How We Are Failing the Next Generation

Early Talent Recruiting

We obsess over the user journey, diligently removing friction points for our customers. But when it comes to our future talent, college students and junior employees, many companies tolerate a recruiting process that is slow, opaque, and frankly, disrespectful. This is a failure of discipline we would never accept in our consumer businesses, and we shouldn't accept it in a candidate experience.

Over the past few years, I have spent time mentoring and guiding college students as they make the transition from campus to the workforce. In that time, I have seen too many companies treat recruiting as a low-accountability process.

Students are not casually submitting random applications and moving on. Many are reading job descriptions carefully, tailoring resumes, writing thoughtful cover letters, completing long application forms, and preparing seriously for interviews. They are investing real time and effort into each opportunity. Too often, what they get in return is silence. No update. No rejection. Sometimes not even a basic acknowledgment that their application was received.

Shame on us. This is a basic failure of professionalism.

Once the interview process begins, the experience can get worse. Interviews are scheduled and then moved at the last minute. Recruiters do not show up. Follow-up emails go unanswered. Candidates are expected to be punctual, prepared, polished, and flexible, while employers do not always hold themselves to the same standard.

We should remember something simple:

For those of us already in the workforce, an interview can feel like just another meeting squeezed into a crowded calendar. For the candidate, especially a student or early-career applicant, that same meeting may be the highlight of the day.

They have prepared for it, built their schedule around it, and attached real hope to it. When we cancel casually, reschedule repeatedly, or disappear afterward, we are doing more than creating inconvenience. We are showing them exactly how little we value their time.

Interviews are not one-way evaluations. The company is trying to determine whether the candidate is the right fit for the role. At the same time, the candidate is trying to determine whether the company is a place where they can learn, grow, and be supported. Too many organizations still behave as though the company is the only party making a choice.

I have seen students turn down roles that looked stronger on paper because another employer did a much better job explaining the human side of the opportunity. Who will help me ramp up? What mentorship is available? How will I learn? What support systems are in place if I struggle? A company name and a job title do not answer those questions. A thoughtful recruiting process does.

A recent event brought this whole issue to mind. A student was scheduled for three interviews with an established Silicon Valley tech company. The first interview happened on time. The second was rescheduled at the last minute. The third was canceled and never rebooked, even after the student followed up more than once. Weeks later, the recruiter called to offer the role, even though that third interview had never taken place and the student's emails had gone unanswered. The student declined, not because the role was not a good fit, but because the process had already answered the most important question: What would it feel like to work here?

The increasing use of AI in recruiting also deserves more scrutiny. While technology can help with scale, scheduling, and workflow, it must never become an excuse for removing accountability. If AI screening or interview tools are used to filter students and then leave them in limbo, with no feedback, no closure, and no human oversight, that is not efficiency. It is a failure of candidate experience delivered at scale.

For many students, the recruiting process is their first meaningful interaction with a company. Before they know the team, the manager, or the day-to-day culture, they learn from the process itself. They learn whether the company communicates clearly, respects commitments, and treats people as though they matter. Early talent recruiting is not just about filling roles. It shows whether a company truly respects people.

The standard should not be hard to meet. We must commit to:

• Acknowledge every application.
• Honor interview time as a real commitment.
• Communicate timelines and status clearly.
• Close the loop with all candidates, regardless of outcome.
• Sell the opportunity, explain the mentorship, support, and path to growth.

If you want strong junior talent, you need to explain not just the work, but the environment in which that person will be expected to succeed. You also need to engage with and respond to applicants, especially those already in the interview process.

Companies that get this right will do more than fill roles. They will build trust. They will strengthen their reputation with students, universities, and future talent pipelines. Most importantly, they will send a much clearer signal about the kind of organization they actually are.

We should hold ourselves to a higher standard. Students notice how they are treated. Their peers notice too. In a market where every company talks about talent, culture, and values, early talent recruiting is one of the clearest places where those values are either proven or contradicted.

This article reflects my personal perspectives on product management and AI. It does not represent the official position of my employer or any affiliated organization.