Category Archives: Candidate Experience

The Reason You Got Ghosted After Your Interview

Posted on by
1

Dear Timmy,

I recently applied for a position that I’m perfect for! A recruiter from the company contacted me and scheduled me for an interview with the manager. I went, the interview was a little over an hour, and it went great! I immediately followed up with an email to the recruiter and the manager thanking them, but since then, I’ve heard nothing, and it’s been weeks. I’ve sent follow-up emails to both the recruiter and the manager, and I’ve gotten no reply.

What should I do? Why do companies do this to candidates? I would rather they just tell me they aren’t interested than have them say nothing at all!

The Ghost Candidate

************************************************************

Dear Ghost,

There are a number of reasons that recruiters and hiring managers ghost candidates, and none of them are good!

Here’s a short list of some of these reasons:

– They hated you and hope you go away when they ghost you because the conflict is uncomfortable.

– They like you, but not as much as another candidate. They’re trying to talk into the job but want to leave you on the back burner, but they’re idiots and don’t know how to do this properly.

– They decided to promote someone internally, and they don’t care about candidate experience enough to tell you they went in another direction.

– They have a completely broken recruitment process and might still be going through it believing you’re just as happy as a pig in shi…

– They think they communicated to you electronically to bug off through their ATS, but they haven’t audited the process to know this isn’t working.

– The recruiter got fired, and no one picked up the process.

I would love to tell you that ghosting candidates are a rare thing, but it’s not! It happens all the time! There is never a reason to ghost a candidate, ever! Sometimes I believe candidates get ghosted by recruiters because hiring managers don’t give feedback, but that still isn’t an excuse I would accept. At least tell the candidate that!

Look, I’ve ghosted people. At conference cocktail parties, I’ve been known to ghost my way right back up to my room and go to sleep! When it comes to candidates, I don’t ghost! I would rather tell them the truth so they don’t keep coming back around unless I want them to come back around.

I think most recruiters ghost candidates because they’re in over their heads with the amount of work they have, and they mean to get back to people but just don’t have the time. When you’re in firefighting mode, you tend to only communicate with the candidates you want, not the ones you don’t. Is this good practice? Heck, no! But when you’re fighting fires, you do what you have to do to stay alive.

What would I do if I was you? 

Here are a few ideas to try if you really want to know the truth:

1. Send a handwritten letter to the CEO of the company briefly explaining your experience and what outcome you would like.

2. Go on Twitter, and in 140 characters, send a shot across the bow! “XYZ Co. I interviewed two weeks ago and still haven’t heard anything! Can you help me!?” (t will work on Facebook as well!)

3. Write a post about your experience on LinkedIn and tag the recruiter and the recruiter’s boss.

4. Take the hint and go find a company that truly values you and your talent! If the organization and this manager treat candidates like this, imagine how you’ll be treated as an employee.

Skills matter. Experience matters. Performance matters.

Posted on by
3

Skills, skills, skills, skills…

If you’ve been around HR tech for two minutes in the last five years, “skills” is basically all you’ve heard. Well, okay, “skills” and “AI.” The HR Tech community is jamming skills down your throat like a new pharmaceutical drug that cures narcissism.

Why do we feel “skills” are so important?

  1. Hiring by skill is thought to eliminate bias. It’s not about relationships, or what school you went to, or that you went to school at all, or what color your skin is. If you have the skill to do the job, you should be hired to do the job.
  2. As a concept in organizations, skills seem to connect a lot of dots. We can measure skills and make a giant inventory of all the skills we have, and our all-knowing executive team can tell what skills we need in the future, and we can build those skills to be ready.

In theory, hiring and promoting people based on skill makes a lot of sense. In reality, it’s super hard to pull off. It’s difficult to truly assess someone’s skill in most areas. We just don’t have enough black-and-white skills measures that truly differentiate nor do we have the ability to build all the skills we believe we need.

Does “experience” matter?

The folks on the skills side of the fence want you to believe experience is an outdated concept being sold to you by “the man.” Or, more specifically, by men who have traditionally controlled the world in so many ways. Some of that is also true. But that doesn’t mean that experience doesn’t matter. It does.

