Why generic rejection emails are outdated

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

Hiring is hard. Rejecting well is harder. It’s your brand on the line. Most hiring processes obsess over how candidates show up. Very few pay attention to how the business exits the conversation. But candidates remember rejection far more vividly than interviews. A slow fade, a generic template email, or worse, silence. That experience doesn’t disappear when the role is filled. It turns up later. When that candidate talks to peers. When they see your next job ad. When they decide whether your business feels worth engaging with again. Here’s the part many hiring managers miss. The majority of candidates you reject today are still part of your future talent market. Some will be better suited in 12 months. Some will refer someone exceptional. Some will become clients, suppliers, or senior leaders elsewhere. How you reject tells them exactly who you are when there’s nothing to gain. Clear communication, timely closure, and genuine respect for the effort candidates put in all signal professionalism, not politeness. None of that is about being “nice”. It’s about being professional. Good hiring builds capability. Good rejection protects reputation. And in a tight market, reputation compounds. P.S. If you want to improve your hiring outcomes, start by fixing the parts candidates experience when they don’t get the job. That’s where most brands quietly lose trust.

The Frustration of Job Applications: A Call for Better Communication With my Heads Resourcing Group hat on this week, I have been supporting some of our teams in managing the many applications we have received for various opportunities we are recruiting for across HR Heads and Executive Heads. In today's competitive job market, job seekers invest significant time and effort into crafting the perfect CV and cover letter. They meticulously tailor their applications to match the job requirements, hoping to stand out among many candidates. After all this effort, receiving a rejection email can be a significant blow. What makes it worse is the impersonal nature of these emails. Often, they are generic, offering no specific feedback or reasons for the rejection. Phrases like "Thank you for your application, but we have decided to move forward with other candidates" provide little solace or understanding. Job seekers deserve respect and acknowledgment for the time and effort they put into their applications. A more considerate approach from employers could make a significant difference. Personalized feedback, even if brief, can help candidates understand their shortcomings and improve. Additionally, a polite and respectful tone in rejection emails can soften the blow and maintain a positive impression of the company. That is why this week I have been calling those who have applied, but for various reasons are not quite right for that specific role. There is value in having a conversation, however brief, to understand what they are looking for and explain why this particular role is not the one. While rejection is an inevitable part of the job application process, the way it is communicated can make a world of difference. Let's strive for a job market where every candidate feels valued and respected, regardless of the outcome. It might take some time to do it, but it is time that is well-invested and valuable to all. Manners cost you nothing.

Transforming Rejections into Opportunities Far too often, rejection emails are brief and impersonal, leaving candidates feeling undervalued and uncertain about their future fit. It's crucial to move beyond generic regret emails and offer detailed feedback, especially after interviews when a candidate’s strengths don't align with current needs. Thoughtful insights respect candidates' efforts, help them grow, and enhance the talent pool. Remember, behind every application is someone who invested their time and energy hoping to join your team. A rejection without context can be demoralizing, particularly when the real reason is strong competition. By providing constructive feedback, organizations can mitigate feelings of inadequacy and help candidates see the value in their efforts. This shows a commitment to transparency and a genuine interest in the candidate's future success, encouraging a more positive perception of the company. Offering constructive feedback fosters a positive relationship between candidates and organizations, demonstrating that the company values transparency and is invested in professional growth. This practice builds goodwill and can turn past candidates into future advocates. By providing honest and constructive feedback, organizations demonstrate respect for candidates' efforts and invest in their professional growth. This approach leaves candidates feeling valued and encouraged, ultimately strengthening the company's reputation and fostering a more engaged and capable workforce. #TurnRejectionsIntoWins

A client forwarded me a rejection email this week. “Thank you for your time.” “We went with other closer fit candidates.” “Please apply again.” Most rejection emails are polite, generic and useless. Most people read this and move on. That’s the mistake. I told her: Don’t close the file yet. Open the feedback loop. Here’s what matters after a rejection: Information. Not emotions. Not assumptions. Not self-blame. So I helped her frame four simple questions: → How did I compare to the selected candidates? → What felt risky about hiring me? → Was it a skills gap or a positioning issue? → Which roles would you recommend for me now? Not to argue. Not to beg. To learn. Because every serious career move is built on data. Generic feedback keeps you guessing. Specific feedback helps you grow. Most candidates never ask. So they repeat the same mistakes. Interview after interview. Company after company. High performers treat rejection as research. ✓ They extract insight. ✓ They adjust. ✓ They come back stronger. If you’re job searching and collecting “thank you” emails, you’re sitting on valuable information. Go get it. Growth doesn’t come from silence. It comes from informed correction. Have you ever asked for real feedback after a rejection? What did you learn? ---- Save this. Follow Douglas Wanjala for more like this. Send it to someone you know.

