Employer brand audit

Candidates are told the number of interview stages and the format of each before the process begins
Uncertainty about what comes next creates anxiety, and doubt about how the business is run.

Timelines are communicated at each stage: when to expect feedback, when a decision will be made
The gap between final interview and offer is where most candidates are lost. Speed signals that the business values the candidate.

The process runs to the timeline given: delays are communicated proactively, not left for candidates to chase

Candidates receive a clear outcome at every stage: no extended silences or ambiguous holding messages

The hiring process from first contact to offer takes no more than three to four weeks for most roles
In STEM sectors, more than two weeks between final interview and offer is high risk for candidates in active competition.

There is a named point of contact for candidates throughout the process

Interviewers are briefed before each interview: on the candidate's CV, the role requirements, and what they are assessing
An unprepared interviewer tells the candidate more about the business than any answer they give.

The interview includes time for the candidate to ask questions, and interviewers are prepared to represent the business well
The interview is a two-way assessment. Candidates with options are evaluating whether they want to work there.

The role, team structure, and day-to-day expectations are explained clearly during the interview

Progression paths and development opportunities are discussed, not left for the candidate to ask about
Experienced technical hires are evaluating long-term fit, not just the immediate role.

Interview panels are consistent: the same criteria are used across candidates for the same role

Feedback is available for candidates who reach final interview stage but are not selected
Candidates who receive useful feedback remember the experience positively, and may return or refer others.

The company LinkedIn page has been updated in the last 60 days
A dormant LinkedIn page signals a business that isn't active or engaged, not the impression to leave with a candidate who's researching you.

The LinkedIn page reflects the current team: profiles of people a candidate would be working with are visible and current

Management turnover in the relevant team is not visible as a pattern on LinkedIn
Candidates check tenure. High turnover in the team they'd be joining is one of the most common reasons for late-stage withdrawal.

The business has a Glassdoor profile and reviews have been reviewed in the last six months
Candidates check Glassdoor. Negative reviews left unacknowledged signal that the business doesn't engage with employee experience.

Any significant negative Glassdoor reviews have been responded to, professionally and without being defensive

The careers page is current: open roles are accurate, and content reflects what the business looks like now
An outdated careers page, with wrong roles listed, old team photos or stale content, undermines credibility before first contact.

The business shares content about its work, projects, or people on LinkedIn regularly enough to give candidates a sense of the culture

Job descriptions are written for the specific role, not recycled from a previous hire or a generic template
A vague or templated JD signals that the role hasn't been properly thought through. Strong candidates notice.

The salary band is defined before the process opens, and is communicated to candidates early
Transparency on salary is now expected. Withholding it until late in the process damages trust and increases the chance of a decline at offer.

The scope of the role does not change materially between first and final interview
Shifting scope is one of the most common reasons experienced technical hires withdraw. It signals poor planning or internal misalignment.

Reporting lines, team size, and the business context for the role are explained clearly in the JD or at first interview

The role's contribution to the wider business, what it enables or delivers, is articulated, not just the task list
Candidates evaluate roles in terms of impact. A task list without context is harder to commit to than a role with a clear purpose.

Declined offers and late-stage withdrawals are reviewed to identify patterns, not treated as isolated events
The pattern across a handful of declined offers usually points clearly to where the employer brand gap sits.

Exit data from the hiring process is collected: reasons for withdrawal at each stage are recorded where possible

The business has asked recently hired employees what influenced their decision to accept, and what nearly put them off
New joiners are the most accessible source of honest candidate experience data.

Hiring managers are aware that how they run the process affects the employer brand, not just the outcome of a single hire

There is a feedback mechanism for candidates who have been through the process, and responses are reviewed

The business could articulate clearly what makes it a good place to work for a technical professional, and that answer is reflected in how the hiring process is run

The business maintains relationships with qualified candidates who were not hired but would be considered for future roles
A talent pipeline built on positive candidate experience converts more reliably than cold outreach when a role opens.

There is a process for keeping in touch with strong candidates between hiring cycles, not just when a vacancy is live

The business has a view of how its employer brand compares to direct competitors in its hiring market
Candidates with options are comparing. Knowing how the business positions against peers shapes what needs to improve.

Employer brand is reviewed as part of workforce planning, not addressed reactively when hiring becomes difficult

Someone in the business has named accountability for employer brand in the context of hiring outcomes