You are about to go to prison for a crime you didn’t commit. You can choose between two lawyers. Both passed the bar to demonstrate their “skill” as an attorney. For one, this will be their first case. For the other, it will be their 2,000th case. Who will you choose? You are about to go into a life-saving brain surgery. You have two surgeons to choose from. Both of whom passed their boards at the highest level. One has performed over 1,000 of this specific operation. One has done 50. Which one will you choose?

There is a piece of this skills revolution that also is veiled in ageism. One of the reasons “skills” has risen is that young people are sick of old people getting hired and promoted over them. Old people who might not have the same skill level, but definitely have more experience. We can’t just say stop hiring them because they’re old, but we can say stop hiring them because I have higher “skill.” So, if it’s only about skill, we eliminate the ageism bias.

Your experience actually does matter.

Wait, what about performance?

Here’s where I get a bad feeling in my stomach around “skills.” It’s not just that a person has a certain skill, but how they perform in that skill. The reason we say “experience” doesn’t matter because there are dozens of academic studies that have shown that when we measure new hires and we take a look at their resumes and their previous job experience, there is very little correlation between where they worked previously and the job they had, to success in the new job and company.

That isn’t because experience doesn’t matter. It’s because high-performing experience matters!

Therein lies our problem. We can’t measure the performance of someone’s past job.

Let’s get back to our lawyer and doctor examples. What if I now told you that our lawyer, who has tried over 2,000 cases, actually lost every case? You would obviously try the inexperienced lawyer! Same with our doctor. The doctor who had 1,000 brain surgeries under their belt has a success rate of 10%. But our 50 case doctor has a success rate of 90%!

But wait, what if I tell you the “experienced” doctor only takes on the most difficult last-chance cases? And the less experienced doctor is given the “easy” cases where the vast majority of patients are thought to recover. Does that make a difference? You see how complicated “experience” as a factor can be.

Performance matters a great deal!

If you are looking to hire the best talent, it’s not only about skill. It’s about choosing individuals who have the skill to do that job at a baseline, then looking at their experience and their performance, and probably their intrinsic motivation. This is why a job sample is the number one predictor of a new hire performing well on the job. If they can actually do the job, successfully, then it stands to show they will probably be successful when we hire them. Although, even that isn’t guaranteed. We then add in factors like culture, leadership, peer support, etc.

It turns out hiring is really hard.

So, why is everyone saying the future of talent is skills?

I believe it’s because this is something we can control. It’s tangible and feels like something that can work. I can try and measure for skill. I can assess and build for skill. It seems obtainable, and it seems like something better than our past hiring based on experience.

In reality, hiring and promoting should have always been about skill. And experience. And performance. I want to hire highly skilled people that have amazing experiences and have performed in their previous jobs at a very high level.

What I don’t want to do is blindly hire and promote based on someone’s ability to demonstrate they can do a bunch of random skills. A job and performing in that job is not just about doing a bunch of random skills. That simplifies what employees do down too far. People and work are much more complex than just skills.

Skills. Experience. Performance. I want to hire the complete package. Be careful selling “skills” as a strategy to your executives. Most executives have great experience and high performance, and they actually believe that matters. Because it does.

Zagging when others are Zigging.

Posted on by
1

It struck me yesterday while I was on my 7th call of the week, where everyone wanted to talk about ChatGPT and Generative AI, that there is an opportunity here. And not the opportunity that everyone VC is running around like zombies trying to invest in any stupid idea that has “Chat” or
“GPT” in the title.

“Human connection is the luxury of the future.” – Tim Sackett, 2023

I’m sure this isn’t a new idea. I don’t know when or where, but I know I’ve heard others say similar things to this in the past. It just seemed to hit me today. This is even more true in our world at this moment.

I love tech. I love generative AI tech, like GPT. I’m a nerd for this stuff, playing around with it every day. More millionaires will be created in the next 18 months from GPT/Generative AI than at any other time in history because this tech will be so transformative to everything we do. I believe that.

I also believe this tech will do some harm. It will hurt some experiences. Those experiences will be faster and more efficient, but also, at the exact same time, feel less.

So, the “Zag” opportunity is first to understand those opportunities. Who will want or need human interaction or connection vs. AI/Robot connection? What will be the value of the human connection vs. that of the robots? I think in my world of HR and TA tech. There are a lot of these human opportunities. For some brands, not delivering a full AI experience and adding humans into the loop will be a competitive advantage.

