Webinar Recap: What candidates remember about your hiring process

Key takeaways for HR and Talent teams 

A few themes came through repeatedly during Hector and Karina’s conversation: 

1. Candidate experience starts before the application. Careers websites, employee stories, employer reviews and online content shape expectations before candidates speak to a recruiter. 
2. A strong employer brand needs to be backed by a strong process. An impressive careers website means little if the application is difficult or communication is poor. 
3. Consistency does not mean identical recruitment workflows. Different roles and departments may need different approaches, but every candidate deserves clear communication and respectful treatment. 
4. Preparation makes interviews more comfortable. Sharing interview arrangements, panel information and salary details where possible helps candidates arrive knowing what to expect. 
5. Communication matters as much as speed. A delay is easier to understand when candidates know why it is happening and when they can expect an update. 
6. Rejection can still strengthen an employer’s reputation. Friendly automated responses may be appropriate at application stage, while candidates who attend interviews should receive meaningful feedback wherever possible. 
7. Do not overlook unsuccessful candidates. Someone who is not right for a role today could become an excellent hire later. Keeping the relationship positive leaves that opportunity open. 
8. The candidate journey continues after offer acceptance. Communication during pre-employment and onboarding helps maintain confidence as someone prepares to join. 
9. Ask new joiners what they actually experienced. A simple recruitment and onboarding questionnaire can reveal problems, highlight positive interactions and provide practical ideas for improvement. 

“If you then have a poor application and recruitment experience, then your view of that organisation… can and will change quite quickly.” 

Karina Lee, Senior Internal Recruiter at LCP 

Candidates might forget the exact questions they were asked during an interview. But they are much less likely to forget how an employer treated them throughout the hiring process. 

From the first application to the final hiring decision, every interaction can shape how someone feels about an organisation. A clear update, a welcoming interview or thoughtful feedback can leave a lasting impression, even when the candidate does not get the job. 

But with busy hiring managers, competing priorities and growing application volumes, how can recruitment teams create a better experience without making the process more complicated? 

In our latest Reimagined Recruitment webinar, Hector Bustillos, Head of Marketing Growth at Reach ATS, sat down with Karina Lee, Senior Internal Recruiter at LCP, to explore what candidates actually remember about recruitment and what employers can do to improve those experiences. 

With 20 years of recruitment experience, Karina leads a small internal recruitment team supporting around 15 to 16 departments at LCP, covering everything from pensions and insurance to data science, health analytics and corporate functions. 

Their conversation covered employer branding, interview preparation, communication, rejection, candidate feedback and the small changes that can make a surprisingly big difference. 

And one thing became clear throughout the discussion: a good candidate experience is not necessarily about having the fastest or most sophisticated process. It is about being clear, realistic and thoughtful in how you treat people. 

What do candidates actually remember about recruitment? 

Hector opened the conversation with a simple question: when someone looks back at a hiring process, what stays with them most? 

For Karina, the answer depends on how far the candidate has progressed. 

Someone who never gets beyond the application stage may remember how straightforward or frustrating it was to apply. Someone who attends an interview is more likely to remember the people they met, how they were treated and whether they felt comfortable asking questions. 

For successful candidates, the experience continues into the period between accepting an offer and joining the organisation. 

“If a candidate gets through to the interview process, then what they remember most is how they’re treated as part of that process.” 

Karina explained that communication, opportunities to ask questions and reasonable adjustments all play a part in shaping that experience. The important moments change depending on where the candidate is in their journey. 

That is why she does not believe in a single definition of good candidate experience. What matters to somebody applying for their first job may be different from what matters to an experienced professional weighing up several opportunities. 

For employers, the lesson is to look at the complete journey rather than concentrating all their attention on interviews. Every stage creates an impression, including the ones where candidates have very little direct contact with the recruitment team. 

Candidate experience starts before someone applies 

One of Karina’s strongest points was that candidate experience begins long before an application reaches a recruiter. 

Careers websites, LinkedIn activity, employee stories and online reviews all contribute to how someone perceives an employer. By the time a candidate clicks ‘Apply’, they may already have spent time researching the organisation and forming expectations about what working there could look like. 

At LCP, Karina explained that the team has invested in improving its careers website to give potential applicants a clearer picture of the business. 

That includes information about benefits, videos featuring employees from different departments and a recruitment candidate charter that sets out what applicants can expect from the recruitment team. 

The aim is to help people understand both the opportunities available and the experience they can expect when applying. 

