Impact of Automated Rejections on Applicant Trust

I'm sure some of you have seen this rejection email that is going viral, but this is more than just an embarrassing mistake. It is a symbol of a much bigger issue in today’s hiring landscape... A candidate received an email that was supposed to politely inform them they didn’t get the job. Instead, they received the raw AI prompt: "Write a warm but generic rejection email that sounds polite yet firm... Do not mention specific reasons... Remember to use candidate name and company name variables." That message wasn’t meant for the candidate’s eyes, but in many ways, it speaks the truth louder than a polished email ever could. It shows how deeply impersonal the hiring process has become. As someone who runs a recruiting firm that specializes in the insurance industry, I’ve had thousands of conversations with candidates who feel like they’re shouting into a void. They apply, they interview, they follow up, and in return, they often get silence or an automated message that clearly had no human involved. Let’s be honest. Technology and AI have their place. They can streamline workflows, track applications, and even generate helpful templates. But somewhere along the way, companies started thinking those tools are the hiring process. They are not... Hiring is human. It is emotional. It is a decision that impacts someone's livelihood, their family, and their future. When we reduce it to prompts and placeholders, we lose credibility with the very people we are trying to attract. The irony is that the companies that take the time to be thoughtful, the ones that give feedback, that show empathy, that make candidates feel like more than a line in an ATS, those are the companies that consistently win the best talent. In the insurance industry especially, where trust, relationships, and communication are everything, that extra effort matters. So here is my take: If you are not willing to treat people like people during the hiring process, do not be surprised when the people you want to hire do not want to work for you. Let’s stop treating rejection like a checkbox. Let’s start treating it like an opportunity to show who you are as a brand and how you value people, even the ones you do not hire. #Recruiting #Hiring #CandidateExperience #InsuranceIndustry #AIFail #TalentAcquisition #DoBetter #HumanFirst

"Send your CV." And then silence. Nothing... I’ve been in executive search for years. I’ve seen the hiring process from both sides, candidates sending their CVs full of hope, and companies posting jobs with urgency. But here’s the uncomfortable truth: Too often, candidates hit send... and hear nothing back. Not an acknowledgment. Not a rejection. Just silence. Behind every CV is more than a document. It’s someone’s late nights rewriting, someone’s career story, someone’s hope for a new chapter. And silence doesn’t just waste time, it chips away at dignity. As headhunters, HR leaders, and hiring managers, we have a responsibility: if we ask for someone’s story, the least we can give is a reply. Even an automated response is better than disappearing. Because respect is remembered and silence is never forgotten. To job seekers: if you’ve felt this, you’re not alone. The system is flawed, not you. To companies: if you want the best people tomorrow, start by treating applicants with respect today. Trust and reputation are built or broken here. 💡 Here’s my question to you: As a job seeker, what would it mean for you to simply hear back, even with a rejection? Let’s start building a hiring culture that values people, not just posts. #hiring #jobseekers #CV #jobs #jobsearch

Let's normalize sharing with candidates (especially in those rejection emails) how many people applied, how many were screened/interviewed, and how long the role was posted for. 💡 👉 If you want candidates to stop lighting up your Glassdoor and "understand" you are one person and that you can't feasibly respond to every applicant, then personalize your ATS emails/processes better and weave in some transparency for them. HELP them understand. 👉 If you average 500 applications per role, say that in the job posting. As recruiters, we have this data. Why not pull the curtain back and let candidates know about it so they can understand WHY they weren't selected for a screen? 👉 If you know you won't be able to personally speak with them unless they're chosen for a screen/interview, state that in the job posting or in the auto-confirmation email they'll get when they apply. 👉 If you want candidates to know that you usually have to pull your postings after a few days because the volume is insane, put that... you guessed it... IN THE JOB POSTING. 👉 If you know that your ATS is going to send "late-apply" candidates a generic rejection email (i.e., those who maybe applied just as you happen to be extending an offer), then TAILOR your ATS messaging so it sends a specific email to those leftover/not considered/not-statused candidates. Explain to them the timing was off, but that you'd encourage them to still apply. These are small tweaks in your ATS automation process, but they can help curb a TON of frustration for candidates. If you need help optimizing your candidate experience, especially in relation to how it intersects with your ATS capabilities, DM me. Let's fix this.

