I recently had the opportunity to interview for a position with a well-known technology company. Overall it was a positive experience. However, there was one thing that made me sour on it. The company has an policy against giving interview feedback beyond a yes/no hiring decision. What bothered me even more was I only found out about this policy after investing more than ten hours interviewing. I want to unpack this issue to help make job candidates aware that:
First, I want to clarify what I mean when I say “interview feedback.” During the interview process, feedback can come in many forms. Here are some examples of things I would consider valuable feedback.
Formal feedback from a recruiter is great, but it is not the only kind a candidate can receive. There are so many simple things that can happen during the interview process that provide valuable feedback. Companies with policies against interview feedback actively silence all of these.
The next thing I want to be very clear about is, as a job candidate, just what are you entitled to in terms of interview feedback? The answer is simple: nothing. Companies are not obligated to provide candidates with feedback, and rightly so. I’m sure there are plenty of cases where the employer just doesn’t have anything else to say. Interview feedback is valuable because it means something was significant enough to warrant mentioning it. There would be far less value in feedback that was given just because it was mandatory.
It’s not fair to argue that companies should require providing feedback to every job candidate. What is unfair is the inverse – when companies prohibit providing feedback to any job candidate.
It may not seem to make much sense on the surface, but companies have sound business reasons for prohibiting interview feedback. The most obvious reason is to avoid liability. If a candidate feels they were treated unfairly or discriminated against because of feedback they received, they may bring a lawsuit against the company.
Another reason is to save time. Companies that try to provide feedback to candidates must invest extra time in collecting and delivering it.
A third reason is to ensure all candidates are treated equally. Allowing feedback to flow naturally from recruiters and interviewers to candidates means that some candidates will receive more feedback than others. It’s not exactly formulaic, and how much feedback you get depends on many factors. Restricting interview feedback is an efficient way to remove this potential discrepancy.
Lastly, some companies restrict interview feedback to avoid having to deal with unhappy candidates. Obviously there will be many cases where a company decides a candidate isn’t a good fit but the candidate just doesn’t agree with that. Not only does this result in more time the recruiters must spend on the phone or e-mailing with candidates that they’re already done with, but it can also reflect negatively on the company on review sites such as Glassdoor.
So the third thing I want to be clear about is that I don’t think companies do this without reason. Companies are completely within their rights to have policies restricting interview feedback. These policies do provide value to the business and mitigate risk.
This is a complicated topic, as I discovered after many discussions with friends and colleagues. I’ve tried to clarify the details of my perspective. Now, I will try to summarize the point I hope all job seekers will take away from this post:
With a busy career and a wife and daughter that I love coming home to, time is my most precious resource. The next time I find out a company has a policy against interview feedback, I will think very carefully about how much of that time I’m willing to invest.
Adam Platt is a technologist with more than a decade of experience across the full stack. His passion for technology and penchant for rendering complex technical ideas into simple terms have made him an in-demand speaker. His resume includes BriForum, the PowerShell Summit, teaching engagements and more.
He is one of the 10 types of people who understand binary and he can solve a Rubik’s Cube.
Adam Platt is a technologist with more than a decade of experience across the full stack. His passion for technology and penchant for rendering complex technical ideas into simple terms have made him an in-demand speaker. His resume includes BriForum, the PowerShell Summit, teaching engagements and more.
He is one of the 10 types of people who understand binary and he can solve a Rubik’s Cube.