On feedback

Greg Wyatt • April 16, 2024

This article is on the feedback you may get from applications, what they can sometimes mean, and why it happens.

Today I’m going to cover

  1. The only three reasons people are offered and declined for a vacancy

  2. Two scenarios for context, to illustrate how feedback is derived and its dangers, to give a little insight on employer limitations

  3. Detail on three ‘classic’ lines of feedback and what they can mean

  4. When feedback matters, and when it doesn’t

  5. And if feedback doesn’t help, what you should do instead

I try to present this information in an even and balanced way for UK jobseekers, based on my knowledge of recruitment, in supporting HR teams and hiring managers, and in networking with the talent acquisition community.

Feedback cultures differ around the world, but you may find this helpful if you are situated outside of the UK.

The intent is to try and make this aspect of a job search less frustrating, and to try and temper your expectations in what remains a strange market.

1

At its heart any fair and reasonable recruitment requires three criteria to be met, to fill a vacancy:

  1. Capability

  2. Fit

  3. Stick

Capability answers the question ‘Can you fulfil the needs of the vacancy?’

This relates to the immediate problems a vacancy solves. This can include you being available in the right time frame.

As well as other dimensions such as forward-planning (e.g. if they look at the next job as well as this one, through succession planning. Or if they have confidential plans that will affect this role in future.)

I classify the wrong work permit here, in the same way a lack of a hard minimum qualification can be a deal breaker.

If you aren’t seen to be able to fulfil the role, for whatever reason, this is a capability rejection.

The good thing about capability is that if this is feedback which should be straightforward to give, in an objective process.

Fit is whether you are perceived to fit in or add to the business, culture and team.

Stick is whether you are perceived to remain in post long enough for the employer to see a return on their investment. This includes points like salary affordability and even location, if the employer doesn’t believe your commute is sustainable.

Unlike capability, both these points are primarily subjective.

What even is a culture or sustainable commute anyway?

Unfortunately, bias and assumptions are a common occurrence.

I say ‘fair and reasonable’ because some employers are not, and even fair and reasonable employers make unfair or unreasonable assumptions.

So; three reasons only, yet each has many facets and nuance, both for selection and rejection.

2

In the market we’ve found ourselves in during the last few years, many vacancies have many great candidates who meet all of those criteria above.

The sheer volume alone can make it hard to identify the right candidates, especially when applicants may not know how to make their candidacy discoverable.

By discoverable, I mean enabling the weakest link in a recruitment chain to see your suitability through the principles covered in the articles in this archive.

Here is what a typical vacancy might encounter working backwards, assuming there are no dropouts or cancellations, in a 2-stage interview process from a public job advert:

  • One candidate offered

  • 2-3 candidates at final interview

  • 5-8 candidates at 1st stage interview

  • 40-50 applications who show suitable candidacy

  • Another 40-150 applications who aren’t directly suitable yet have transferrable skills

  • A further 150 to 200 applications are wholly unsuitable, which may be for reasons of work permit status or wrong background

That could be a total of 400 applications, where only one person gets the job.

Now let’s say those 5-8 candidates at 1st stage interview are all excellent, with little to choose between them.

What separates those who are selected and those who are declined?

You might be a great candidate, but what’s to say the others aren’t great in their own ways, some of which might be more suited?

Sometimes it’s such fine margins that feedback is meaningless.

I use this example to set the scene - there are other approaches to recruitment, such as headhunting, referrals or others, where the numbers look very different.

However, I expect if you are reading this, you have at some point battled your way through a competitive process. If you were ‘pipped to the post’ as a 2nd choice candidate, take solace in being 2nd out of possibly hundreds - that’s an effective performance to build on.

If you’ve ever worked in a hiring capacity, you may know that giving feedback can be fraught with consequences.

Some years back, an early lesson on what can happen was a conversation I had with a candidate for an HR Director role.

This was a maternity leave contract, and he was a close 2nd to a strong candidate. There wasn’t anything he might have done differently, and had that candidate declined, they would have been pleased to offer him.

He took the news and my feedback very well, and we agreed to speak again at the earliest opportunity.

The following morning I had a call from the HR Director who was aghast. She’d received a vitriole-filled email from the candidate, after my conversation with him. Accusations, ill wishes and swear words aimed at a professional who was heavily pregnant.

Even with the best intentions, seemingly good people can be triggered to act abhorrently.

Between that and the legal complexity of feedback that may seemingly overlap with discrimination areas, such as ‘Overqualified’ (more on that), it’s no wonder many companies choose to either give platitudes or not to give feedback at all.

3

There are many cliched pieces of feedback. In my opinion, they all tether to the list at the top, either directly or in a way that doesn’t cause offense.

