staying human: a commitment to communication.
A candidate I’ve been representing contacted me to say thank you. They hadn’t landed a job; in fact I’d recently called them to explain why they hadn’t been progressed on a role. And when I did, I offered them the honest feedback that every jobseeker deserves.
The sad thing is that my call and feedback really stood out for them. So much so that they took the time to email to thank me.
And the thing is, I often get comments from candidates who are surprised when they’re treated as human beings and have actual conversations through the hiring process.
the efficiency trap.
Communicating well and regularly with candidates is an essential part of the hiring process but somehow, it’s become acceptable to skip that part. Why?
Recruitment has never been ‘faster’. AI screening, automated scheduling, one-click rejections; there are systems that can process hundreds of applications in a couple of hours. And there's value in that speed, both for clients under pressure to hire and for candidates who deserve quick answers.
But let’s not mistake "efficiency" with “the bare minimum”. Let’s not sacrifice connection for speed.
When we optimise purely for speed, we start treating candidates as data points rather than people with careers, anxieties, and ambitions. And that approach will cost your business; in reputation, in referrals, and in the quality of your future talent pools.
connection is key.
Here's what I live by: every candidate interaction builds connection between two humans. It’s never a transaction or a data processing exercise, even when they’re not right for your current role.
The person you ignore today might be perfect for a role next year. They might recommend a friend. Or they might simply remember how you made them feel and share that story.
Going back to candidates and communicating well is strategically sensible. It takes time, given the volume of candidates, but it’s the right thing to do and leads to successful hiring outcomes.
what "human-centric" hiring means.
At mum we focus on human-centric hiring. But what does that mean in communication with candidates?
Realistically, it's the basics, done really well:
acknowledge applications. Every applicant deserves a human response. Even if that response is automated (I do understand sometimes volumes require that) make the message timely, personalised, and encouraging. Ignoring applications has become acceptable in hiring. It’s not.
close the feedback loop. If someone's taken time to interview, they deserve to know the outcome and why. Silence is the loudest and most destructive message you can send. It’s neither respectful nor kind.
be honest, not brutal. Feedback doesn't have to be exhaustive. A few specific, constructive points are what’s needed, to be genuinely helpful. And only share valuable feedback that people can act upon.
respect the timeline. If you said you'd update someone by Friday, update them by Friday, even if that update is "we're still deciding."
remember the human in the process. A quick personal note, a voice message, a check-in. Moments of connection that make a world of difference.
efficiently human.
I'm not arguing against speed and efficiency. It’s essential for everyone in the hiring process. But as you automate some tasks, invest more time in the moments that build connection - the check ins, the constructive feedback, the follow-ups.
Make sure that in the rush to fill roles, you don't forget that there's a person on the other end of every application.
When candidates contact me to thank me for doing my job and keeping in touch, it highlights how truly impersonal the act of hiring human beings can become when left unchecked – and how damaging that is for employers too.
Because the thing about candidates is when they’re treated well, they remember.