Why don't many companies inform you after the interview fails?

Everyone must have encountered such a situation: after an interview result comes out, the employer generally only sends a notice to the successful candidate, and will not send a rejection letter to the unsuccessful candidate. Is this disrespectful to job seekers? Or HR is not professional enough?

This question is more representative, and many people have more or less encountered the situation that there is no following after the interview. Let me talk about my understanding of this issue for your reference:

Generally speaking, most enterprises really don't give notice to applicants who fail the interview. However, recruitment channels should also be divided, and candidates recommended by internal promotion and headhunters will basically give a reply; Applicants who submit their resumes through websites and other channels are often rejected without further notice.

Each company can have its own different ways and practices. Sometimes the ideas of the person in charge of the enterprise or the person in charge of HR and the person in charge of recruitment will have different influences on this matter, so there is no uniform standard for this matter.

But what is certain is that not telling the applicant is not disrespectful, nor is HR unprofessional. The reason for this is the following：

1, the cost of one notification is too high.

According to statistics, on average, about 50- 100 people submitted resumes for each position (more if it is a campus recruitment position), about 8- 10 people entered the initial test, about 3-5 people entered the second test, and only 1-2 people were finally accepted.

If everyone wants to reply, even through the standard email template or SMS template, it is still a considerable workload. Behind the workload are time costs and labor costs, and enterprises should of course consider saving costs.

2. Bad notice

China culture pays more attention to face. Rejecting others is not a "good thing". Everyone refuses to do such a thing to some extent. So many HR and interviewers are unwilling to do it. Unless it is strictly stipulated by the company, few people will really send rejection letters to candidates.

Not everyone wants to receive the rejection letter.

Similarly, being rejected is not a pleasant thing.

A company once tried to send a rejection letter to the rejected candidate, "I'm sorry to inform you that you didn't pass the interview of our company." As a result, some candidates thought that they were sprinkling salt on the wound and returned some ugly words; Some candidates also wrote back to ask why the interview failed, hoping to get further guidance; Some applicants expressed great incomprehension and even anger at their failure to apply for the job, and asked the company to give an explanation.

In short, when the forest is big, everyone can have it. Of course, employers don't want to waste time and energy on such things.

4. Prevent accidents

In the workplace, there are often candidates who have made an offer before joining the company, and there are also cases where they leave the company within a few days.

In the face of all kinds of uncertainties, the insurance policy certainly does not give clear answers to the candidates who are not selected, because some candidates are not the most suitable, but they are also very good and can be used as alternatives.

In this way, once the selected candidate cannot join the company, at least other candidates are available. To put it bluntly, leave a spare tire. What if all the rejection letters are sent in a hurry? All the other candidates in the ranking were rejected and had no choice. Isn't this digging a hole for yourself?

When the interview is inappropriate, do you want to receive a reply in time, or do you refuse by default without news? What do you think of this?