I’m a Delta Diamond (humble road warrior brag), which only means I fly on Delta way more than the average person. Because of my flyer status, I get a special number to call when stuff goes wrong in my travel. Whenever I’ve reached that number, someone has picked up or called me back in minutes. My sons are like Delta Silvers, the lowest flyer status. I hear the stories of them waiting hours to hear from Delta when they need assistance.

Some might call that privilege and believe everyone should have that same level of access. Those people are wrong. I’m a top customer of Delta. I go out of my way to fly Delta because of my status. It’s super rare that I’ll fly another airline. Most fliers seek the cheapest ticket, and the service should match that desire. I’m loyal. My service should be elevated to reward my loyalty to the brain. My experience matters more than someone who isn’t loyal to the brand. Delta makes more money exponentially from me as a customer than most customers.

Many company executives will say that their employees and their future employees (their candidates) also deserve an elevated level of experience. That experience might include all kinds of efficiencies and AI allowing them to get what they need quickly. That experience also might include the hotline to a real person. A person who knows the brand well. Who understands the importance of your position as an employee or a candidate?

Even today, we live in a world where many times, it’s hard for us to speak to a real human when we actually need and want to speak to a real human. The “Zag” ensures that human connection can happen at the right exact moment when it is needed and wanted. It’s not about delivering a smart robot that can answer more questions.

I speak to executives all the time that will tell, almost to a person, that “our talent, our employees, are our most important assets.” Then they show me how they’ve jammed technology between the employee and a great experience, making it a not-so-great experience. Technology should be a conduit to a great experience. Often it’s replacing an average experience and making it a different but still average experience.

We need to keep asking ourselves what is uniquely human about our experience that we want to preserve and how AI can help us make that human connection even better. Even stronger. We have an amazing opportunity to be more human, but only if we design the world we want.

Should You Ever Ask About Pay During a Job Interview?

Posted on by
1

NO! YES! I DON’T KNOW! WHY ARE WE YELLING!?

This question gets asked so often by all levels of individuals who are going through a job search. From entry levels to seasoned professionals, no one really knows the correct answer because, like most things in life, it depends on so many factors!

First off, you look like an idiot if you show up to an interview and in the first few minutes you drop the pay question!

“So, yeah, before we get too deep into this, how much does the job pay!?” 

Mistake #1! 

First, if you’re asking about what the job pays in a real face-to-face interview or virtual interview, you’re doing it wrong! The time to ask about pay is almost immediately, even when you’re desperate for the job. Usually, this happens during a screening call, email, or text message from someone in recruiting or HR. Talent Acquisition and HR Pros expect this question, so it’s really not a big deal.

The problem we get into is this belief that somehow asking about pay and salary looks bad on us as a candidate. “Oh, all you care about is the pay and not our great company!?”

Mistake #2! 

Actually, TA and HR would prefer to get this big issue out of the way right away before they fall in love with you and find out they can’t afford you. Doesn’t matter if you make $15/hr or $100K per year. Everyone involved needs to understand what it’s going to take to hire you. As a candidate, even when you desperately want the job, you still have power. You can still say, “No.”

The best thing you can do is get the pay question out of the way, upfront, so both you and the company can determine if you will truly be the best hire. The worst thing that can happen during an interview is you both fall in love with each other, then at the end find out it won’t work financially! That’s a killer!

Mistake #3! 

As a candidate, you get referred to a position, and you have a pretty good idea of what the pay will be. Your friend works at the company, even in the same position, and makes $45K, so you’re not going to ask because you feel you already know.

The problem is the company might not see your experience and education the same as your friends, or the market has shifted (like a Pandemic hit, and now the market pays less for your skills). For whatever reason, you are thinking of one number, and they are thinking of another. This gets awkward when it all comes out at the end of the hiring process.

So, once again, be transparent. “Hey, my friend actually referred me and loves her job and the company. She also told me what she makes. I’m comfortable with that level, but I just want to make sure we are on the same page for a starting salary/wage before we keep going.” Simple. Straight-forward. Appreciated.

Yes, ask about Pay! 

