‘It's not the salary that tips the scales for top talent – it's the experience they have during the process.’
That's more than just a bold statement. It's the reality of many executive search mandates. In fact, even a strong offer can't make up for a weak process. According to a global BCG survey, 52% would reject an attractive offer if they had previously had a negative recruiting experience. At the same time, 66% cite a smooth, speedy process as the most important differentiator in the competition for talent (2023). Those who cut corners here will end up paying for it – with rejections, replacements and lost time.
The austerity measures of recent years have shifted priorities. Many companies are cutting benefits, negotiating harder on packages and streamlining steps. But it is precisely where candidates experience the company that the greatest cost levers arise: speed, transparency and, above all, appreciation. Gallup shows that turnaround time has become a decisive influencing factor alongside salary; applicants are more likely to accept an offer if the process is fast and reliable. Two out of three new employees report a very good to exceptional candidate experience – and it is precisely this quality that shapes their subsequent loyalty (2024). In short: process beats package when time is short and offers are competing.
For decision-makers, this means that candidate experience is not dispensable, but rather a cost and risk factor in recruiting. Those who want to keep their pipeline stable prioritise clearly defined steps, reliable communication and quick decisions – supported by smart automation, without losing the personal touch. This creates a measurable competitive advantage in terms of acceptance rates, time-to-hire, and reputation in the candidate market.
The dilemma of costs and candidate experience
Of course, budget constraints are transforming recruitment strategies. Processes are being streamlined, job advertisements are being published automatically, and interviews are being reduced to a minimum. On paper, this seems efficient – but in reality, it is often counterproductive. From the applicant's point of view, it often means longer waiting times, less personal contact and a lack of transparency. This is precisely what leads to dropouts in the process. Expectations on the candidate side have risen significantly in recent years.
In the upper segment in particular, they expect an application process that is fast, respectful and reliable. Studies show that a speedy process is the most important deciding factor after salary (Gallup 2024). Anyone who responds a week late or delays feedback will quickly lose their favourite candidates in the tight candidate market.
For companies, this is not a cosmetic issue. A poor candidate experience acts as an invisible cost factor. It increases the number of rejections, lengthens the time-to-hire and forces teams to invest resources in the search again. At the same time, an unprofessional process weakens the employer brand – and to ensure that the chances of even making it into the relevant set of candidates for the next search mandate.
This effect is particularly noticeable in executive search. Top executives have options. They compare not only packages, but also the professionalism of the application process. Those who falter here pay twice: with lost candidates and damage to their image in the market. In short, attempting to increase efficiency by cutting costs often undermines the very goal – a successful conclusion.
Low budget, high impact – what really counts
The candidate experience does not have to be expensive. Many of the most effective levers are in areas that require little budget but make the biggest difference. At its core, there are three factors: communication, feedback and transparency.
Applicants don't expect glossy brochures, but reliability. A brief confirmation of receipt provides orientation, prompt feedback signals respect, and clear information about the next steps provides reassurance. CareerPlug shows that these items are crucial: two-thirds of candidates cite their experience during the process as the main reason for their decision to accept a job (2025).
Particularly under budget constraint, it is these ‘basics’ that determine success or failure. They take little time, but have a big impact on perception. Those who consistently apply these principles build trust – and increase the chance that candidates will ultimately accept the offer.
Gaining efficiency – small adjustments with a big impact
Beyond the basics, technology and structure can be used to design processes that are both efficient and candidate-centred. Automation is the key here: appointment scheduling, status updates and digital interview platforms reduce administrative effort and create space for personal interaction.
PeopleStrong points out that automation can reduce costs and improve the candidate experience – provided it is used in a targeted manner (2024). The important thing is to strike a balance: tools should take over routine tasks, not the entire contact process. Candidates must continue to feel that they are dealing with people who take their application seriously and address them personally.
The process design itself also offers room for adjustment. A clearly defined procedure with binding time frames for feedback and decision-making steps prevents delays. This creates a process that appears professional, reliable and efficient – without incurring additional costs.
Measuring and controlling candidate experience
Candidate experience can not only be improved – it can also be systematically measured. To ensure it becomes a management tool that gives executives clarity about where processes are working and where risks exist,
Our colleagues at Foxio Consulting show that clear KPIs are indispensable, particularly in phases of austerity. One of the most important is the Candidate Experience Score, which measures how applicants perceive the application process (2023). A high score not only signals satisfaction, but also correlates with higher offer acceptance and stronger referral rates.
This is a double win for companies: they can manage their recruiting efficiency using measurable data – and at the same time strengthen their employer branding in a targeted manner. A data-based approach creates transparency, prevents blind flights and shows which investments are having an impact.
Candidate experience as a business case
As we now know, candidate experience is not a ‘soft factor’ but a strategic investment with a measurable return. Decision-makers who take this connection seriously recognise that satisfaction in the process has a direct impact on key KPIs in recruiting – from time-to-hire to offer acceptance rates.
Figures from recent studies are clear. Around 66% of applicants make their decision for or against an offer based directly on their experience in the recruitment process (CareerPlug 2025). Poor processes not only lead to rejections, but also prolong the recruitment period, increase the cost per hire and reduce planning reliability. At executive level, this can even delay critical projects. And it is expensive in any case.
The candidate experience is to be ensured as a hidden cost factor or efficiency driver – depending on how professionally it is designed. Those who recruit quickly, transparently and appreciatively secure commitments earlier, reduce the dropout rate and save internal resources. Those who do not pay several times over: through vacancies, additional rounds and the loss of reputation in the candidate market.
And the ROI can be measured. Tools such as the Candidate Experience Score or regular applicant feedback show where processes are weak and where investments are having an impact. The decisive factor is the change in perspective: the question is how much money companies lose when they neglect the candidate experience. This is precisely where the lever lies to develop recruiting from a cost centre to a value driver.
Conclusion: Priorities for decision-makers
Management must recognise that the candidate experience is much more than just an image issue. It determines whether processes run efficiently, whether offers are accepted, and whether recruiting meets its goals. Those who cut corners here lose out – in terms of time, money, and reputation.
For decision-makers, this means sharpening their focus on the levers that show effect even under budget constraint. It is not expensive benefits or salary packages that make the difference, but the quality of the application process: speed, transparency and appreciation. These factors are inexpensive to implement, yet they are crucial and critical to recruiting success.
The recommendation is clear: invest resources specifically in process quality. Automation and clear communication ease the strain on budgets without sacrificing the personal touch. At the same time, a positive candidate experience increases the chances of quick acceptances and strengthens the perception of the employer brand.
The impression that candidates take away with them is crucial. And this determines – both measurably and sustainably – the return on investment.
Do you want to leave the candidate experience to chance – and at the same time keep your recruitment costs under control?
CareerTeam supports you in designing efficient, candidate-centred processes. Together, we identify the levers you can use to secure commitments more quickly and strengthen your employer brand. Discover with us how your recruiting can save costs and attract talent at the same time. We look forward to hearing from you.
References
- BCG (2023): For In-Demand Job Seekers, a Poor Recruiting Experience Is a Deal Breaker.
- Gallup (2024): The Lasting Impact of Exceptional Candidate Experiences.
- CareerPlug (2025): Candidate Experience Report.
- PeopleStrong (2024): 11 Cost-Effective Recruitment Strategies for 2024.
- Foxio Consulting (2023): Top 5 cost-effective HR strategies – successful recruiting despite austerity measures.
.png)