If a candidate goes through 4+ interviews and you decide not to move forward… they deserve more than an automated rejection email. At that point, they’ve invested real time. • They prepared for multiple conversations • They rearranged schedules • They researched your company deeply • They emotionally invested in the opportunity And after all of that? Silence or a generic template response feels incredibly dismissive. A quick phone call won’t erase the disappointment. But it does show something important: • Respect • Professionalism • Basic human decency Because by the fourth interview, the candidate is no longer casually applying. ➜ They’re imagining the role. ➜ The team. ➜ The future. Hiring processes should feel human ➜ Not transactional ➜ Not disposable If someone gave your company hours of effort, the least you can do is close the loop properly. 📌 The more time a candidate invests, the more personal the communication should become.

“WE WERE GENUINELY IMPRESSED WITH YOUR BACKGROUND, BUT…..” I received another rejection email today. The interesting part? They told me they receive rejections like this all the time. Different company. Different role. Same words. “We were impressed with your background.” “We decided to move forward with another candidate.” “We wish you all the best.” Let’s be honest. Most of us know we won’t get every job we apply for. That’s not the problem. The problem is that, somewhere along the way, many hiring processes seem to have forgotten something very simple: we’re dealing with people. Losing a job can happen to anyone. You can be a CEO, a Chief People Officer, a People Director, or the person who cleans the office. At some point in life, many of us will face rejection, uncertainty, or unemployment. And yes, we’re all professionals. But we’re also human. Not having a job is hard enough. Receiving a standard rejection email after spending time, preparing for interviews, and putting yourself out there doesn’t make it any easier. A phone call isn’t always possible. And detailed feedback isn’t always realistic. But perhaps we can remember that behind every application is a person who hoped this opportunity could make a difference in their life. Maybe it’s time to bring a little more respect and humanity back into the way we reject people. Because one day, any of us could be the person receiving that email.

I got a rejection email this morning. It was beautiful. Three paragraphs long. Perfect grammar. It was also completely fake. I could tell within seconds that it was copy-pasted from ChatGPT. Here is the irony: Last week, I spent an hour on a Zoom call with this client. We laughed, we strategized, we connected as two human beings. But when it came time to say ‘No’, they let a robot do the talking. Why are we so afraid of a human connection when it's uncomfortable? Let’s stop over-automating empathy. Going from a warm, personal video call to a cold, generic template gives candidates whiplash. It makes the entire interview process feel like a lie. We just need the truth. “Hey, we really enjoyed meeting you, but we went with someone who has more niche experience. Good luck.” That took me 10 seconds to type. And it honors the hour I gave you. I would rather receive two honest sentences from a human than three paragraphs of praise from an algorithm. Automate the scheduling. Automate the paperwork. But never automate the goodbye. Period. If we are professional enough to interview, we are human enough to deserve a real goodbye. #hiring #HRManagement #freelancing #jobposts #AI

There is a trend emerging in hiring that I find genuinely alarming — and I want to name it directly because I don't think most companies realize the signal it sends. Candidates apply for a role. They spend time on a resume, a cover letter, sometimes a portfolio submission. They click submit. And the automated response they receive says some version of: "Thank you for your application. We'll be in touch if there are next steps." Not "we'll be in touch either way." Not "you'll hear from us within X business days." Just: if you don't hear from us, you didn't make it. This is a meaningful shift from even five years ago, when standard practice was at minimum an automated rejection email closing the loop. That wasn't a high bar. It was basic courtesy — the professional equivalent of acknowledging that another person's time has value. The "we'll reach out if interested" model removes even that. I understand the operational reasoning. Application volume is high. HR teams are stretched. Sending individual rejections at scale is resource-intensive. But here's what that efficiency decision actually costs: Every candidate who applies and hears nothing walks away with a specific impression of your organization. They tell people. They remember. They leave Glassdoor reviews. They decide — sometimes years later, when they're a hiring manager or a client — whether your company deserves their goodwill. The talent market is smaller than it looks. And employer brand is built one interaction at a time — including the ones that don't go anywhere. A rejection email takes seconds to automate. The cost of not sending one compounds indefinitely. Candidates: has this happened to you recently? Employers: is this a deliberate policy or something that crept in? I want to hear from both sides. #HiringPractices #CandidateExperience #EmployerBrand #Recruiting #HR #TalentAcquisition

If this company has an employer brand team, they're shaking their heads. Look at this rejection email. First, the email says they chose other candidates. Next, it says the role is no longer needed and will close soon. After that, it encourages the candidate to keep applying for a role that no longer exists. So which is it? Did you choose someone else, or close the role? Maybe your systems crossed and fire off two contradictory templates together? The candidate has no idea. That confusion is the message they walk away with. Every time you contact a candidate, you affect your reputation. People you reject talk about their experience, and they might be future customers, referrers, or candidates. A clear, honest rejection earns respect. A confusing, automated message causes lasting harm. This matters even more if you're a large company hiring year-round. You might not realize you're sending thousands of them to thousands of people, each one shaping how the market sees you. Rejection is unavoidable. Confusion and disrespect are not. If you're going to say no to someone, at least make sure your message is clear. Every point of contact with a candidate is either building your reputation or spending it. Choose carefully.