Hate Async Interviews? Why Candidates Say They Waste Time

Candidates don’t hate async interviews because they’re asynchronous - they hate them because they often waste time, lack feedback, and feel one-sided. When poorly designed, asynchronous interviews increase candidate drop-off and damage the overall candidate experience. An asynchronous interview (also called a one-way or video interview) is a hiring method where candidates record answers to pre-set questions without a live interviewer present. Do candidates really hate async interviews? Candidates don’t hate async interviews themselves. They hate poorly designed async interview processes that waste time, lack clear expectations, or demand excessive effort without feedback. When asynchronous interviews respect candidate time, sentiment improves significantly.

TL;DR

• Candidates do not hate async interviews; they hate wasting time on poorly designed processes.
• Clear questions, realistic time estimates and prompt feedback cut the friction dramatically.
• Use async interviews for scale, remote teams and fast screenings while protecting candidate time.
• Measure drop off, time-to-hire and satisfaction to optimise the experience.
• Technology helps but process design and communication matter most.

Understanding Candidate Frustrations

What Are Async Interviews?

Asynchronous interviews, often called one-way or recorded video interviews, let candidates respond to pre-set questions at a time that suits them. Recruiters record questions once and many candidates submit video or text responses that hiring teams review later. The format increases efficiency and removes the need for scheduling a live meeting. Yet many recruiters still hear the complaint that candidates hate async interviews. That reaction is rarely about the format itself. It is about how the format is implemented and whether it respects candidate time.

Common Misconceptions About Async Interviews

A common misconception is that candidates hate async interviews because they prefer human contact. Some do prefer live interaction. But industry surveys show that a majority of applicants value flexibility and speed. The real cause when candidates say they hate async interviews is usually the experience: unclear instructions, long question sets, unexpected technical requirements and little feedback. When companies get the setup wrong, candidates feel like their time has been wasted, and they equate that wasted time with the interview format.

Why Time Matters to Candidates

Time is one of the most scarce resources for job seekers. Many candidates balance current roles, family responsibilities and multiple applications. A candidate who is asked to spend 45 minutes on a video task with no clear return may feel exploited. Research from hiring platforms indicates that long or opaque early-stage tasks increase drop rates and reduce employer brand favourability. When applicants say they hate async interviews, they often mean they hate being asked to invest time with no clarity on value or next steps.

Use Cases for Async Interviews

Hiring at Scale

When a company receives hundreds or thousands of applications, live interviews become impractical. Async interviews enable teams to screen many candidates quickly. For example, a recruitment team can batch a short set of competency questions and review submissions in focused sessions. This reduces the scheduling overhead and ensures consistent assessment criteria. The format helps hiring teams remain structured and fair at scale, provided questions remain concise and relevant so candidates do not feel their time is being wasted.

Remote and Distributed Teams

Remote teams spread across time zones find asynchronous interviews invaluable. Candidates in different regions may not have convenient overlapping hours with the hiring team. Async interviews reduce friction and allow diverse talent pools to apply. However, remote hiring amplifies sensitivity to process design. If remote candidates feel they are spending too much time on tasks with little feedback, they often conclude they hate async interviews, whereas a clearer, time-limited approach would have improved their view of the employer.

Initial Screening Efficiency

Async interviews work well as an initial filter in multi-stage processes. A short, two to three question recorded interview can quickly surface communication skills, culture fit and basic competencies. Recruiters can then invest live interview time in fewer, higher-potential candidates. The efficiency gain is real, but it is only realised when tasks are targeted and do not impose excessive time demands on candidates.

Benefits of Async Interviews for Candidates and Recruiters

Flexibility in Scheduling

Flexibility is the top benefit. Candidates can record responses at a convenient time, reducing the stress of arranging time off work or coordinating across schedules. Employers benefit from accelerated screening and consistent question delivery. When organisations respect candidate time, the flexible nature of async interviews becomes a genuine benefit rather than a grievance that leads people to say they hate async interviews.

Reduced Pressure and Bias

Asynchronous formats can reduce nervousness for some candidates who prefer to prepare short responses rather than perform live. They also help reduce interviewer bias because every candidate receives the same questions in the same format. Platforms that anonymise responses for initial review strengthen fairness. This helps hiring teams make decisions based on evidence rather than impressions formed in a stressful live setting.

