression.
Cheryl Bedard represents the best interests of candidates and clients. She identifies opportunities for success for talented executives and companies and reconciles hopes and dreams with reality.
