Most candidates aren’t being rejected – they’re being ghosted. Mentions of ghosting on Glassdoor is up 450% since the start of COVID. We know that it’s bad for employer brand and long-term prospecting, so why does silent candidate rejection happen so often?
Here are some of the causes most commonly cited for ghosting candidates:
- Our hiring team is understaffed and overworked, and we don’t have the time to get back to everyone
- Our recruitment system is difficult to use, and through sheer volume we lose track of people
- Our recruitment system does not facilitate the automation of tailored rejection emails
- We don’t know exactly what to say, or do not feel qualified to give detailed feedback
We’re not out to bash recruiters, talent acquisition professionals, or hiring managers. Finding talent during the Great Resignation is difficult. Time is precious. Offering everyone a high-touch candidate experience, therefore, seems far beyond scope.
Problem is, candidates expect feedback. At the very least, they need closure. Rejection by silence has a unique sting. Consider the following responses, offered by people who applied for jobs and were either ghosted, or received a templated rejection:
“Discarded. Treated like number.”
“Crushed. Doubted my competence and value.”
“Depressed, unsure of reasons, uncertainty with quality of CV and skills or experience.”
The preceding is part of a new study, What Type of Explanation Do Rejected Job Applicants Want? Implications for Explainable Ai, by researchers at UNSW, Australia. It aims to prescribe an ideal framework for positive candidate rejection.
Here is a snapshot of some of the findings.
Candidates want these specific reasons for not making the cut
This point may sound obvious, but here it is: 53% of study respondents wanted to know why they did not make the cut. Just under a third wanted to know how they might improve, and 12% of respondents wanted to find out more about the competition – including whether or not the successful candidate was an inside hire.
According to the wants of candidates, when crafting a rejection letter, it is recommended that you focus on at least one of these factors:
- Interview performance
- Presentation of CV
- General comment on skills, qualifications, or level of experience
- Characteristics of the successful applicant
- Candidate ranking in the total number of applicants (i.e. “it was between you and one other person”)
If possible, err on the side of extra transparency. If it was an inside hire, say so. If the losing candidate was neck-and-neck with the winner, tell them. People want the truth, it seems, and without sugar-coating.
Candidates believe they are owed an explanation for their effort
This is interesting: As part of the study, respondents were asked how much they would pay for a tailored explanation for rejection. 44% of respondents said they wouldn’t pay anything for feedback; 25% of respondents said they might pay more than $20.
We might first surmise from this result that applicants don’t place value on feedback, but this isn’t the case; for the most part, they believe they have already paid for it. Said one respondent, “The idea about paying for feedback is idiotic and I beg you not to put it into the universe. If I take the time to apply for a job they should have the courtesy to provide feedback. Job hunting is hard enough and expensive don’t add more cost to excuse inexcusable conduct.” Fair enough.
Automating candidate rejection: The best way to retain candidates as advocates
Phai, our smart interviewing Ai, gives every single one of your candidates an interview. But it also provides tailored personality insights and coaching tips to every single one of your candidates, whether or not they are successful.
We do this because we can quickly and accurately analyse how people align to the HEXACO personality inventory. It’s high tech stuff, but the result is what matters: More than 98% of candidates love the feedback they receive, and rate it as useful. We help people understand themselves better, and equip them to attack jobs with the techniques best suited to their personalities.
If you’re using Phai, that means you’re really helping people. If that wasn’t enough of a reward on its own, know that good candidate feedback is also helping your employer brand immeasurably. It’s a dream solution for volume hiring.
Related
Blog
The AGC Debate: Are AI-Written Interview Answers a Red Flag or Smart Strategy?
Every day, we read stories of increased fake or AI-assisted applications. Tools like LazyApply are just one of many flooding the market, driving up applicant volumes to never-before-seen levels.
As an overwhelmed hiring function, how do you find the needle in the haystack without using an army of recruiters to filter through the maze?
At Sapia.ai, we help global enterprises do just that. Many of the world’s most trusted brands, such as Qantas Group, have relied on our hiring platform as a co-pilot for better hiring since 2020.
Our Chat Interview has given millions of candidates a voice they wouldn’t have had – enabling them to share in their own words why they’re the best fit for the role. To find the people who belong with their brands, our customers must trust that their candidates represent themselves. Thus, they want to trust that our AI is analysing real human answers—not answers from a machine.
The Rise of GPT
When ChatGPT went viral in November 2022, we immediately adopted a defensive strategy. We had long been flagging plagiarised candidate responses, but then, we needed to act fast to flag responses using artificially generated content (‘AGC’).
Many companies were in the same position, but Sapia.ai was the only company with a large proprietary data set of interview answers that pre-dated GPT and similar tools: 2.5 billion words written by real humans.
That data enabled us to build a world-first:- an LLM-based AGC detector for text-based interviews, recently upgraded to v2.0 with 99% accuracy and a false positive rate of 1%. An NLP classification model built on Sapia.ai proprietary data that operates across all Sapia.ai chat interviews.
Full Transparency with Candidates
Because we value candidate trust as much as customer trust, we wanted to be transparent with candidates about our ability to detect artificially generated content (AGC). As an LLM, we could identify AGC in real time and warn candidates that we had detected it.
This has had a powerful impact on candidate behaviour. Since our AGC detector went live, we have seen that the real-time flagging acts as a real-time disincentive to use tools like ChatGPT to generate interview responses.
The detector generates a warning if 3 or more answers are flagged as having artificially generated content. The Sapia.ai Chat Interview uses 5 open-ended interview questions for volume hiring roles, such as retail, contact centre, and customer service, and 6 questions for professional roles, such as engineers, data scientists, graduates, etc.