Karina also highlighted the growing influence of employer review platforms such as Glassdoor. Candidates regularly mention having read LCP’s reviews during interviews, which reinforces the importance of keeping an employer’s online presence informative and representative of the organisation. 

However, a strong employer brand can only do so much if the recruitment experience fails to meet those expectations. 

“It’s great to be able to have an all-singing, all-dancing careers site… but if you then have a poor application and recruitment experience, then your view of that organisation… can and will change quite quickly.” 

This is where employer branding and recruitment operations need to work together. 

An organisation might invest heavily in showing that it values its people, but a confusing application form, poor communication or an unwelcoming interview can quickly undermine that message. 

For Karina, the application itself is an important part of this. She shared that LCP uses Reach ATS and receives positive feedback about how easy candidates find the application process. 

The takeaway for recruitment teams is straightforward: what you promise candidates before they apply should match what they experience once they enter the process. 

One hiring process will not work for every role 

When Hector asked whether LCP had found a single recruitment workflow that worked across its departments, Karina laughed at the idea. 

With around 15 to 16 departments and a wide range of specialist roles, different teams naturally have different hiring requirements. 

“If I could have one kind of process for 15 or 16 departments, then that would be the dream, but… in reality, it’s just not feasible and not viable.” 

Karina explained that the recruitment team’s role is to work closely with individual departments to understand what each position requires and build a suitable process around those needs. 

Even within one department, different jobs may call for different skills, assessments or interview arrangements. 

That creates a useful distinction for employers. Consistency matters, but it does not necessarily mean every candidate must go through exactly the same stages. 

The underlying principles should remain consistent: clear communication, appropriate preparation, fair treatment and useful feedback. 

How those principles are delivered can then be adapted to the role. 

This is particularly relevant for organisations recruiting across several business areas. Rather than forcing every department into a rigid workflow, recruitment teams should focus on creating a consistent standard of candidate experience while allowing processes to reflect the job being filled. 

What makes an interview feel positive? 

Interviews are often the point where the employer becomes real to the candidate. 

Until then, much of their experience may have involved websites, emails and application forms. During an interview, they finally meet the people they could be working with. 

Karina believes some of the most important details are also the simplest. 

At LCP, the team aims to make candidates feel welcome from the moment they arrive, whether they are attending an interview in person or joining through Teams or Zoom. 

“We want you to have a good experience with us today. We want to welcome you into our environment.” 

That means making sure candidates know who they are meeting, understand the interview arrangements and receive a warm welcome. 

For in-person interviews, something as basic as a positive reception experience and proper introductions can influence how comfortable someone feels. 

The conversation also explored what candidates should know before attending an interview. Two areas stood out. 

Salary transparency: Karina personally supports sharing the salary band with candidates before an interview wherever possible. She acknowledged that employers can face internal challenges around salary disclosure, but believes the information adds value to the candidate experience. 

Interview panel information: Candidates should know who they are meeting beforehand. Last-minute changes will sometimes happen, but the team should try to communicate them when possible. 

These details help candidates prepare and reduce unnecessary uncertainty. They also demonstrate respect for the time and effort someone has invested in the opportunity. 

For recruiters and hiring managers, the practical question is simple: does the candidate have enough information to arrive feeling prepared, comfortable and able to focus on the conversation? 

Silence between stages can damage candidate confidence 

A positive interview can quickly lose its impact if the candidate hears nothing afterwards. 

Hector raised a familiar challenge for recruitment teams: when hiring managers are busy, decisions are delayed and multiple interviews need to take place, how long can a candidate reasonably be expected to wait? 

At LCP, Karina explained that the team aims to provide interview feedback within 72 hours where possible. She recognises that this will not always be achievable, particularly for specialist positions involving multiple candidates and stakeholders. 

But when delays happen, communication becomes even more important. 

“If a candidate is left more than a week after interview, unless there’s a very good reason, then that can start to bring a little bit of doubt into their mind.” 

Karina’s advice was not to promise unrealistic timelines. Instead, tell candidates what is happening and explain when they can reasonably expect an update. 

Sometimes the reason for a delay is completely understandable. A hiring manager might be on annual leave, or several interviews may still need to take place before a decision can be made. 

Those circumstances do not necessarily create a poor experience. Leaving candidates without an explanation is where problems can begin. 

“The way that you can soothe that is by simply getting in touch with them and giving them a call, or dropping them a quick note.” 

