Feedbacks after a job interview: 3 recruiters testify

Three recruiters testify:

  • Charlotte Gouiard, HR Tech & Candidate Experience Manager at Mazars
  • Frédéric Faye, HRD of the Apicil Group
  • Nawel Ouannassi, recruitment and internal mobility manager at ADP

Charlotte Gouiard: “We are careful about the words we use”

Charlotte Gouiard, HR Tech & Candidate Experience Manager at Mazars

“At Mazars, we systematically give feedback by telephone to the candidates we have interviewed, whether they are executives or non-executives. We address both their strong points and their areas for improvement, that is to say what went wrong in their candidacy. I feel like this is something quite unusual in the recruiting sphere.

For the majority of candidates, it is often a first to be contacted in this way by a recruiter.

Generally, they listen and want us to rely on factual elements to justify our decision. We therefore rely on the interview report as well as on the results of the resolution of practical cases to argue. Some even go so far as to ask for another chance after being debriefed!

Conversely, some candidates take it badly, certainly because they need to “digest” the negative response. They are not vindictive either. But when the remarks affect their personality, for example, it is more difficult for them to hear. In any case, we are careful about the words we use. When a candidate has sold himself too well or is too sure of himself, we remind him, for example, that our professions are those of consulting and that they require a low posture, empathy and listening. We are not talking about “lack of humility” but about “clumsiness in the way of putting oneself forward”. Each word is carefully chosen and this is also the reason why only the HR team is authorized to provide this feedback. Operational staff do not all have this neutrality and this ability to smooth things over. »

Frédéric Faye: “Feedback works both ways”

Frédéric Faye, HRD of the Apicil Group

“We respond to all candidates who send us their applications. However, we only give feedback to those who have reached the shortlist and, of course, to those who ask us for it. It is important for us to close the door elegantly to candidates that we do not retain insofar as our reputation as an employer is at stake! When we give feedback, we have four objectives: to announce the answer frankly, to explain the reasons for our refusal, to answer questions and to reformulate our arguments. Often, we recall the important qualities and skills expected for the position and we explain how the profile of the candidate is positioned vis-à-vis them.

It’s trickier when it comes to explaining that the candidate doesn’t match the team in place or the company’s values, for example.

Those who give us a hard time are often the confident candidates who don’t listen. We take care not to offend them because in the digital era and e-reputation, a simple language error can have terrible repercussions on our employer brand.

What is often forgotten is that feedback works both ways. When we call candidates to explain our refusal, we collect, in turn, their impressions of their recruitment experience. It’s not common but it’s enriching for us. In this way, we are developing our welcome, our process, our image. Profiles in human resources, communication and sales are those who share their feelings the most. It’s in the DNA of their profession. »

Nawel Ouannassi: “We use the ‘sandwich’ technique”

Nawel Ouannassi, recruitment and internal mobility manager at ADP

“The candidate experience is an important subject for us. So much so that when we indicate, in our recruitment software, that a position is marked as filled, all the candidates who have applied for it receive a questionnaire which aims to collect their opinions on the experience they have had. . All ratings below 9 out of 10 are subject to in-depth analysis. For our part, we systematically give feedback to the 450 to 550 candidates we interview every year. It’s a question of politeness. We also believe that a candidate who does not receive feedback will not re-apply to the company in the future. It is therefore also a bet on the future. By telephone, we use “the sandwich technique”.

This consists of starting the explanations with the strong points of the candidate, continuing with areas for improvement and ending with a positive and encouraging note.

This exchange lasts between 5 and 10 minutes, depending on the case. In general, the candidates are listening, thanking us and finding our remarks useful for their future recruitment experiences. Sometimes, when we point out a trait of their personality such as a lack of team spirit, the exchange is however more difficult, less fluid. To convey this message, we rely on facts: for example the fact that a candidate speaks in the first person when questioned about his latest achievements, that he puts himself too forward by hiding his former team. ..”

Back to top button

Adblock Detected

Please disable your ad blocker to be able to view the page content. For an independent site with free content, it's literally a matter of life and death to have ads. Thank you for your understanding! Thanks