Job seekers are 8x more likely than talent leaders to rate an interview process poorly.
New research from Textio and Kyle & Co finds employers are confident their interview process is working—while candidates report unprepared interviewers, unacceptable feedback, and fraud detection gone wrong.
Last year, we showed what’s actually happening inside interviews.
Textio’s 2025 research analyzed 10,000+ interview assessments across nearly 4,000 candidates. We found the likable candidate gets the job, even if they’re not the most qualified.
12xMore likely that a candidate who received an offer was described as having a “great personality”
39%More feedback written about a candidate when the answer was no
25xMore often women candidates were described as “bubbly” than men
This year—as AI continues to both help and hamper hiring processes—we’re measuring the state of interviewing: for candidates, and for employers.
Employers and job seekers disagree about the quality of the interview process.
Talent leaders scored their own company’s interview process at +48.25 on a standard recommendation scale. Job seekers, rating a process they had actually been through, scored it +2.87.
Employers report all is well. Candidates report mixed experiences. Something isn’t working as designed.
88%
of employers say their interviews are usually or always structured
48%
of job seekers say their most recent process felt at least partly improvised, and 7% say the interviewer seemed to be winging it
Candidates judge a hiring process by how it was run.
Asked to name the single thing that matters most in judging whether a hiring process was good:
How fair and consistent it felt35%
How well they communicated31%
How fast it moved10%
How respectfully I was treated10%
How honestly the role was represented8%
Whether I got the job6%
Candidates want more consistency and communication in hiring. They’re getting thoughtless feedback or straight up ghosted instead.
81%
of employers say rejected finalists usually or always receive substantive, personalized feedback
57%
of job seekers rejected at a final round got a templated line, no explanation, or no reply at all
Webinar
Hiring That Works: What TA Leaders Should Stop, Start, and Scale
You have all the data. Now join us on October 29 at 11 am PT / 2pm ET to hear from talent leaders on what comes next. Register below!
Matt CharneyTA Analyst at Kyle & Co.
Colleen GallagherCEO at Textio
Employers are confident they can spot cheating. Candidates say they’re catching the wrong people.
8.1 / 10
How confident talent leaders are that their interviewers can tell when a candidate is using AI assistance during a live interview
39%
of job seekers have felt an employer wrongly suspected them of cheating or misrepresenting themselves
Employers are right to be on guard: 83% of job seekers say candidate misrepresentation is at least fairly common.
24%
admit to exaggerating a skill or credential
11%
say they’ve had someone help them answer in a live interview
10%
report they’ve used AI covertly in an interview
It’s not that fraud is overblown. It’s that employers aren’t as good at detecting it as they think they are.
Bad interview processes cost companies customers, not just candidates.
56%
of candidates who had a poor interview experience say they would never apply to the company again
35%
say they would never apply again and they would stop buying from the company
Matt CharneyTA Analyst at Kyle & Co.
.png)
Colleen GallagherCEO at Textio
