Should Companies Pay Candidates for Their Time Spent on Interviews?

Oh well, before you bombard me with the choicest of words, let me clarify that I'm playing devil's advocate here. This perspective arises from a conversation I had with a candidate who went through nine rounds of interviews with a renowned employer, only to be rejected. Having been part of the executive search industry, I have a solid understanding of what I'm discussing. The goal is to invite the rest of the community members to share their thoughts on the potential pitfalls of this idea.

In today's competitive job market, the recruitment process has become increasingly complex and time-consuming. Candidates often invest significant amounts of time and effort in preparing for and attending multiple rounds of interviews, only to face prolonged waiting periods or even silence from employers. This situation raises an important question: should companies compensate candidates for their time spent on interviews? Could this practice lead to more efficient hiring processes, reduce unnecessary interviews, and ensure that hiring managers take the process seriously?

The Case for Compensation

Respecting Candidates' Time

You hire people for their skill set to perform an expected job. When you find one, you hire. Why do hiring managers need a couple more candidates for comparison? Quite often, hiring managers issue marching orders to recruiters to find that "god's gift to mankind" and not to rest till they find one. No, I'm not exaggerating. By compensating candidates for their time, companies demonstrate respect for their efforts and acknowledge the value of their time. This can enhance the candidate experience and foster goodwill towards the company, even if the candidate is not ultimately selected.

Encouraging Prompt Feedback

One of the most frustrating aspects of the job search process is the lack of timely feedback from recruiters (yes, my own brethren, sisters, and everyone else). When candidates are paid for their interview time, there is a financial incentive for companies to expedite the feedback process. Take the example of Priya, who attended four rounds of interviews over a span of three weeks and then waited another month for feedback. If companies were compensating candidates, they would likely be more prompt in providing feedback, leading to quicker decision-making, reduced candidate anxiety, and a more streamlined hiring process.

Reducing Unnecessary Interviews

Companies often conduct multiple rounds of interviews to ensure they select the right candidate. However, this can lead to candidates being interviewed unnecessarily, especially if the hiring criteria are not well-defined from the start. For example, Rajesh might go through several rounds of interviews for a position only to find out that the job requirements were not clearly communicated. Offering compensation for interview time may encourage companies to be more selective and efficient in their interview processes, reducing the number of redundant or unnecessary interviews.

Ensuring Seriousness from Hiring Managers

When a company commits to paying candidates for their time, it signals to hiring managers that the interview process is a significant investment. This can lead to a more serious and thoughtful approach to interviewing, with hiring managers being better prepared and more focused on assessing candidates' fit for the role. For instance, Aditi, a hiring manager, might be more diligent in preparing for interviews and providing timely feedback if her company compensates candidates for their time, knowing that the process incurs a direct cost.

Potential Drawbacks and Challenges

The other side of the coin isn't as clean. I have a few reasons that go against this thought.

Financial Burden on Companies

Paying candidates for their interview time could represent a significant financial burden, particularly for small businesses and startups with limited budgets. For example, a startup in Bangalore might find it challenging to allocate funds for compensating interviewees, especially if they are interviewing multiple candidates for several positions. Companies would need to carefully consider the costs involved and whether this practice is sustainable in the long term.

Administrative Complexity

Implementing a system to compensate candidates for their interview time could add administrative complexity to the hiring process. Companies would need to establish clear guidelines for payment, manage payments efficiently, and ensure compliance with relevant labor laws and regulations. For instance, a multinational corporation with offices in multiple cities like Mumbai, Delhi, and Chennai would need to coordinate payments across different locations, adding to the administrative workload.

Potential for Abuse

There is a risk that some candidates might exploit the system by applying for roles solely to receive compensation for interview time. This could lead to an influx of insincere applications, making it harder for companies to identify genuine candidates and increasing the overall cost of the hiring process. For example, an individual might apply to multiple positions across different companies, attending interviews without genuine interest in the roles, just to receive the compensation.

Adding the ones that I follow and appreciate their thoughts..

Bharat Bhartia Sarang Brahme Raghunath Ramaswamy Mitcch Duddani Yusuf Pathan Kunjal Kamdar Jonas Prasanna Achyut Menon "AK" Aadil Bandukwala Ashish Gakrey Subhashish Bhattacharyya Ramya Sundaram

(The above article is my personal opinion and has nothing to do with my current OR past employer/s)