I agree that a rejection email isn’t evidence that GiveWell is worse than other places. At the same time, even though it’s standard practice, an organization can do better. A two-minute phone call to each of the few remaining candidates at later stages isn’t that burdensome and has several benefits:
It makes the organization stand out as one that cares about applicants. Which is good because organizations compete for talent.
It maintains the relationship with the rejected candidate. Which is good because a candidate who got to the later stages might be fit for other roles in the future.
It makes rejection hurt less, which is good in and of itself.
Now, dan.pandori says he would find a phone call rejection off-putting. So it becomes a question of degrees: What share of people would find it off-putting, depending on how well or badly it’s done?
Because with email it’s easy to read in a tone of ‘you suck, we’re sending you boilerplate niceties to get rid of you’, which is not possible with a phone call. (Unless the caller makes it sound like boilerplate niceties. I’m not saying such calls are easy. Email is the easy cop-out.) Something like that. Have you had the experience where you keep communicating with someone by text and get more and more annoyed with them, then you get on a call and all annoyance melts away because hearing a voice reminds you of the other person’s humanity? Perhaps it’s just me who thinks strange things.
Ultimately it’s an empirical question and my prediction is that on balance, a phone call has more value.
I agree that a rejection email isn’t evidence that GiveWell is worse than other places. At the same time, even though it’s standard practice, an organization can do better. A two-minute phone call to each of the few remaining candidates at later stages isn’t that burdensome and has several benefits:
It makes the organization stand out as one that cares about applicants. Which is good because organizations compete for talent.
It maintains the relationship with the rejected candidate. Which is good because a candidate who got to the later stages might be fit for other roles in the future.
It makes rejection hurt less, which is good in and of itself.
Now, dan.pandori says he would find a phone call rejection off-putting. So it becomes a question of degrees: What share of people would find it off-putting, depending on how well or badly it’s done?
Why would rejection hurt less in a call than an email?
Because with email it’s easy to read in a tone of ‘you suck, we’re sending you boilerplate niceties to get rid of you’, which is not possible with a phone call. (Unless the caller makes it sound like boilerplate niceties. I’m not saying such calls are easy. Email is the easy cop-out.) Something like that. Have you had the experience where you keep communicating with someone by text and get more and more annoyed with them, then you get on a call and all annoyance melts away because hearing a voice reminds you of the other person’s humanity? Perhaps it’s just me who thinks strange things.
Ultimately it’s an empirical question and my prediction is that on balance, a phone call has more value.