Most rejected candidates get nothing, a template or a sentence that could apply to anyone, because the interviewer's notes were impressions and the legal team was nervous. An interview copilot changes the first problem: the notes are evidence against a rubric, observed behaviours with quotes, which is exactly the material feedback should be made from. This page covers what to share and what to withhold, a short template built from copilot notes, who should send it and when, the caution level that keeps it safe, and why doing this well is worth the time. It is general information about process; employment and data rules differ by jurisdiction, and nothing here is legal advice.
What to share and what to withhold
| Share | Withhold | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Observed behaviours against the role's competencies ('the examples of leading a team were from projects you contributed to rather than led') | Scores and rankings | Behaviour is actionable; a number is an argument |
| One or two things that were strong | Comparisons with other candidates | The candidate did not interview against the others; they interviewed against the rubric |
| What the role needed that was not shown | Speculation about why | Describe the gap; do not diagnose the person |
| A specific suggestion where there is one | Anything about protected characteristics, even to reassure | Feedback is about the job |
| An honest line about the decision being made | Interviewers' private flags or hypotheses | Flags are for the human to check, not to publish |
The copilot's report is organised by competency with evidence quotes, which maps directly to the left column; the scorecard it fills, described in the interview scorecard template with AI scoring, is the source document for feedback, and the right column is what stays in it.
A template
"Thank you for interviewing for the X role. We have decided not to move forward, and I wanted to give you something more useful than that sentence. What came through strongly: [one or two behaviours with the competency named, for example 'your account of the vendor consolidation showed the kind of structured problem-solving the role needs']. Where the role needed more than we saw: [one or two gaps stated as behaviours, for example 'the role involves leading a team of five, and the examples we heard were of contributing to teams rather than leading them; a role where you can show that leadership would make a future application strong']. [One suggestion if there is one.] I hope this is useful, and I would be glad to see you apply again when the fit is closer." Four short paragraphs, from the evidence, with nothing in the withhold column. Write it from the report's quotes rather than from memory, and read it once as the candidate would.
Who sends it, and when
- The hiring manager or the interviewer who owns the decision, not the recruiter, for finalists; the recruiter can send it for earlier-stage rejections using the same evidence.
- Within a week of the decision, with the rejection or shortly after; feedback a month later is a reminder, not a gift.
- By email for most candidates; a short call for finalists after a long process, with the email as the record.
- Once. Do not enter into a debate; if the candidate replies with questions, answer briefly and factually or not at all.
- With the notice you gave at the start that interviewers used a note-taking and scoring aid, as in how to tell candidates you use an AI interview copilot; candidates who were told at the start find evidence-based feedback natural rather than surprising.
The caution level, and why it is worth it
- Behaviour and competency language only; no adjectives about the person, no diagnosis, nothing about protected characteristics.
- Consistent with the report: if a candidate later sees the record, the feedback should match it.
- Reviewed by HR for a template and a sample, not for every message; a process that needs legal review per email will not happen.
- Where the organisation's lawyers advise against feedback for a role or a jurisdiction, follow them; this page is general information.
- Worth it because candidates who receive specific feedback reapply, refer others and speak well of the process; the candidate's side of this experience is described in candidate experience when interviewers use an AI copilot.
- Worth it internally because writing feedback from evidence exposes interviews where there was no evidence, which is the calibration problem feedback was never meant to solve but does.
Where CoPilot Interview fits
CoPilot Interview is an AI interview assistant for candidates and, in Interviewer Mode, a copilot for interviewers that offers role-specific questions by category, live rubric scoring with evidence notes, follow-up question ideas, red and green flags as hypotheses, and a hire/no-hire report with section scores, flags and quotes, free in the desktop app for Windows and macOS with no signup; its report's competency sections and evidence quotes are the raw material for feedback that says something. The candidates on the other side of these interviews are told, on the candidate side of this site, to follow your employer's rules and to prepare with the practice tools, which is also what useful feedback sends them back to.
Disclosure: CoPilot Interview is our product, so weigh what we say about it accordingly.
Frequently asked questions
Should I give rejected candidates feedback?
Where your organisation allows it, yes: specific, behavioural and brief. Candidates who get it reapply and refer others.
What should I share from AI interview notes?
Observed behaviours against the competencies, one or two strengths, the gap the role needed, and a suggestion. Never scores, rankings, comparisons or interviewers' flags.
Who should send it?
The hiring manager for finalists, the recruiter for earlier stages, within a week, once, with no debate afterwards.
How do I keep it safe?
Behaviour and competency language only, consistent with the report, a template reviewed by HR, and your lawyers' advice where they have given it.
Is this legal advice?
No. Employment and data rules differ by jurisdiction; follow your organisation's counsel.
Try Interviewer Mode on your next screen
Role-specific questions, live rubric scoring with evidence notes and a structured report at the end of the call. Free in the desktop app for Windows and macOS, no signup.
Get the desktop app