11 Months, 176 Applications, Zero Interviews – And Some Hard Truths About Hiring Today Sharing my friend’s story… For the past 11 months, I’ve been actively searching for a new role. I’ve applied to 176 jobs. I’ve received 62 automated rejections and 114 companies didn’t even bother responding (including some big names that I will not mention here but "you know who you are"! 🤫 ). And how many personal responses did I get that actually acknowledged my experience or effort? Zero. That’s right—not a single indication that a human (or even a well-trained bot) had actually read my CV or cover letter. Two things strike me: 1. Ageism is real, and it’s a massive missed opportunity. I’m not saying I was the best candidate for every role. But when you get zero engagement despite decades of experience and leadership success, you start to wonder: Was I even considered? Companies, organizations, and even governments keep making the same mistakes because they undervalue experience. Studies show that younger generations are increasingly hesitant to take on leadership roles, prioritizing work-life balance instead. At the same time, experienced professionals over 50 are being sidelined. So here’s a thought: What if companies actually leveraged both—the boldness and fresh ideas of youth combined with the strategic insight and battle scars of experience? Instead, we seem stuck in a loop where "too young" and "too old" are equally disqualifying. And let’s be honest—a world run only by old leadership isn’t exactly going great either. 😉 2. Rejection letters don’t have to be this bad. It’s 2025. AI can generate deeply personalized customer service responses in seconds—so why are HR departments still sending robotic, one-size-fits-all rejections (or worse, ghosting applicants altogether)? A simple, well-crafted AI-generated response could: ✅ Show candidates their effort was acknowledged ✅ Offer constructive feedback or encouragement ✅ Strengthen the employer brand (yes, rejected candidates can still be future customers, partners… or even future bosses!) Right now, rejection feels like shouting into the void. It doesn’t have to be that way. So here’s my question to you: Have you experienced this? Do companies need to do better, or is this just the reality of hiring today? And if AI can help, why aren’t we using it? For instance, generate a personalized rejection letter? Is the age of the candidate an issue to hiring as well? What do you think? Let’s discuss! Drop your thoughts below, and if you agree this needs attention, feel free to repost—maybe someone in HR or leadership will take note. Thanks! Keith LAU - Your Recruitment Adviser

I’ve facilitated university workshops to 1000+ students this academic year and employers - this is the single biggest issue students are facing with your application process gathering Insightful Feedback following ejections Talking to students after workshops, many of them would talk through the current problems they faced And hearing ‘I don’t know where I’m going wrong” after facing dozens of generic rejections came up way too many times Yes, employers are overflowed with an increasing amount of applications for limited roles But the lack of feedback in their rejections frustrates students as they were no better off in terms of knowing where to improve most students and graduates aren’t asking for hyper personalised rejection email But just more than a simple ‘we regret to inform you…’ rejection after every application And there are simple things you can do such as: 1️⃣ Categorising their rejection into templates buckets e.g. Strength of CV, numerical/ verbal reasoning part of online assessment 2️⃣ Automated Personalised Feedback via Scoring Matrix Using ATS to score applicants across key dimensions (e.g., communication, commercial awareness, data interpretation) and auto-generate feedback. 3️⃣ Rejection with Resources attached Sending rejection emails with links to resources or free guides to help improve their applications 4️⃣ Rejection + Invite to Talent Community Inviting them into your talent community can keep them in the loop of insight days and future opportunities you may have These are just a few ways to help students Which can make a heap of difference to students’ experience but also how they connect with you and to be honest - students are owed it in what is the toughest grad job markets out there

Welcome to the modern job hunt: where you upload your resume, enter it manually, take a test, hear nothing, and still get rejected for ‘lack of enthusiasm. Let’s stop sugarcoating it: poor recruiting isn’t just a miss—it’s a self-inflicted wound. Every time a qualified candidate gets lost in your ATS abyss, every time a hiring manager wings an interview, and every time a rejection email sounds like a toaster wrote it—you’re not just losing talent. You’re burning bridges, killing your culture, and quietly bleeding your brand to death. This isn’t about bad luck. It’s about bad choices. It’s about defaulting to the same tired playbook, copying job descriptions from 2015, and pretending that a 3-week silence is “respecting the candidate’s time.” It’s about overvaluing degrees, undervaluing skills, and mistaking automated rejection for efficiency. And here’s the uncomfortable truth: - Poor recruiting creates a ripple effect of dysfunction. - You hire the wrong people. - The right people don’t even apply. - Teams lose trust in HR. - Culture suffers. - Productivity stalls. - Turnover skyrockets. - Reputation tanks. All because the first 10 minutes of someone’s candidate experience told them exactly what kind of chaos they’d be walking into. Recruiting is your company’s front door. So ask yourself: Are you inviting people into a thriving workplace—or slamming the door with broken systems and silence? #HRDisruption #HumanResources #Recruitment

I recently spoke with a dedicated job seeker who applied to 377 roles on LinkedIn. She was strategic — targeting only fresh postings and tailoring her resume every time. She did everything “right.” Yet astonishingly, only 27 of those applications were even viewed by recruiters; 350 got no response at all (no LinkedIn alerts, no emails, nothing). 377 applications submitted (all carefully customized). Only 27 were viewed; 350 were ignored. 2 interviews resulted (one with an AI chatbot, one panel interview); 0 job offers. This is not a candidate problem — it’s a hiring process problem. The System Overwhelmed Automated tools have created an avalanche of applications. One report found application volume surged by 48% year-over-year as candidates use “easy apply” bots. Hiring teams are swamped: it’s “fundamentally broken when your ATS is flooded with 500 applications for a single role and only 20 of them are remotely qualified” No surprise then that 66% of job seekers report feeling burned out by the search Many qualified people give up or question themselves — not because of their skill level, but because the system is impersonal and slow. For too long, recruiters have measured success by the wrong metrics. As one expert puts it, “time-to-fill, cost-per-click, and raw application numbers tell us very little about whether we’re actually hiring the right people.” Over-automated: Candidates are screened by algorithms with no human interaction. Under-human: Automated interviews and ghosting offer no empathy or feedback. Slow & Broken: People are left hanging indefinitely or completely ignored. People Are Not Pipelines Remember: job seekers are human beings, not funnel metrics. Treating applicants like numbers dehumanizes the process. If great candidates are burning out, it’s time to fix your process, not blame them. Respect: A timely personal response (even a rejection) shows you value candidates. Clarity: Simplify the application (35% of candidates abandon long applications). Humanity: Balance tech with real connection — many candidates trust humans more than bots 📌 FREE Resume Review: To help job seekers navigate this broken system, I’m offering a completely free resume review. Follow or connect with me and send your resume — I’ll give you personal feedback and support. You deserve better treatment in your job search. #JobSeekers #Recruitment #Empathy #Hiring