Yes, ask about pay, but “no,” don’t ask about pay as the last step of the interview process. Calm down. You’re not some wolf of Wall Street expert negotiator who’s going to wow them with your brilliance and get $100K more than others doing the same job. Most jobs have a set salary range that is pretty small, so you might get a little movement, but there is really no need to play hardball.

In fact, from a negotiation standpoint, getting your figure out early with a statement like, “I just want to make sure we are in the same park. I’m looking for $20-22/hr in my next job. Does this position pay that?” It gives you and the company some room to negotiate, but it’s a safe conversation since you both put some bumpers around where that conversation will go.

Also, if you decide you want more, it’s a great starting point. “Yes, I really like the job and the company, and I’m interested in working for you. I know I said I was looking for $22/hr, but Mary told me I would also be doing “X,” and honestly, I think that job pays a bit more than $22/hr. Can we discuss?”

Discussions of pay can be difficult because we often find talking about how much money we make taboo. I blame our parents! They never talked to us about it, and if the subject was ever brought up, we got hushed immediately! Raise your hand if you knew what your Dad made when you were 12! Not many hands are up!

The reality is it should be a very transparent, low-stress conversation. This is where I am. This is what I want from this job. Are we on the same page?

Hiring Managers! Job Seekers Are Judging You on These Two Criteria!

Posted on by
Reply

If you’re out looking for a job, it usually feels like you’re being judged on every little thing you do, have done, or potentially will do in the future. Interestingly enough, a Harvard professor discovered you’re actually only judged on two things:

“People size you up in seconds, but what exactly are they evaluating?

Harvard Business School professor Amy Cuddy has been studying first impressions alongside fellow psychologists Susan Fiske and Peter Glick for more than 15 years and has discovered patterns in these interactions.

In her book, “Presence,” Cuddy says people quickly answer two questions when they first meet you:

 – Can I trust this person?

 – Can I respect this person?

Psychologists refer to these dimensions as warmth and competence, respectively, and ideally, you want to be perceived as having both.

Interestingly, Cuddy says that most people, especially in a professional context, believe that competence is the more important factor. After all, they want to prove that they are smart and talented enough to handle your business.”

Trust and Respect.

I’ll add these are probably two things you’re being judged immediately following the judging that gets done on your overall appearance, which is almost instantaneous! Let’s face it, we like to hire pretty people.

Once you open your mouth, you’re being judged on how well you can trust what this person is telling me and if you respect their background, work ethic, where they came from, etc. Most of this is based on the person doing the judging, not you. I know, that sucks.

How do you help yourself?

1. Try and mirror the energy of the person who is interviewing you. If you come in all calm and cool, and the person who is interviewing is really upbeat and high energy, they’ll immediately question you as a fit.

2. Do research on who you’ll be interviewing with and try and get some sense of their background and story. Try and make some connections as fast as possible in the interview. This will help build trust and respect with this person. In today’s world, it’s not that hard to find out stuff about an individual. If HR sets up your interview, just politely ask who you will be interviewing with (the name).

3. Be interesting. Have a good story to tell, one that most people will find funny or interesting. Not too long. A good icebreaker to set off the interview in a great tone.

I tell people all the time. An interview isn’t a test, it’s just a conversation with some people you don’t know. We have these all the time. Sometimes you end up liking the people, sometimes, you don’t. If you don’t like the people you’re interviewing with, there’s a good chance you won’t like the job!

The Recruiter Texting Rules!

Posted on by
1

Here we go! Your boy is back with some more rules! You know I love me some rules! I’m high rules, and low details, which drives most people crazy!

I was having a conversation recently with some recruiters about texting candidates. For the most part, in recruiting, we’ve gotten to this point where we believe every candidate prefers texting over every other kind of communication. And, if they don’t want a text message, then they want email.

This isn’t exactly true! I did some research and surveyed over 1600 candidates we screened to find out the facts and published it – 6 Things Candidates Want You to Know – you can download it here for free. But I’m not here trying to sell you a free whitepaper!

The entire reason we believe candidates prefer text over any other form of communication is some creative marketing around text vs. email response rates in overall text vs. email communications. Now, this is where all of this falls apart. I get over 500 emails per day. I get maybe 25-50 messages. Of course, I’m going to respond more to text messages vs. email. But that doesn’t mean, as a candidate, I want text vs. email, necessarily!