What feedback would you give to someone that is abrasive or offensive at interview?

How about someone with atypical body language or communication style?

Someone who is down in the dumps?

Someone who likes cricket when you like football?

Someone who is arrogant and blind to the damage they’ve caused in previous jobs?

Someone who is a maintenance mode manager in an environment of rapid change?

Some of these descriptions relate to people who are illegally discriminated against, others to people who are simply unpleasant, and many more.

‘ Cultural fit ’ may sometimes be the straightforward way to explain a decision.

An easy way out with an individual you shouldn’t employ, something that hides poor process, something that hides discrimination, or something else.

And sometimes a simple way not to hurt someone’s feelings.

Whatever the reason, the worst it can invite is frustration for the candidate, rather than specific feedback which opens a can of worms.

Let’s talk about ‘ overqualified ’.

Now a popular post on LinkedIn is that it’s impossible to be overqualified. It’s true, but not for the reason stated.

The more accurate truth is that there are only two states - you are either qualified or unqualified for a role.

You are qualified if you meet the measure of capability, stick and fit.

You are unqualified if you don’t meet all three.

The use of the word overqualified is a lazy fallback that creates problems unnecessarily in a fair and reasonable process.

The common perception is that overqualification relates to seniority, a level of expertise above the requirements for the role, expense or even age, and this can be true. But they aren’t necessarily the reasons behind the use of the word.

The real issue with the word is that it can be used for good or to cover cynical reasons.

When I recruit for any vacancy, there is typically a context not visible in the employer’s job spec, which they might keep for an interview or remain trapped in their heads.

This might be the role trajectory - how it will change over time.

It might be a salary budget with the balance of the team in mind.

It might be that the role won’t change at all, so from a retention perspective, more junior candidates have more room to grow into it before it becomes blindingly boring.

Or it could be that the role is hands on, and a strategic level of experience may be too far removed, while not working to the strengths of a more senior level candidate.

These might not be articulated clearly yet can be fair selection criteria for declining a candidate - where the recruiter might say overqualified instead.

By identifying these points, I can make them clear in my adverts and conversations, so that applicants aren’t left bemused by decisions from hidden information.

And when I am wrong in my decision, I welcome constructive disagreement to allow clarity.

The examples here are simplified for this article - the devil is always in the detail.

In most adverts and job descriptions, this key hidden context is often missing, making overqualified hard feedback to parse.

I’d be annoyed if given that from an application to a generic job description-led advert full of innovative adjectives and no insight.

Regrettably, it’s also used as a euphemism, much like cultural fit, that can hide discrimination.

What these two principles have in common is that they can mean fair, neutral and unfair (and possibly illegal things).

However, unless you have evidence of the harmful connotation, you have to assume there is fair reason.

I do see commentary that recruiters and the front-end of hiring processes aren’t qualified to make these judgements, and it may even be so in many situations. However, we can only focus on the controllable, such as how we define our messaging, not the decisions others make, as frustrating as that might be.

I mentioned a third common reason to unpick - ‘ industry experience’.

Not so much to discuss whether it’s right to reject someone on this basis.

Moreso because it’s often a rejection that happens after an interview process, leading to the common question

“Why did they waste my time, when they knew I didn’t have industry experience?”

Industry experience is an example of how selection criteria shift throughout a recruitment process.

Firstly, through the hierarchy of decision-makers. It’s not uncommon for additional decision-makers to become involved late in the process, who have a strong objection that wasn’t present earlier.

And secondly, through how tight calls are judged between candidates.

The closer you get to the offer stage, the fewer candidates you compete with, and if everything else is even, what weren’t issues before can become decision-making factors at the final hurdle.

This is a mercurial type of feedback that also raises its head with qualifications, education, and even cultural fit and overqualification. I’m not excusing it, simply highlighting why it can happen.

4

This isn’t to say that feedback isn’t worth pursuing.

Feedback can be a game changer, particularly when we help candidates overcome blindspots, improve how they play the game and deliver a better interview.

It’s always worth asking for feedback, or ways in which to improve your performance, but if that answer isn’t forthcoming, I’d question whether it’s worth pursuing, or if that energy is better spent elsewhere.

If you’re interested in my philosophy on feedback, it’s this - to reciprocate the level of investment a candidate has made in the process.

An applicant who is wholly unsuitable and appears not to have read the advert gets a generic response.

A candidate who has committed to going through an interview process gets full feedback.

And everything in between.

However, I see it as important to give feedback in the spirit it’s meant, rather than verbatim.

For example, if someone’s nerves have led them to perform really poorly at an interview, I’ll look at tips to help them find confidence, rather than dwell on details that may even knock them back further.

Equally, some people prefer limited feedback by email, while others benefit from a call.

