Employers think their hiring processes are working. Job seekers disagree

dragana991/iStockPhoto / Getty Images

This is the weekly Work Life newsletter. If you are interested in more careers-related content, sign up to receive it in your inbox.

Job searching has become a test of patience. Candidates are navigating artificial intelligence-assisted interviews, confusing rules about using AI themselves, multiple interview rounds, suspicious job postings and, after all that, employers who simply stop responding.

Employers have a much rosier view of the experience.

That’s a central finding in The State of Interview Intelligence, an October 2026 report from research firm Kyle & Co. It surveyed 257 employers and 174 job seekers in August, nearly all based in the U.S.

Employers gave their own interview experience a net promoter score of +48, compared with just +3 from job seekers. The score measures how likely someone is to recommend an experience to others, with higher scores indicating greater satisfaction.

The disconnect between the two groups also shows up inside the interview room. Eighty-eight per cent of employers say interviewers always or usually ask the same core questions and follow a defined scoring system. But only 51 per cent of candidates felt their interviews were structured and consistent. Nearly one in four candidates said they received a vague explanation or none at all about how they would be evaluated.

There’s also a disconnect when it comes to how many interviews are necessary. Sixty-two per cent of employers conduct exactly three interview rounds for professional jobs, while 44 per cent of job seekers believe two rounds are enough to determine whether someone is a good fit.

AI is creating another disconnect between employers and job seekers. Employers are highly confident they can recognize when candidates are secretly using AI to help answer questions during live interviews, rating their ability to do so at 8.1 out of 10. However, 39 per cent of job seekers say they’ve been unfairly suspected of using AI or misrepresenting themselves, including some who felt they were being judged without being directly confronted. The report says employers often lack clear rules distinguishing preparation from inappropriate live assistance.

However, the gap may be most striking after an interview ends.

Eighty-one per cent of employers say rejected finalists always or usually receive substantive, personalized feedback. Only 43 per cent of rejected finalists described what they received as useful.

And while 68 per cent of employers acknowledged failing to provide a final decision to at least one interviewed candidate in the past year, 57 per cent of job seekers said they’d been ghosted in the previous 18 months.

A university recruiter in Ann Arbor, Mich., described how that happens: “The committee decides in April and nobody is assigned to tell the other four finalists, and then it is June, and telling them in June feels worse than not telling them, so nobody does.”

That silence can have consequences, with 56 per cent of candidates saying a poor interview experience would discourage them from applying again and 35 per cent saying it could discourage them from buying from the company.

The report recommends several ways employers can improve the hiring experience including explaining evaluation criteria and AI policies upfront, eliminating unnecessary interview rounds and ensuring candidates receive clear communication about hiring decisions.

While employers have plenty of room for improvement, there are ways candidates can advocate for themselves, too. Asking how they’ll be evaluated, what the company’s AI policies are and when they can expect a decision could help make the experience more transparent.

Fast fact

Hiring hints

54 per cent

That’s the share of workers who said, in a survey from job search platform JobAssist, that at least one question, phrase or recruitment practice during an interview made them suspect an employer preferred a younger candidate.

Career catfish

Are you experiencing a career “bait-and-switch,” where the job you were hired for bears little resemblance to the work you’re actually doing?

This article in FastCompany shares advice for spotting red flags during the interview process, including vague job descriptions or evasive answers about why the role is open. You should also ask hiring managers what success looks like in the first month and first three months, as well as who you’ll work with day-to-day. If the hiring manager struggles to answer, it may signal the role could change after hiring.

Blocked beginnings

“Previous generations faced their own challenges, but today’s young people are coming of age in a different environment. Many spent formative years during the pandemic, losing opportunities to build social connections, participate in extracurricular activities and gain early work experience. Now, they are entering adulthood as technology transforms how we learn, work and communicate at extraordinary speed,” writes Lesley Davidson, president and chief executive officer at the YMCA of Greater Toronto.

In this Globe and Mail article, Ms. Davidson argues that as competition grows and automation takes over entry-level work, employers must create meaningful pathways for young people to start and build their careers.

Confidence cues

How confident you feel and how confident you appear to others can be two very different things. In this TED Talk, public speaking expert Cara Hale Alter shares two key behaviours that shape how others perceive your confidence and credibility, and explains how understanding these cues can help you better communicate your potential at work.