This all lead me down a path where I believe we need some rules around texting as recruiters!

The Recruiter Texting Rules:

Rule No. 1 – As the first outreach to a candidate you don’t know, texting is not preferred by candidates. They don’t know you, and they certainly don’t want you jumping into their private text messages with a spammy job offer!

Rule No. 2 – No one of quality ever accepted an interview and job offer through text message without first speaking to a real human. Pick up the god damn phone. Once a candidate is all in with you, then yes, they will most likely only want texts from you.

Rule No. 3 – Give me a way to opt-out of your bad text recruiting automation hell! For one, it’s the law. But, most still make it way too difficult to stop the automated texts.

Rule No. 4 – Just because you have my number as a candidate does not give you permission to stalk me for a date. It’s super creepy!

Rule No. 5 – If we aren’t friends, don’t text me like we are friends. Avoid sarcasm. Keep it professional and short.

Rule No. 6 – If it feels like you’re sending candidates too many text messages. You are sending candidates too many text messages! Also, don’t text me a novel! Send long stuff in an email.

Rule No. 7 – If I ask you a question, answer the damn question! We are adults. You can tell me the truth I don’t need some run-around answer that doesn’t really answer my question.

Rule No. 8 – If you expect me to respond within minutes. I expect you’ll respond within minutes. Set the ground rules around expectations early.

Rule No. 9 – Never! And I mean, NEVER! Text with a green bubble! Just Kidding! 😉

Okay, peeps, what did I forget? Give me your favorite rule for texting candidates in the comments below.

4 Strategies to Get Candidates to Open Your Emails!

Posted on by
2

I found some cool data that probably got overlooked a while back from CB Insights. Now, this data is from 2016, but it’s super relevant!

CB Insights did some testing with their own email newsletter that went out to 175K+. A very big sample, and the reality is they have the exact same goal as we all do, Get Candidates to Open Our Email!

These four things work really well in getting people to open your email:

1. Brand Names. CB found that using a big brand name like Apple, Google, Nike, etc., in your subject line increases your odds greatly of getting someone to open your email. Now, you might be asking yourself, “Tim, how the heck am I going to use a brand name in my recruiting emails!?” How about something like, “3 Ways we are a better place to work than Apple!”

2. Short Titles. Less is more when it comes to attention-grabbing subject lines! I suggest under five words if possible. “Are we paying too much?” or “I’ve Got a Quick Question” or “Sackett” – Yep, in my own testing, the one email that gets open at a higher rate than any other is when I only put my last name in the subject line!

3. Negativity. This seems counter-intuitive. No way! People love positivity. You are right, but negativity draws them in! “How Candidates Fall on their Face!” will get opened way more than “How Candidates Succeed!” Again, in ten years of blogging and making headlines, this data also rings true. I get way more interaction on negative headlines than positive headlines.

4. Surprises. Different viewpoints that people don’t expect. “Punching Your Boss Can Get You a Raise!” or “Older Workers Have More Energy Than Millennials!” or “Hiring Dumb People!” Basically, people open these because they don’t agree with the headline. What the heck is Tim talking about today!?!

So, if all of these things work. What does CB Insights say doesn’t work?

What should we stop doing with our subject lines? 

  • All of the opposites of the above! Long headlines, positive headlines, boring, etc.
  • Question Headlines. “What 3 Things Are You Doing to Hurt Your Brand!” While Buzzfeed has made billions with these clickbait headlines, CB found readers are getting fatigued with these types of headlines. (I will tell you “The X Things to do…” headlines still work in my world. 5 Ways to Hire More People! Will always do well.
  • Broad topics do worse than Niche. A headline that says “5 Ways to Attract More Talent” will do worse than “5 Ways to Attract More Nurses Right Now!”

The key to great email subject lines is they get opened! If you send out a hundred emails to candidates and no one opens them, it doesn’t matter what the content is and how much time you spent making it perfect. Get Them To Open Your Emails! Is the single most important thing you should worry about first!

It’s very Recruiting 101, and it’s something almost every recruiting shop struggles with, but then we go and focus on the picture we’re using. Does it have a puppy and a kid in a wheelchair? No, stop the presses! Stop it. Fix the basics first, then worry about doing the higher-level stuff.