It’s a balance that isn’t always easy to get right.

Assuming you are performing well at interview, built on a successful career, the question I’d ask is - when has feedback made a difference to you?

If feedback doesn’t make a difference you should act on, is it worth worrying about?

Or is it healthier to draw a line through that application, and move forward?

5

If you’re frustrated by a lack of feedback, what can you do?

Self reflection is key. After an interview think back on the areas you did well, and what you might have done differently.

For problem questions, write them down and think of better answers for future reference.

For questions you felt you answered well - run through them with a friend you know will challenge you in the right way and ask them to time your response. Time management is key, and it’s unlikely employers will provide feedback on waffling!

If you find yourself BSing, ask yourself why. Was it a lack of confidence, rusty knowledge, or a gap to overcome?

Did you prepare well enough? Were there unanswered questions you had, you could have learnt beforehand?

If answers aren’t coming from elsewhere, looking within, and focusing on what you can control will help.

How can you better show that you solve the employer’s problems, through your capability, fit and stick?

Thanks for reading.

Regards,

Greg

How recruiters work

By Greg Wyatt • August 18, 2026
The body content of your post goes here. To edit this text, click on it and delete this default text and start typing your own or paste your own from a different source.

After the interview

By Greg Wyatt • August 11, 2026
What follows is Chapter 49 in A Career Breakdown Kit (Summer 2026) . It's like many other chapters in that I've tried to make it stand alone, yet it's deeply connected to the rest of the book. For example, if you accept your job search is equivalent to launching a product to market - where you are the product and your next employer the buyer - then a sensible strategy is also equivalent. You execute an appropriate multichannel sales and marketing plan, where you focus on the steps in your control, with considered action and follow up. An interview process is an ongoing negotiation, with each interview equivalent to a consultative sales meeting. And like any good sales professional, you know that the steps preceding, the steps in-between, and the steps after all have a part to play. In my last three offers these have all been contributing factors: The relationship nurtured by the hiring manager led to their new employee hitting the ground running The private information withheld by the candidate that led to an offer rescinded because she could never have fulfilled the role in the first place The enthusiasm shown by a candidate in post interview communications tipped a decision in their favour Recruitment is risk, filled with bias - that doesn't mean you can't make that work for you. 49 - After the interview In a tough job search, getting to an interview can feel a real achievement. If you’ve been accountable in your applications, only going for roles where you are a strong fit, these are tangible opportunities to secure employment. The interview itself isn’t the be-all and end-all. It’s better to see them as the start of a conversation, one that’s only complete when you either have an acceptable employment contract in your hand, or if it’s an unequivocal no. Continuing this conversation in the right way, and in ways other candidates may not think to, can bring hoped for and unexpected gains. A few weeks back I filled a vacancy which had a strong shortlist. The final three were all employable, and the company would have taken all three had they been able to. The second choice candidate was disappointed and took it well, responding professionally. I worked hard to give all three a good experience with regular updates and constructive feedback. I too was genuinely disappointed for the ‘unsuccessful’ candidates. Two weeks after accepting the offer and returning the signed contract, the first-choice candidate withdrew. She’d received a significantly improved offer having been headhunted. Within two hours of passing the news on to the hiring team, the 2nd choice candidate was offered the role and accepted. How she had responded to her initial disappointment was a key element in this offer being put forward. The same was true of her experience with us in her decision to accept the offer. In many ways an interview is like a sales meeting. One party pitches their offering which might be customised against the questions asked. The other party makes a decision on whether and how to proceed. In an interview both the candidate and employer act as both seller and buyer. As a job seeker you get the final say on whether you say yes, no or something in between. Your decision is influenced by factors you may not divulge to the employer, such as an unexpected intervention (illness, accident, family), personal circumstances or other offers that may come up. It’s the same for the employer. They may have a hierarchy of decision-making, changes in the business and changes outside of the business - many things that can influence an interview decision or time frame, different from what was initially agreed. In sales we know that a deal isn’t agreed upon until the invoice is paid. Even if there is an initial ‘yes’ in a meeting we follow up suitably. Follow-up email to confirm details of the conversation and next steps. Thank you for your time Follow up at the appropriate time to check progress If it’s ‘no right now’, follow up over time to build a relationship until they are ready to buy If it’s ‘no answer’, find appropriate reasons to follow up, ending in a breakup email What this actually looks relates to what their sales (hiring) process is, playing to their rules and breaking those same rules in an appropriate way. In the UK, 61% of private sector employers are SMEs, whereas the vast majority of money is in the corporate space. The differentiator in recruitment is that the more corporate you get, the more transactional and matrix-led recruitment often becomes. Some of the rules of the game