Let’s Take a Closer Look at the Data…
We see that using our AGC detector LLM to communicate live with candidates in the interview flow when artificial content has been detected has a positive effect on deterring candidates from using AI tools to generate their answers.
The rate of AGC use declines from 1 question flagged to 5 questions – raising the flag on one question is generally enough to deter candidates from trying again.
The graph below shows the number of candidates, from a total of almost 2.7m, that used artificially generated content in their answers.
Differences in AGC Usage Rate by Groups
We see no meaningful differences in candidate behaviour based on the job they are applying for or based on geography.
However, we have found differences by gender and ethnicity – for example, men use artificially generated content more than women. The graph below shows the overall completion ratios by gender – for all interviews on the left and for interviews where the number of questions with AGC detected is 5 or more on the right.
Perception of Artificially Generated Content by Hirers.
We’re curious to understand how hirers perceive the use of these tools to assist candidates in a written interview. The creation of the detector was based on the majority of Sapia.ai customers wanting transparency & explainability around the use of these tools by candidates, often because they want to ensure that candidates are using their own words to complete their interviews and they want to avoid wasting time progressing candidates who are not as capable as their chat interview suggests.
However, some of our customers feel that it’s a positive reflection of the candidate, showing that they are using the tools available to them to put their best foot forward.
It’s a mix of perspectives.
Our detector labels it as the use of artificially generated content. It’s up to our customers how they use that information in their decision-making processes.
This concept of having a human in the loop is one of the key dimensions of ethical AI, and we ensure that it is used in every AI-related hiring product we build.
Interested in the science behind it all? Download our published research on developing the AGC detector 👇
Research Paper Download: AI Generated Content in Online Text-based Structured Interviews
Blog
Joe & the Juice Partners with Sapia.ai, Scaling an Exceptional Candidate Experience and Cutting Time to Hire
Read the full press release about the partnership here.
Joe & the Juice, the trailblazing global juice bar and coffee concept, is renowned for its vibrant culture and commitment to cultivating talent. With humble roots from one store in Copenhagen, now with a presence in 17 markets, Joe & The Juice has built a culture that fosters growth and celebrates individuality.
But, as their footprint expands, so does the challenge of finding and hiring the right talent to embody their unique culture. With over 300,000 applications annually, the traditional hiring process using CVs was falling short – leaving candidates waiting and creating inefficiencies for the recruitment team. To address this, Joe & The Juice turned to Sapia.ai, a pioneer in ethical AI hiring solutions.
A Fresh Approach to Hiring
Through this partnership, Joe & The Juice has transformed its hiring process into an inclusive, efficient, and brand-aligned experience. Instead of faceless CVs, candidates now engage in an innovative chat-based interview that reflects the brand’s energy and ethos. Available in multiple languages, the AI-driven interview screens for alignment with the “Juicer DNA” and the brand’s core values, ensuring that every candidate feels seen and valued.
Candidates receive an engaging and fair interview experience as well as personality insights and coaching tips as part of their journey. In fact, 93% of candidates have found these insights useful, helping to deliver a world-class experience to candidates who are also potential guests of the brand.
“Every candidate interaction reflects our brand,” Sebastian Jeppesen, Global Head of Recruitment, shared. “Sapia.ai makes our recruitment process fair, enriching, and culture-driven.”
Results That Matter
For Joe & The Juice, the collaboration has yielded impressive results:
-
33% Reduction in Screening Time: Pre-vetted shortlists from Sapia.ai’s platform ensure that recruiters can focus on top candidates, getting them behind the bar faster.
-
Improved Candidate Satisfaction: With a 9/10 satisfaction score from over 55,000 interviews, candidates appreciate the fairness and transparency of the process.
-
Bias-Free Hiring: By eliminating CVs and integrating blind AI that prioritizes fairness, Joe & The Juice ensures their hiring reflects the diverse communities they serve.
Frederik Rosenstand, Group Director of People & Development at Joe & The Juice, highlighted the transformative impact: “Our juicers are our future leaders, so using ethical AI to find the people who belong at Joe is critical to our long-term success. And now we do that with a fair, unbiased experience that aligns directly with our brand.”
Trailblazing for the hospitality industry
In an industry so wholly centred on people, Joe & the Juice is paving the way for similar brands to adopt technology that enables inclusive, human-first experiences that can reflect a brand’s core values.
If you’re curious about how Sapia.ai can transform your hiring process, check out our full case study on Joe & The Juice here.
Blog
Sapia.ai Wrapped 2024
It’s been a year of Big Moves at Sapia.ai. From welcoming groundbreaking brands to achieving incredible milestones in our product innovation and scale, we’re pushing the boundaries of what’s possible in hiring.
And we’re just getting started 🚀
Take a look at the highlights of 2024
All-in-one hiring platform
This year, with the addition of Live Interview, we’re proud to say our platform now covers screening, assessing and scheduling.
It’s an all-in-one volume hiring platform that enables our customers to deliver a world-leading experience from application through to offer.
Supercharging hiring efficiency
Every 15 seconds, a candidate is interviewed with Sapia.ai.
This year, we’ve saved hiring managers and recruiters hours of precious time that can now be used for higher-value tasks.
Giving candidates the best experience
Our platform allows candidates to be their best selves, so our customers can find the people that truly belong with them. They’re proud to use a technology that’s changing hiring, for good.
Leading the way in AI for hiring
We’ve continued to push the boundaries in leveraging ethical AI for hiring, with new products on the way for Coaching, Internal Mobility & Interview Builders.