What is your most responsive email subject line?

How do Candidates Evaluate Companies?

Posted on by
2

It’s the age-old question we’ve been trying to answer since the beginning of recruitment!? If you look at TA team resources allocation (time, money, etc.) you would be led to believe that it must be our career sites. I can’t think of another thing we do in talent acquisition that takes more of our time and effort, as a single piece, than our career site!

Based on this, candidates must evaluate us on our career site! False.

The Muse did a study where they asked candidates directly to rank the resources they have available to them on they evaluate a company and this is what they said:

Highest Importance in Evaluating Employers for a New Role

The Career Site actually does have real value!

So, it turns out, our career sites are actually valuable, or at least can be if we put the right information on them that candidates are looking for. Actual photos and videos of real workspaces and real employees, not stock content. Videos of employees talking about company culture, not your CEO explaining what they think company culture is. Details of your perks and benefits, not a list of things like: Full Medical Coverage, Paid Time Off, etc. Those aren’t details! Those are titles of details!

Job descriptions that entice someone to want to apply, not fall asleep. I get it! JD’s are legal documents! That doesn’t mean they have to be boring and awful. Make “Job Postings” and put a link to the actual legal job description. Hire marketing, content producers to build your job postings, and let your legal council write your job descriptions. No one gives a shit about your JD, except legal. Everyone cares about your job posting.

Give your employer brand social media feeds to your interns and let them have fun with them. The best-case scenario is they say something wrong and it goes viral and you have to apologize for an intern making a mistake. That’s the BEST case! Candidates don’t care. Your employees don’t care. It’s noise and you’re too damn buttoned up to get anyone to pay attention.

Glassdoor isn’t as important as you think!

Man, did Glassdoor do a job on us for like a decade! We were all running around scared of what someone might say about us! Turns out, candidates don’t care. I mean, they did when it first started, but then the world went sideways and now we all kind of understand Glassdoor is basically a site for corporate terrorists to hang out.

What candidates really want are real testimonials from real employees, not anonymous b.s. from someone hiding behind a platform that we assume got fired and is now hating. Pro tip: get an employee that left, but still loves you, to give you a testimonial! We all have those folks. Mary decided to leave and focus on her family, but if she was going to come back to work, it would be with you. But, also current employees who aren’t completely scripted in their response. It’s okay if they say some real stuff, as long as they also say the good stuff.

I hated to see employers being held hostage by anonymous reviews. I love to see employees fighting back with real, open, and honest content that people believe.

75% of Job Seekers Have Been Ghosted After an Interview!

Posted on by
2

That number seems high, but it’s not. I’m assuming 99% of recruiters will say they have been ghosted by a candidate. My dad used to love telling me when I was a kid, two wrongs don’t make a right!

Greenhouse released their latest Candidate Experience survey last week and it’s packed with some eye-opening findings, but none larger than the one in the title!

Here are some others:

  • More than 70% of job seekers said they will not submit a job application if it takes longer than 15 minutes to complete.
  • Almost 58% of candidates expect to hear back from companies in one week or less regarding their initial application.
  • Over 70% of job seekers want feedback on an interview. More than 60% said that receiving feedback during the interview process, even if they do not receive a job offer, would make them more inclined to apply to future jobs at that company.
  • The most important DE&I investments candidates evaluate when considering a company are:

a.    employee benefits such as coverage for remote and flexible work arrangements and gender affirmation paid leave (49%)
b.    employee reviews on platforms like Glassdoor on progress and opportunities (47%)
c.    diverse leadership team or board (34%)
d.    promoting affinity/employee resource groups on the careers page (34%)

Why are we all being so rude to each other?

I think candidates and organizations are doing this simply because there are no consequences. Ghost an interview and you will probably be “black-balled” by that one recruiter, for that one position, for the time that recruiter is at that company. Ghost a candidate and the candidate will get a bit pissed and might not apply to your jobs any longer unless you have a great brand, then well, okay, they’ll probably apply to your jobs again.

None of us have consequences for our crappy job process behaviors!

We love to say that we do, but really we don’t, or the consequences are so small it’s akin to a hand slap. “Don’t treat candidates poorly or they’ll stop buying your products!” Or maybe they won’t, kind of depends on how good your products and services are.