She also highlighted the responsibility recruitment teams have in guiding hiring managers. 

If an interviewer knows they will be away for a week after meeting a candidate, they can communicate that during the interview. It takes very little effort but helps manage expectations before uncertainty develops. 

The wider lesson is that candidate experience depends on predictability as much as speed. Even when there is no decision to share, a short update can reassure someone that their application has not been forgotten. 

Is faster hiring always better? 

Speed is often treated as one of the most important measures of recruitment performance. 

And while Karina agrees that employers should aim to move candidates through the process efficiently, she challenged the idea that faster automatically means better. 

She shared a recent example where she received 11 interview requests for a single vacancy. Arranging and completing those interviews would realistically take around two weeks. 

The first person interviewed would therefore need to wait while the others completed the process. 

That delay is not necessarily a problem, provided the candidate understands what is happening. 

There is also another side to speed that employers sometimes overlook. 

Candidates need time to make decisions too. 

Someone might be speaking with several employers, comparing opportunities or wanting to understand the team and working environment before accepting an offer. 

Moving too quickly can leave candidates feeling pressured rather than valued. 

Karina explained that LCP sometimes offers additional opportunities for candidates to meet people within the organisation. That could mean an informal coffee, another Teams conversation or simply the chance to ask further questions after an interview. 

These interactions allow candidates to understand the business beyond the formal interview. 

“It’s about making sure that you give them enough opportunity to get to know you as a business, the role that they’re coming in for.” 

This is particularly important when recruiting specialist talent, where candidates may be considering several opportunities and need more information before making a significant career decision. 

Karina also discussed the role of internal recruiters when candidates are introduced through recruitment agencies. 

At certain stages, particularly around offers and benefits, direct contact with the internal team can help ensure candidates receive accurate information and have the opportunity to ask questions. 

Her point was not that every employer needs to introduce more stages. It was that recruiters should understand when candidates need more time, information or human contact. 

A faster process is useful, but candidates should not feel rushed into a decision they have not had enough time to consider. 

Can candidates be rejected and still have a positive experience? 

One of the most interesting parts of the conversation focused on rejection. 

Most applicants will not secure the job they apply for. That makes rejection a normal part of recruitment, but it does not mean the experience has to end negatively. 

Karina believes the way employers communicate unsuccessful outcomes should depend on how far someone has progressed. 

For candidates rejected at the initial application stage, personalised telephone feedback may simply not be practical. 

She shared an example of a vacancy that had received more than 80 applications. Contacting every unsuccessful applicant individually would place considerable pressure on a small recruitment team. 

That is where automation has a useful role. 

“I absolutely believe that there is a place for the auto-reject email, as long as it’s a nice, friendly, well-crafted email that goes out of the system.” 

However, Karina takes a different approach when somebody has attended an interview. 

At that stage, candidates have invested more time in the organisation. She strongly believes they deserve constructive feedback explaining why they were unsuccessful. 

At LCP, the team makes every effort to speak with interviewed candidates before sending an automated rejection notification. 

The quality of that feedback matters too. Rather than simply telling someone they were unsuccessful, recruiters should help them understand what went well and where their application fell short. 

Karina shared a recent example of a candidate who had asked for detailed feedback following an unsuccessful first-round interview. 

The hiring manager provided a thoughtful explanation, including feedback on the tasks completed during the assessment. 

The candidate later emailed to thank the team and expressed an interest in staying in touch. 

It was a small but meaningful example of how a disappointing outcome can still leave someone with a positive impression of an employer. 

For HR and recruitment teams, the message is clear: rejection does not need to damage the candidate relationship. The way it is handled can influence whether someone would consider applying again. 

Today’s unsuccessful candidate could be tomorrow’s hire 

The value of handling rejection well becomes even clearer when considering future opportunities. 

Karina shared that she could recall at least two candidates who had been unsuccessful in their first application to LCP, only to return around a year to 18 months later and secure a role. 

She believes their initial experience may have contributed to their willingness to apply again. 

“They clearly must have gone away with a positive impression, because they felt that they were able to apply again a little bit further down the track, and ultimately were successful.” 

Karina also described how she encourages unsuccessful candidates to keep an eye on LCP’s careers website. 

Thanking someone for their interest and leaving the door open for future opportunities can help maintain that relationship. 

Importantly, she does not believe previous rejection should count against someone when they reapply. 

She explained that she does not normally tell hiring managers when a candidate has previously applied, even if she recognises their name or the applicant tracking system shows an earlier application. 