Faster Hiring Decisions

When used correctly, asynchronous interviews speed up time-to-hire. Recruiters can review submissions in batches and move promising candidates to the next stage faster. Faster decisions matter to candidates who are often engaging with multiple employers. Lack of speed and poor communication are reasons candidates say they hate async interviews. Conversely, a transparent, timely async process can increase acceptance rates and improve the candidate experience.

Challenges and Best Practices to Avoid Wasting Candidate Time

Designing Clear and Concise Interview Questions

Design questions that map directly to the role and that can be answered succinctly. A common mistake is asking candidates to complete long case studies at the screening stage. Keep early questions focused on core competencies and allow longer assessments later for shortlisted candidates. Use behavioural prompts like Ask about a specific situation, the action taken and the outcome. This keeps answers structured and short, and it prevents candidates from spending hours on tasks that do not move them forward.

Setting Realistic Time Expectations

Always tell candidates how long the task should take. A realistic time expectation might read: This task should take no more than 15 minutes to complete. Candidates appreciate transparency. If a task requires preparation or takes longer, explain why and what they will get in return, for example fast feedback or a guaranteed next-stage interview for strong submissions. Many who say they hate async interviews are reacting to surprises about time commitment rather than the format itself.

Providing Feedback and Communication Transparency

Feedback is a differentiator. Even a brief acknowledgement and a clear timeline for decision-making demonstrate respect. Automated messages can confirm receipt and set expectations, while personalised feedback for candidates who reach later stages builds goodwill. When recruiters close the loop, candidates are less likely to spread a negative view and say they hate async interviews. Transparency about the recruitment stages, timelines and assessment criteria reduces anxiety and preserves the employer brand.

Conclusion: Enhancing the Async Interview Experience

Balancing Efficiency with Candidate Respect

Async interviews are a practical tool to improve hiring process efficiency, but only when implemented with candidate respect at the centre. The statement that candidates hate async interviews is often shorthand for a deeper complaint about wasted time. Recruiters should view each async touchpoint as an interaction where respect is owed. Keep tasks short, align questions to the role and be explicit about time expectations to reduce friction.

How Technology Can Improve Async Interviews

Technology can automate administrative tasks, standardise questions and capture useful metrics such as completion rates and average response times. Use analytics to spot where candidates drop out and then iterate. Integrations with ATS systems, mobile-friendly recording and bandwidth-aware video options make the process easier for candidates. But technology is an enabler, not a solution on its own. Process design and clear communication remain the most important levers to prevent candidates saying they hate async interviews.

Final Thoughts on Reducing Candidate Frustration

When candidates indicate they hate async interviews the issue usually lies with process and communication, not the core format. Take a candidate-centric approach: reduce task length, set explicit time expectations, offer fast feedback and measure satisfaction. Simple changes can transform perception. Recruiters who optimise for time, clarity and respect will reap benefits in quality of hire, employer brand and candidate experience. A candidate who feels their time has been respected will not say they hate async interviews; they will recommend the organisation to peers.

Example: A mid-sized tech firm replaced a 45 minute asynchronous task with a 12 minute prompt and an on-screen timer. Completion rates rose by 40 percent and candidate satisfaction scores improved, showing the direct link between time respect and candidate sentiment.

FAQs - Frequently Asked Questions

1. Do candidates really hate async interviews?

Candidates don’t hate async interviews by default. Negative sentiment usually comes from long, unclear, or poorly designed interview tasks.

2. Do candidates genuinely hate async interviews?

Most do not hate the format itself. They dislike processes that waste their time. Clear tasks, time estimates and feedback change perception quickly.

3. How long should an async interview task be?

Aim for 10 to 20 minutes for initial screens. If deeper assessment is needed, reserve longer exercises for later stages when candidates have advanced.

4. How can we measure whether candidates feel their time is respected?

Track completion rates, drop-off points, net promoter score and time-to-hire. Qualitative feedback through short surveys after the task also yields actionable insights.

5. Will async interviews increase bias?

If designed well they can reduce bias by standardising questions and anonymising early responses. Training and structured scoring help maintain fairness across stages.

6. What are quick wins to stop candidates saying they hate async interviews?

Reduce question count, offer explicit time estimates, provide an on-screen timer, and ensure prompt communication. These small changes have outsized effects on candidate perception.

7. Why do candidates feel async interviews waste time?

Candidates feel their time is wasted when interviews are too long, lack instructions, or offer no feedback or response afterward.

8. How can recruiters improve async interview experience?

By limiting interview length, explaining evaluation criteria, setting expectations clearly, and respecting candidate effort.