Being rejected for a job can be a deeply disheartening experience—especially when you were a top contender but still didn’t get the offer. It’s natural to feel discouraged, even resentful, toward the company that delivered the final “thanks, but no thanks.” But new research suggests it doesn’t have to end that way. In fact, how a hiring manager communicates rejection can significantly influence whether a strong candidate will consider applying again in the future—and even how they view the organization overall.
A study from Temple University in Philadelphia reveals that candidates who receive a thoughtful, informative rejection message—one that briefly explains *why* they weren’t selected—are far more likely to stay engaged with the company. According to the findings, providing even a short rationale for the decision boosted the likelihood of future engagement by more than 21 percentage points. That’s a substantial increase, and as the science news site Phys.org notes, it likely stems from reduced uncertainty: when applicants understand the reasoning behind the “no,” they’re more empowered to improve and try again.
Sunil Wattal, associate dean of research and doctoral programs at Temple’s Fox School of Business and the study’s lead author, emphasized that small gestures can have an outsized impact. “Even simple things can make a difference in terms of how a rejection is received,” he told Phys.org. This includes basic courtesies like using a friendly tone or offering a clear, respectful explanation—actions that require minimal effort but yield meaningful results. “No one likes being rejected,” Wattal acknowledged, “but how you deliver that message matters.”
The researchers analyzed real-world data from Stack Overflow, a social-media-style platform for developers, to study how users responded to rejection-like feedback. While the context was digital and technical, Wattal stressed that the insights apply broadly across industries. Today, many companies send generic, one- or two-sentence rejection emails—or worse, ghost candidates entirely. “How likely is that candidate to apply again?” Wattal asked. The answer, unsurprisingly, is: not very. A dismissive or silent rejection often closes the door permanently.
This is especially costly when you consider the resources already invested in top-tier applicants. Screening resumes, conducting interviews, and evaluating finalists all take significant time and money. The runner-up candidates may be perfect for a future opening—yet if they’re brushed off with a cold or vague rejection, they may never return.
You might read this and think, “Well, isn’t that just common sense?” Perhaps. But in today’s strained job market—where HR teams are stretched thin and burnout is widespread—it’s easy to prioritize efficiency over empathy. Meanwhile, job seekers, empowered by AI-driven application tools, are casting wider nets than ever, applying to dozens of roles with minimal effort. In this environment, fostering goodwill with near-miss candidates isn’t just kind—it’s strategic. Encouraging them to reapply down the line can streamline future hiring and strengthen your employer brand.
Importantly, Wattal notes that these principles extend beyond recruitment. The same logic applies when delivering unwelcome news to customers—such as denying a refund request. When rejections are framed respectfully, with a clear and polite explanation, they can actually *enhance* trust, loyalty, and long-term relationships. In both hiring and customer service, how you say “no” can determine whether someone walks away—or stays engaged for the next opportunity.