Are most hiring processes fundamentally broken?
In case you’re in a rush, I believe the answer is yes!
If you have a few minutes to spare though, let’s dig a little deeper…
As a Talent professional, “Candidate Experience” is a topic very close to my heart, but what is Candidate Experience? In a nutshell, it’s the overall experience candidates go through during the hiring and onboarding processes. It includes being sourced for a role, applying for a role, being interviewed, being rejected, getting hired, and being on-boarded. As you would expect, studies show candidate experience is related to recruiting performance.
I like grids, so here’s one showing the various scenarios:
I’ll come back to this, but for now, all you need to know is that each of the four scenarios is possible, with some more likely than others.
Now, I’ve experienced hundreds of hiring processes over the years and heard many people talk about their frustrations. However, I didn’t want to rely on those opinions, so I did a quick survey of people who have recently been in a hiring process. Here are the highlights:
When asked to rate their overall candidate experience from 0-10, with 0 being “Very Poor” and 10 being “Great”:
- 22% chose 0, indicating their experience was Very Poor;
- Nobody chose 10, so nobody had a “Great” experience; and
- 70% chose 5 or less.
When asked: “Did you experience any issues that negatively impacted your experience?”:
- 85% applied for a job and never heard back;
- 69% received a generic rejection email;
- 42% experienced a lack of regular updates during the process;
- 38% had an interview and never heard back; (sorry, but WOW!)
- 38% had an interview and didn’t receive proper feedback; and
- 38% experienced a role being pulled or put on hold during the process.
Other issues highlighted by respondents included:
- Interviews being changed, postponed or cancelled without sufficient notice.
- Incompetent recruiters (internal and external).
- Poor feedback and updates on positions the recruiters approached them about.
- Standard interview questions from a list.
- Role scope/content changed during the process.
- Arrogant attitude of recruiters (short-term approach).
To provide some additional context on these findings, a few of the respondents made applications through internal referrals, but the majority either applied directly (company website), responded to adverts, or were put forward by agencies or head-hunters (an even split between these three).
Let’s jump back to the grid! Here are some possible effects relating to each scenario:
I don’t know about you, but as a hiring company (or agency), I’d definitely want to be operating in scenarios A and B. Herein lies the issue; most companies don’t consider the effects of candidate experience. They don’t relate candidate experience to hiring success, and they don’t treat hiring and onboarding as processes that require continuous improvement.
Some organisations are starting to focus on candidate experience, and if you read the adverts for internal Talent Acquisition roles, many are talking about it. However, there’s a long way to go. If you’re involved in the hiring process, here’s my challenge to you:
- Map out your current hiring and onboarding process, including measuring lead-times e.g. response times and overall time to hire.
- Collect some customer feedback, both from applicants and hiring managers. How was your experience? What worked, what didn’t work? What could make it better?
- Based on your findings, design or re-design your “To-Be” process – how it should work.
- Decide what actions need to be taken to move the existing process to the new (To-Be) process and start delivering them.
- Re-measure lead-times and collect more customer feedback.
Also, put yourself through the process as the acid test. How would you feel if you applied to your own company and never heard back, received a generic rejection email, or had to wait 3 weeks for a response? How would you feel if your interview time was changed the day before, you were interviewed in a disorganised or unprofessional manner, or the role details changed mid-way through the process? How would you feel if you showed up on day one and there was no plan for your onboarding? You get the picture.
If you’re on the external side (like me), why not challenge your clients to improve their focus on candidate experience? There is only so much you can do (as you don’t own the process), however, here are some things that have worked for me:
- Set mini SLA’s with your clients around things like “time to review CV’s” and “time to provide interview feedback”. This is great practice too as it gives you justification to chase your clients if they’re falling behind.
- Get diary time (for interviews) from your clients in advance of sourcing candidates. These times might shift, but at least you have something to work with and can provide your candidates with a general timeline.
- Set yourself a target of giving all your active candidates a weekly update (at worst). I typically do this every Friday, even if it’s a quick email to say, “No news, but I’m on the case”. Sounds basic, but your candidates will thank you for it.
- Feedback to your clients after the process. Let them know what didn’t work, but also what worked and what they themselves did well! It takes time, but you can train your clients to be more focused on candidate experience.
If you’re a candidate, my advice is to prepare yourself for poor candidate experience and hope you’re pleasantly surprised! Joking aside, when you apply for a position online, you’re in the hands of the hiring company and there’s little you can do to influence your candidate experience. However, when working with an agency or head-hunter, you at least have a chance to request regular updates and feedback. Try asking for an approximate timeline when you first discuss the role. Try asking how frequently you should expect updates. Try adding text or WhatsApp as a communication channel – I often text or WhatsApp candidates with updates. Get in the habit of speaking with your contact both before and directly after interviews. Finally, talk to them about candidate experience, so they know it’s important to you.
I hope this has been insightful – I welcome any comments!
Lean Six Sigma Consultant @Greendot Management Solutions | Lean Six Sigma
3 周@Hamish Dunn, thanks for sharing!
Lecturer - Public Health & Community Health UMF Carol Davila - Faculty of Medicine
5 年There has never been a more exciting time than the time when one applies for a new role. And then, it all pans out like in this post, thank you Hamish. I learned about HR functions early in my career. I topped that knowledge with new real life HR management within my JSA claimant period. I follow the job market in my area since. And I believe things got very interesting lately. And I learned another thing: if the hiring manager cannot be bothered to give feedback, to you as an applicant, you keep asking for one until you get it. You then take control over the worth of a future application with that organisation. And the rest writes itself as HR history
Operations Manager at Defence Equipment & Support (DE&S)
5 年Excellent post Hamish. It is a shame many companies demonstrate a lack of basic respect to potential employees until close to or over the recruitment line. For some candidates even if successful, impressions are already formed. People are the strongest assets for a company and human factors should always be considered for a strong culture.
Process improvement | Program management | Lean engagement | Culture change
5 年Great article, Hamish! You've captured key issues most of us encounter in job searching, and shared some best practices. The candidate experience is an early indicator of what the organizational culture is like. When the hiring manager is actively involved, it could be a sign of good leadership (although the hiring process may still be broken). I can recall 3 candidate experiences in category B - 1) the time I worked with you, 2) one where the hiring manager was actively involved in the process (he was a great leader and great to work for, in a bureaucratic organization), and 3) when I interviewed and hired on with a top management consulting company that walked the talk, applying CPI to the recruiting, hiring and onboarding processes.
Implementation and Client Management, Partner in Productivity at De Kiewiet Associates
5 年Spot on Hamish. The hiring process seems to favor conformists. ?It appears that the goals of the HR department are very different from the hiring department, the company and the person being hired. It seems to be about immediate fulfillment rather than looking at the long term strategy or needs of both the company and individual. ?Companies tell me that there is a skill shortage - I beg to differ. ?Look at the hiring process, it is geared to deselect those with skills and experience.