Ghosting Candidates is Poor Communication Not Normal

"Async interviews feel impersonal." It's the most common objection we hear. Worth unpacking, because what actually happens is closer to the opposite. In an async interview: The candidate records in their own space, on their own time. No interview room, no awkward small talk, no 9am Monday panic. Fewer nerves, more honest answers. The hiring team watches when they have focus. Not between two Zoom calls. Notes get written, not half-remembered. Specific moments get rewatched. Multiple reviewers see the same response. Five people, same 3-minute answer, structured scorecard. Disagreements become productive instead of "I felt good about them" vs "I didn't." Every candidate gets the same questions in the same format. No "the interviewer was tired" variance. No "we ran out of time to cover that." The question isn't whether async is personal. It's which format gives the candidate a fair shot and the hiring team real signal. Both sides usually get more from async than they expected. The "personal" 30-minute phone screen is often just a conversation where nobody took notes. When was your last phone screen where you took real notes? #hiring #recruitment #hrtech #asyncinterviews

He completed 4 interviews. Delivered a detailed presentation. Then came the email "We’ve decided to move forward with another candidate." No explanation. No feedback. Just... rejection. He followed up politely asking for insight. Silence. Ghosted. 💭 This is someone who showed up fully prepared. He researched. He practised. He gave his best. And still no response. Absolutely shocking. 🛑 Hiring teams, I get that you're busy and sometimes have to rely on automated rejections being sent to the huge amount of applications you receive. But if someone invests hours into your process, and engages in rounds and rounds of interview, the least they deserve is feedback. Even if you’ve chosen someone else. Even if it’s just one helpful sentence. Let’s raise the bar. Follow the golden rule. Treat candidates the way you’d want to be treated. Because you may one day find yourself in their shoes. ____ Who Agrees?

The continued existence of organizations operating unethically is a significant concern. The challenges within the job market could be addressed through straightforward adjustments, which would necessitate the closure of such entities. The manner in which a company interacts with prospective employees often reflects its internal operational standards. It is reasonable to infer that such organizations may be prone to numerous internal issues and scandals.

Working as a department of one in HR has given me perspective on both sides of the process — balancing business needs while also recognizing the importance of timely, respectful communication with candidates. This post highlights an important conversation HR professionals and hiring leaders should continue having around candidate experience and organizational reputation. Candidates often invest a tremendous amount of time and energy into the hiring process — multiple interviews, presentations, preparation, and emotional investment in the opportunity itself. While not every candidate will receive an offer, every candidate deserves communication, professionalism, and respect throughout the process. As HR professionals, we understand there are often factors happening behind the scenes that candidates may not see — shifting business needs, internal approvals, changing priorities, and compliance considerations. But even within those realities, transparency and timely follow-up matter. Candidate experience is more than a recruiting metric. It directly impacts employer brand, reputation, future talent pipelines, and how people talk about an organization in their communities and networks. In relationship-driven industries like community banking, those interactions carry even more weight. The way candidates are treated during difficult moments often becomes a reflection of an organization’s culture and values. Sometimes a thoughtful update, realistic timeline, or simple acknowledgment can make a meaningful difference in how someone experiences the process — even if the outcome isn’t the one they hoped for. People may forget the exact details of an interview process, but they rarely forget how they were treated.💙

The most compelling candidates in an interview aren't always the most qualified. They're the ones who seem like they might say no. In 20+ years in tech, the best interviews I've ever seen didn't feel like interviews. They felt like two people figuring out if they could build something great together. Nobody was performing. Nobody was interrogating. Both sides were genuinely curious. Here's what most candidates don't realize: Hiring managers can feel the difference immediately. The candidate who's hoping to get the job. And the candidate who's deciding whether this is the right opportunity. The second one is always more compelling. When you walk in feeling like you're being judged, you shrink. Safe answers. Rehearsed responses. You leave without ever showing them who you actually are. When you walk in knowing you're evaluating them as much as they're evaluating you, everything changes. Better questions. More honest conversations. Confidence instead of anxiety. They need to fill this role as much as you need to find the right one. The candidate who might say no is the one they'll fight to keep. You're not auditioning. You're having a conversation. Show up like it.

It’s interesting how different the job search feels when you’re currently employed. There’s a bit more confidence, a little less pressure—and it can really change how you show up in interviews. So how do those of us who are unemployed shift our mindset? I remind myself before every interview: I’m interviewing them too. The culture, the expectations, the day-to-day—it all has to be the right fit on both sides. Curious—how do you approach interviews?

If only it was that easy in this day and age. Lately I’ve noticed that some interviews feel more like a checklist than a real conversation. I go in ready to connect and show who I am, but it turns into back-to-back questions with not much room to actually talk naturally. It’s hard to fully express yourself when it feels so structured. The best interviews I’ve had were the ones that felt like real conversations. That’s when I feel like I can actually be myself and show what I bring to the table.

As someone who has had many interviews run like this, I really couldn’t agree more! Interviews are a test and people that are naturally academic are always listened to and taken forward which leaves the others to fend for themselves. Some people like me grow and develop over time. You may think that you’re hiring the right person, but are you when they’ve talked their way through an interview and May have just told you what you want to hear and not necessarily what they can bring. It’s not about the talk, it’s about the action. Give everyone a chance and not just the loud and talkative ones 🙏

When I look at this, I actually miss the real people doing interviews, because now it's AI. I'm not saying that all AI is bad, but it's taking jobs that should be personable. Recruiters and Managers are replacing true human communication with a machine that has no empathy. It analyses every movement, every facial expression, every filler word, as well as your answers. Points off for lack of keyword use. The employer knows what you're trying to say, and granted, they encourage keyword usage...but AI requires it. I believe that employers should take a step back and think about how they are using AI, and how it is impacting not only their business, but other people. People who could make their companies soar if given the chance. People are suffering in the age of AI, due to not being able to pass the interview. And we don't always get a response after all of that. It's important to know how things are going behind the screen. #AI #AIRecruiters #Unemployment #AIInterviews #BringBackEmpathy