Recruitment candidates are customers too.
A poor recruitment process could thus mean loss of customers in the form of candidates who are pissed off, and friends and relatives of such candidates who learn to avoid your brand in sympathy.
Just as you wouldn’t want to go back to a shop if you were treated badly, a candidate who has had a bad experience during recruitment may avoid further contact with the company involved.
David Leigh, chief executive of the psychometric testing firm SHL, put it this way: “A bad recruitment experience is at least as damaging as a bad consumer experience in store.”
And SHL does have the data to back this statement. A survey they conducted among some 1600 UK adults revealed that poor recruitment practices could cost your company quite a lot.
Close to a quarter of the respondents had suffered 2 or 3 bad recruitment experiences, and some 6% had suffered 5 or 6.
Of these, some 18% chose not to do any further business with the company at fault. This value is even higher (28%) for people between the ages of 25 – 34.
A mammoth 77% said that if a friend or family member has had a poor recruitment experience, it will deter them from being or remaining customers of that business.
A person who has never passed through a poor recruitment process may not be able to identify with the people polled in this study, but I can because I have.
I was once shortlisted for a job, contacted by the hiring manager and informed of the “many things” I needed to prepare, and then completely forgotten about.
Now I wouldn’t use this company’s products or services, not because I’m resentful, but because this experience has ingrained in me the belief that their customer service will be no better than their recruitment experience, whether this is true or not.
It is quite clear then that poor recruitment practices can harm a business, and according to the study quoted above, the top four of such practices indicated by respondents are:
1. Not being told they had been unsuccessful (46%).
2. Lack of feedback about their application (39%).
3. Not acknowledging receipt of their application (39%), and
4. Not receiving feedback even after completing an interview (37%).
SHL however performed another survey, this time from the perspective of recruiters.
Of the 500 professional recruiters surveyed, 25% felt overstretched due to the rise in the number of people applying for jobs.
Of these, 1 in 5 could not find the time to inform candidates that their applications had been received, and some 15% were too busy to inform candidates that their applications were unsuccessful.
Clearly, recruiters have not simply decided to abandon courtesy. In some instances, it is the current increase in job applications that has brought recruitment practices to this nadir.
Nonetheless, if 1 in 5 could not find time to inform candidates, this means the other 4 who were also overstretched, found the time to dignify candidates with a response.
So, although the workload on recruiters is appreciated, the fact remains that those who are not doing so well as per the four complaints above may need to give more attention to the recruitment process, and how well candidates are kept in the loop through effective competency assessment and communication.
This is actually more important than many realize. A short while before the experience I mentioned above occurred, I entered into a week-long recruitment process with a different company. But due to some unforeseen events at the start of the week, I wasn’t able to meet their deadlines (but still had a chance to get the job).
At the end however, I received a kind email informing me that I didn’t make the cut. After this experience, I would still gladly use, and recommend this company’s products to others, and the difference between this experience and the one above is (would you believe it) a nice email.
In our world of templates and mass emailing, keeping candidates informed really isn’t so hard. A candidate doesn’t necessarily need their name mentioned in a rejection email to get the point.
Thus you can create a simple email template that says “Dear Applicant, We are sorry to inform you that………” and then mass email this template to those who didn’t make the cut. This way, you will only need a few minutes to reach out to candidates each time.
Of course, if you can personalize the email, all the better. The underlying point remains that candidates should not be left in the dark.
As Angela Baron of the Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development puts it: “A nice e-mail doesn’t cost much…… People really get upset when they invest a lot of time and energy in an application and hear nothing.”
Worse yet, although “a nice e-mail doesn’t cost much”, the lack thereof could cost your company tremendously in lost customers. An efficient recruitment process often integrates tools such as employee skills tracking to maintain visibility over candidate progress and ensure timely communication. Incorporating a solid competency based training program after hiring can also improve employee retention by addressing skill gaps early on and boosting engagement.
FAQ
How do poor recruitment practices affect a company?
Poor recruitment practices directly cost companies customers. Research shows 18% of candidates who had bad recruitment experiences stopped doing business with the offending company, and 77% said a friend or family member's bad experience would deter them too.
What are the most common recruitment complaints from candidates?
The top four complaints are not being told they were unsuccessful (46%), lack of feedback on their application (39%), not acknowledging receipt of the application (39%), and no feedback after completing an interview (37%). All four boil down to one issue: leaving candidates in the dark.
Why do recruiters fail to communicate with candidates?
Many recruiters are overstretched due to rising application volumes. A survey of 500 professional recruiters found 25% felt overloaded, with 1 in 5 unable to find time to acknowledge applications and 15% too busy to send rejection notices.
Does a bad hiring experience really lose customers?
Yes. SHL research across 1,600 UK adults confirmed that candidates who experience poor recruitment often avoid the company as consumers. The effect is especially pronounced among 25-34 year olds, where 28% chose to end their customer relationship.
What is the easiest fix for poor candidate communication?
A simple email template. You can create a brief, respectful message like "Dear Applicant, we regret to inform you..." and send it in bulk to unsuccessful candidates. It takes minutes and prevents the reputational damage of silence.
How does candidate experience impact employer brand long-term?
Candidates who are ignored form lasting negative impressions that extend beyond recruitment. They associate poor hiring communication with poor customer service, and they share that perception with friends and family, amplifying the brand damage.
Should rejection emails be personalized for each candidate?
Personalization is ideal but not required. Even a generic template acknowledgment is vastly better than silence. The key is that every candidate receives some form of response so they are not left wondering about the status of their application.
How can skills tracking improve the recruitment process?
Employee skills tracking tools maintain visibility over candidate progress and ensure timely communication throughout the hiring pipeline. After hiring, competency-based training programs address skill gaps early, boosting both engagement and retention.
What percentage of candidates experience multiple bad recruitments?
Nearly a quarter of respondents reported suffering two or three bad recruitment experiences, and about 6% had endured five or six. These repeated negative encounters compound the reputational cost for employers across the market.
How can companies balance high application volumes with candidate courtesy?
Automation is the answer. Template-based mass emails, applicant tracking systems, and structured communication workflows let even overstretched recruiters acknowledge every application. If four out of five overloaded recruiters still find time to respond, it is a solvable problem.