At some point, there should be a recruiter code of ethics and a measure that follows your around. A RECRUITER BLOCKCHAIN! (contact me privately as I’m currently taking angel investment on this idea! jk) Can you imagine?!

A call is coming in from Timmy the Recruiter, who currently has a 67% reply after interview rating on THE RECRUITER BLOCKCHAIN. F! Timmy, that sucks, I’m not picking up or replying to his outreach, he sucks! OMG – every good recruiter in the world wishes this was a reality! We also wish it worked both ways!

Hey, Timmy, the Software Engineer looks good, I should contact him for our job! Oh wait, he’s ghosted 3 out of 7 interviews in the past 12 months, screw that guy! I’m not taking the risk of putting him in front of my hiring manager with that record!

A boy can dream!

Yeah, but Tim, we didn’t really ghost them!

Yeah, I know! Your ATS automation sent them an email that said, “Thanks, no thanks, here’s a BOGO offer for our products!”

Candidates REALLY love your BOGO offers in rejection emails! Keep it up! (again, jk)

If a candidate interviews, they deserve more than automation. They deserve some personalization around appreciation for their time, some reasoning, next steps, etc. Yes, it does take a full 1 minute and 27 seconds to craft this communication. And, yes, that’s part of the gig. Be better.

We can’t call out candidate ghosting until we clean up our own shop. We stop ghosting, and now we can build Timmy’s Super Blockchain Candidates That Ghost Suck App! Where we track each ghosting and publicly shame candidates! It’s going to be amazing!

Seriously, in 2022 if you can’t clean up your Candidate Experience, you’re in trouble. It’s foundational to great recruiting, and it’s mostly an individual recruiter accountability issue. We get treated like we treat others. Go check out the 2022 Greenhouse Candidate Experience Report there is a ton of great data to support your strategy to become a much better TA shop this year!

Candidate Experience is Free!

Posted on by
Reply

This week on Tuesday Best Buy was supposed to deliver to my house a new clothes dryer. I had scheduled the dryer to be delivered. Best Buy sent an email confirming the date and time slot of my delivery. I waited for the delivery. The dryer never came. You know the drill, call customer service.

So, I did, and probably like most of you, it wasn’t a call I wanted to make because by now we all know the drill. I’m going to get someone who has no idea why or what happened, fake apology, we’ll have to reschedule.

To my surprise, I ran into a dude answering Best Buy customer service calls in Guatemala, named Mateo. The dude seemed more upset than I was about what happened. He questioned why wouldn’t the local delivery people send me a note or text message telling me it wasn’t going to happen. He chastised his own company and then he went to work fixing the problem and getting our delivery rescheduled. He apologized so many times I felt sorry for him! He made zero excuses. I wanted to hire Mateo!

Great customer service is so rare, it seems like a luxury!

We’ve spent the better part of a decade focusing on candidate experience, which is really just another form of “customer service” to our candidates who apply to our jobs. In a very real way, our candidates are our customers. Too often we confuse this with our hiring managers being our customers, but in fact, our hiring managers are our peers, who also need to deliver great customer service to candidates.

The reality is delivering an exceptional candidate experience is completely free and it’s almost always dependent on us as individual recruiters. Yes, I get it, I understand we all have capacity issues, and it can be really difficult to deliver the same level of experience to every candidate. Still, the best recruiters find ways to deliver an exceptional experience enough times that it’s definitely recognized.

I’m not naive to think my guy, Mateo, delivers the same customer experience to every single person. In fact, he even made mention to this fact, that sometimes customers can be quite rude to him. It was a combination of me not being overly worked up about the issue and him being ready to help someone who needed help. The reality is the dude is good at customer service and the few bad ones he most likely has, doesn’t cover up all the good ones he has on a normal basis.

Candidate experience can definitely be aided by technology and process. All of the stuff we have at our disposal can make it easier. Ultimately, though, true candidate experience will fall into the hands of the individual recruiter working the req that is having contact with the candidates. We have the ability to be our own Mateo. To have a personality. To be real. To care more. To show the candidate that yeah, we probably messed up, but that we care that something went wrong and we want to fix it.

Great candidate experience shouldn’t be a luxury.