I've started doing something radical: Giving honest interview feedback.

At the end of every interview, I ask the candidate if they'd like feedback on how it went. And then—here's the controversial bit—I actually give it to them.

Not the sanitised HR-approved version three weeks later after they've already assumed the worst. Not the vague "we've decided to progress with other candidates" email that tells them precisely nothing. Honest interview feedback. Right there in the room.

I tell them what went well. I tell them what didn't. I'm authentic and transparent about it. Then I ask if they'd like to respond or discuss any of it. Because I'm not trying to trick or trip people up. I genuinely want them to feel like they've given their best shot.

And if I'm the hiring manager with the authority to make the call? I tell them whether they've been successful. Right then. Why would I make them sit around for days or weeks wondering if they've got the job when I already know the answer?

If it's a panel situation or I don't have that authority, fine—I can't make promises I can't keep. But if the decision is mine to make and I've already made it? Just tell them.

What's actually happened since I started giving honest interview feedback

People have genuinely thanked me for the advice. Not the perfunctory "thanks for your time" politeness, but actual gratitude for specific feedback that helped them.

I've had conversations during that feedback that changed a no to a yes. Turns out when you tell someone what concerned you and give them a chance to address it, sometimes they have a perfectly reasonable explanation you'd have never uncovered otherwise.

I've had people who weren't successful message me on LinkedIn months later to say thanks and let me know they got a job somewhere else. Some of those messages specifically mentioned that the feedback helped them in subsequent interviews.

I've had people reapply for different roles later because they didn't feel like they'd been treated like a number the first time around.

Treating people like actual people tends to build lasting relationships. Not exactly groundbreaking stuff.

Why this shouldn't be radical (but apparently is)

The standard interview process is fundamentally broken in this respect. We've built this odd theatre where everyone pretends the power dynamic doesn't exist and that candidates aren't sitting there afterwards mentally replaying every answer wondering what they got wrong.

We tell ourselves we're being "professional" by keeping our cards close. We claim we need time to "confer with the team" even when we're the only interviewer and we already know. We hide behind process because it's easier than having an honest conversation.

Meanwhile, the candidate goes home, checks their email obsessively for three days, and constructs an entire narrative in their head about why they didn't get it. Most of that narrative is wrong. All of it is avoidable.

I get that there are legal considerations. I understand that some organisations have policies about this. But a lot of it is just habit. We do it this way because we've always done it this way, and nobody's stopped to ask why.

The irony is that most hiring managers will tell you they value transparency and open communication. But when it comes to honest interview feedback, we suddenly develop amnesia about those values. We've normalised leaving people in the dark.

The objections I hear

"What if they argue with the feedback?"

Then you have a conversation. You're hiring for roles that require judgment and communication skills, presumably. If someone can't handle constructive feedback in a professional setting, that's information too. In practice, this virtually never happens. Most people are just grateful someone's being straight with them.

"What if they take it badly?"

Some might. Most won't. If your feedback is delivered respectfully and is actually about their performance in the interview rather than them as a person, you're on solid ground. If you can't give feedback in a way that's both honest and kind, that's worth examining.

"What if you change your mind later?"

If I'm telling them on the spot, it's because I have the authority to make that call and I've made it. If there's any doubt, I don't. Waiting three days to send an email doesn't make your decision more valid—it just makes them wait three days.

"It's too time-consuming."

It takes five minutes. Maybe ten if there's a proper discussion. You've just spent an hour with this person. If you can't spare another five minutes to help them understand the outcome, what does that say about how you value people's time?

What this actually requires

You need to be genuinely interested in people developing, not just filling seats. You need to be comfortable with direct conversation and giving honest interview feedback. You need to have actually paid attention during the interview rather than just ticking boxes.

And you need to recognise that your time isn't more valuable than theirs. They've prepared for this. They've taken time off work or rearranged their day. They've invested energy into this process. The least you can do is invest five minutes in giving them something useful to take away from it.

That's it. It's not complicated. It's not even particularly time-consuming. It just requires giving a shit about the person sitting across from you.

The long game

Here's what nobody talks about: the person you're interviewing today might be perfect for a role in six months. Or they might work somewhere you need to partner with. Or they might know someone who'd be brilliant for your team.

The UK IT market—especially at senior levels—is smaller than you think. Reputations travel. How you treat people in interviews gets remembered and gets shared.

I've hired people months after an initial unsuccessful interview because they remembered that I'd been straight with them and came back when a better-fit role came up. I've had people recommend their mates to me specifically because of how their interview went, even though they didn't get the job.

Being honest with people isn't just the right thing to do. It's also the smart thing to do.

But mostly, it's just the right thing to do.