Her reasoning is straightforward. 

“It’s a brand new application. Brand new day.” 

Someone who was not suitable six months ago may have developed new skills, gained experience or become a better match for another position. 

The lesson for employers is to treat unsuccessful candidates as potential future talent rather than closed applications. 

This is particularly relevant for organisations recruiting specialist skills, where suitable candidates may return at different stages of their careers. 

Candidate experience does not end when someone accepts an offer 

Once someone accepts a job offer, it can be tempting to consider the recruitment process complete. 

Karina sees it differently. 

At LCP, the recruitment team remains involved throughout the pre-employment period, often maintaining contact until the person’s first day. 

That can include answering questions about offers and benefits, supporting communication around referencing or helping with matters such as Right to Work checks and visa applications. 

The candidate may also be communicating with HR colleagues during this period, but the recruiter often remains a familiar point of contact. 

For Karina, the transition from candidate to employee is therefore gradual rather than immediate. 

Maintaining that relationship helps ensure new starters know who to contact and what to expect before joining. 

The conversation also explored how employers can learn from candidates after the recruitment process has finished. 

Karina shared a practical initiative she introduced at LCP around 18 months to two years ago: a recruitment and onboarding questionnaire. 

The questionnaire is sent to new employees within their first three to four weeks, rather than immediately on day one. 

It covers several areas, including: 

• Their experience applying and interviewing for the role. 

• How the onboarding process worked. 

• Whether they applied directly or through a recruitment agency. 

• Whether particular colleagues provided valuable support during the process. 

For candidates introduced by an agency, the questionnaire also asks about the service they received. This gives LCP useful information about how its recruitment partners are performing. 

Karina reported that around 80% of new joiners complete the questionnaire, providing the team with regular feedback about what is working and what could be improved. 

The responses are not always positive, and Karina sees that as a good thing. 

Constructive feedback gives the team an opportunity to address problems that might otherwise go unnoticed. 

For other recruitment teams, the process does not need to be complicated. Karina uses Microsoft Forms and a spreadsheet to collect and review the information. 

It is a practical example of how a relatively small investment of time can create a valuable feedback loop. 

Two simple changes employers can make now 

Towards the end of the conversation, Hector asked Karina what she would recommend to recruitment teams looking for immediate improvements. 

Her answer focused on two relatively straightforward actions. 

1. Take ownership of your employer presence on Glassdoor

Karina encouraged employers who have not already done so to claim their free Glassdoor page. 

“If you’re not using that at the moment, go and claim your free page on Glassdoor. Do what you can with it.” 

Her point was that employer reviews and online reputation play an important role in how candidates research organisations. 

Even without investing in paid features, businesses can begin taking a more active interest in how they are represented online. 

2. Introduce a recruitment and onboarding questionnaire

Karina’s second recommendation was to start gathering structured feedback from new employees. 

This does not need to involve expensive software or a complicated project. A short questionnaire, sent at a consistent point after joining, can reveal useful information about the application, interview and onboarding experience. 

It can also help employers evaluate recruitment agencies, identify recurring problems and recognise colleagues who have supported candidates particularly well. 

For Karina, the value comes from listening to people who have actually experienced the process. 

“If you’ve got concerns about an agent that you’re working with… then getting feedback from the people that have used the service is gold.” 

Together, these recommendations highlight an important point from the wider webinar. 

Improving candidate experience does not always require additional recruitment stages, new technology or significant investment. 

Sometimes it starts with understanding what candidates already see, how they are treated and what they think once the process is complete. 

Where Reach ATS can help 

Creating a positive candidate experience is not about making every applicant happy or promising that every process will be perfect. 

It is about making recruitment clearer, keeping candidates informed and ensuring people are treated respectfully at every stage. 

As Karina explained throughout the webinar, good candidate experience often comes down to small but important moments: an accessible application, a welcoming interview, a timely update or a thoughtful conversation after rejection. 

Reach ATS supports recruitment teams in managing these interactions through a more organised hiring process, from applications and candidate communication through to interviews, offers and onboarding. 

With the right systems and workflows in place, recruiters can spend less time managing administrative tasks and more time focusing on the interactions that matter to candidates. 

If this webinar has made you reconsider how candidates experience your hiring process, it may be worth reviewing what happens between the formal stages and how much visibility candidates have throughout their journey. 

Talk to the Reach ATS team to explore how you can create a more consistent, thoughtful and candidate-friendly recruitment experience.