I think a key point with interview feedback comes down to minimizing exposure. Any feedback given, even with the best intent, has a non-zero probability of becoming costly.
E.G. A candidate "not being a culture fit" can easily become an issue of bias.
Lawsuits, as well as reputations, are expensive things to lose.
I completely agree that receiving feedback is crucial for candidates' growth and can enhance the recruitment experience. However, I also understand why some companies, especially larger ones, might hesitate to provide it. With the sheer volume of applications they receive, compiling meaningful feedback can be time-consuming and may not always be feasible.
Even without official feedback, candidates can still learn from their interviews. I'd suggest reflecting on your experience and looking for areas to improve. For instance:
- Was there a question you answered but weren't sure about the details?
- Did any topics come up where you lacked hands-on experience?
- Are there any answers you gave that you're not 100% confident were correct?
While these might not be the exact reasons for not passing, working on these areas can boost your chances in future interviews.
It is indeed time-consuming to generate feedback for each candidate. Also, I learned that "giving feedback can invite lawsuits" from the candidates to the company. So, many companies prefer to avoid any potential legal complications by limiting or eliminating post-interview feedback (like above-case).
I think a key point with interview feedback comes down to minimizing exposure. Any feedback given, even with the best intent, has a non-zero probability of becoming costly.
E.G. A candidate "not being a culture fit" can easily become an issue of bias.
Lawsuits, as well as reputations, are expensive things to lose.
To the point. Knowing this helps me move on. Thanks for commenting, Christopher.
Btw, how did you learn about it? Through news, experience, or friends?
It just comes from lot of experience hiring and firing. Avoiding unnecessary risk is a very real part of management.
I completely agree that receiving feedback is crucial for candidates' growth and can enhance the recruitment experience. However, I also understand why some companies, especially larger ones, might hesitate to provide it. With the sheer volume of applications they receive, compiling meaningful feedback can be time-consuming and may not always be feasible.
Even without official feedback, candidates can still learn from their interviews. I'd suggest reflecting on your experience and looking for areas to improve. For instance:
- Was there a question you answered but weren't sure about the details?
- Did any topics come up where you lacked hands-on experience?
- Are there any answers you gave that you're not 100% confident were correct?
While these might not be the exact reasons for not passing, working on these areas can boost your chances in future interviews.
It is indeed time-consuming to generate feedback for each candidate. Also, I learned that "giving feedback can invite lawsuits" from the candidates to the company. So, many companies prefer to avoid any potential legal complications by limiting or eliminating post-interview feedback (like above-case).