will be different. This illustrates how and why things are different depending on the context. Public sector, charities, geography, bias, habit, strategy - these all affect the rules of what appear similar processes from the outside. It’s important not to be cynical or come across as coercive. Respect the process and any rules you learn about. Thank you notes Most of the employers I partner with are interested in candidate feedback and interest post-interview - to help them reach their decision for the right reason. Were you applying directly, their interest in your view would be the same. A naturally written thank you note sent appropriately should not work against you. It might work for you and it’s a situation where someone’s bias can be a benefit. ‘Dear Greg, I wanted to thank you for your time today and the opportunity to interview at ABC Corp. It was a pleasure to meet you and Gary and helpful to understand more about your role and environment. I remain keen and would be delighted to return for the next stage. You mentioned you’ll make a decision by the end of next week and I look forward to hearing from you. Do let me know if I can help with anything - my number is …. Kind regards,’ It’s an opportunity to build on or mitigate inconclusive points in an interview if there’s an example you neglected to share or if you didn’t convey information in the right way. Maybe they let slip they’d be concerned if the role would keep your interest in the long term - why not own this? ‘During the interview you asked if I could see myself in this role long-term. It’s a role I’d enjoy - taking on a hands-on role I can get stuck into is an exciting challenge, while my experience in xxx would be beneficial for yyy.’ Keep it more succinct than my email though. Write it in your own words in a similar tone to how you came across in the interview. Will it make a difference? Only marginally, in some situations. Is it worth doing as a natural way to continue the conversation? I think so. Don’t be disheartened if you don’t get a reply - they may have a policy to follow. And to that coercive point above don’t say ‘I’m the best candidate. You’d be a fool to miss out,’ or something more subtle that might suggest the same. Additional interviews In an ideal world you’d get a full view of the interview process before the interview. Unfortunately some employers enjoy playing a game of interview chicken, revealing more and more interview stages as you go through them. Most are somewhere in between. Try to establish the full process as early as possible in case there is anything that is non-negotiable for you. For example, I know some people categorically do not want to do technical tests or ‘business plan’ style presentations, having had their fingers burnt in the past. It’s your choice what might be a non-negotiable - for any reasonable employer these are typically used as a means for fair assessment. Treat any interview in the same way as the first interview: prepare as fully as possible and assume nothing. Unless you know their hierarchy of decision-making, that new person you meet at fourth stage for an informal chat might well be the person with the final say. Even a social get-together after an offer is put forward might be seen as an assessment. Appropriate follow-ups It’s a careful balance. You want to show you are interested, not desperate. You need an answer, not to be inappropriately intrusive - even if that’s not your intent perception holds weight. Following up in the right way is a good tactic. If you can gain an understanding of their time frames or process work to that. Anything and everything can happen behind the scenes, including unexpected absences. Things can slip in a way employers may not see as notable. A few work days after you were expecting to hear, drop them a polite line. ‘Hi Greg, I wondered if you had any news on how you want to proceed with this role. Is there any update you can share? Kind regards,’ You can play a bit of keeping up with the Joneses if it’s true - ‘I remain interested - I do have two interviews this week with other employers. Would you like me to keep you updated?’ Sometimes no news is no news and you might need to be patient. Eventually you may come to a point where you need a decision from them - such as if your 2nd choice company gives you a job offer. A breakup email can be a good thing. Even if this doesn’t prompt an update or decision from them, you give yourself agency to walk away with no ‘what ifs?’ And if they do come back later, you can make a separate decision on whether to revisit them. One such email might be: ‘Hi Greg, I enjoyed our interview on May 21st. You mentioned you’d reach a decision the following week. Can I assume you have moved forward with another candidate? I’ll draw a line through my application for now and will be happy to pick up our conversations at a later date, if appropriate. Kind regards,’ Written appropriately, there are three outcomes: You get a reply confirming they have appointed You get no reply and can move on You get a reply with more information That last point may be ‘no news’ or something actionable. Sometimes it might even prompt good news. Whatever the outcome, you can move forward. Keeping in touch long-term Sometimes a no might be a ‘no for now’, especially when you are later on in the process, such as being pipped to the post at final interview. If yours is a business as usual role where there are a number of employees fulfilling similar duties in the same company, you may well be suitable for other roles that come up in future. How can you keep in touch appropriately so that you help their decision making when another vacancy comes up? Find reasons to occasionally keep in touch (maybe once every couple of months). If they are active on LinkedIn you could follow their content and add constructive comments. It may come to nothing but it may give you early sight of a new vacancy. If you see another vacancy advertised check it out. Drop them a line directly rather than just apply given you are continuing a conversation rather than coming in cold. And if they reply to say ‘don’t bother’, at least you know.