She met every qualification, tailored her resume, and still got an auto-rejection from the system. A job seeker shared this with me last week, “I spent 4 hours tailoring my resume with ChatGPT and your course literally in front of me. The job was for a past employer I left in good standing with, and I had a referral. I received an automated ATS rejection at 6:15 am this morning. I was crushed. How did this happen? How did my resume fail the test again?” The frustration you’re feeling with the lack of responses you’re getting is completely normal. You expect that when you meet all the qualifications for a job you’ll get a response. The silence is unjustified and so you rightfully feel disappointed. I wish the application process, ATS, and AI screenings were easier to understand and all worked similarly. The reality is, though, that they don’t. The silence feels personal, but I promise you - it's not. Before you start second-guessing your entire career (and maybe even your sanity), let me share what's really happening that’s causing the complete silence and exactly what you can do to get around it. 1. Overly strict ATS filters/AI screening The system is designed to whittle down the candidate list to a manageable number. Often times, it ends up auto-rejecting qualified candidates. Here's the workaround: My client reached out to her contact and asked if he'd be willing to pass her resume along to the hiring manager. He handed the resume to the hiring manager and she got a call that afternoon for an interview. Ask: "Would you be so kind as to pass my resume along to the hiring manager for this role?" If you have a close relationship with the person don't be afraid to make the ask. The caveat is there already has to be a know/like/trust relationship in place. 2. They already had someone else in mind. Internal candidates and employee referrals get priority. Companies prefer promoting from within or hiring referred candidates who come pre-vetted. Here's the workaround: Focus on building relationships and securing referrals - you're 5X more likely to get hired with a referral than without one. It won't help you if it's an internal candidate already poised for the promotion but not having a referral means you have to work 14X harder to get the interview. I share 3 more reasons for the lack of responses you're seeing and the best strategies to overcome or combat them in the carousel below. ⤵️ If your resume incorporates your personal brand and strategic storytelling and is keyword optimized to align with your target roles, then it's not your resume. And it's definitely not you. It's the application process, the hiring system, and/or one of these 5 factors. Instead of focusing on the aspects of your job search you can't control (like whether they respond or not) focus on what you can control. Want more strategies to speed up your search? Subscribe to my newsletter 👆 #LinkedInTopVoices #careers #jobsearch

AI is about to take over hiring. Fast. In just over a year, many companies won’t just use AI to screen resumes—they will hand over entire interviews, body language analysis, and even automated rejection emails to machines. Imagine a candidate getting evaluated by an algorithm judging their tone or facial expressions. Or worse, being rejected without a human ever reviewing their application. This is not science fiction. It is happening now. This shift is a ticking time bomb for HR and business leaders. Efficiency gains come with massive risks—losing top talent, wrecking your employer brand, and eroding trust with every candidate you alienate. A quarter of job seekers already say they would trust a company less if AI evaluates their application. Ignore this, and you’ll lose your best people before they even get in the door. The fix is simple but urgent: be brutally transparent with candidates about where and how AI is used in hiring. Without trust, your AI hiring strategy is a recipe for disaster. Leaders, it’s time to own this shift or get left behind. #Hiring #AI #Recruiting #HRTech

We have all had to play the waiting game after applying for a job. Sometimes it is after you speak to the recruiter, other times after an interview. The best automated rejection email comes shortly after you apply, without any prior conversations or interviews. Why? It provides closure and potential insights for candidates to refine their resumes or narrow their search. As long as the rejection email doesn't arrive months later, most of us appreciate the quick response. But then there are those automated rejections that should never see the light of day - the ones that follow a lengthy interview. After people invest a few hours of their time, a generic email just won't cut it. I recently heard a story about a friend who endured three rounds of interviews only to receive a cookie-cutter rejection email, something like, "We appreciate your interest, but we've chosen a more aligned candidate." Needless to say, her enthusiasm for that company's future opportunities plummeted. 72% of candidates that have a negative candidate experience tell others about it. -TrustCruit The impact of poorly timed or crafted automated rejection emails can be devastating for the job seeker, but it can also devastate the brand's ability to attract future talent. Let’s remember once again there are people behind the resume, and we should be treating them as you would wish to be treated. What's your take on this? Share your experiences and insights in the comments! #candidateexperience #jobseekers #recruitment #talentacqusition