Interview feedback examples: what to write (and what never to)
'Interview feedback' means two different documents: what you write for the HIRING TEAM (scorecard notes that justify a decision) and what you send the CANDIDATE (closure, and occasionally growth). Both are usually done badly — vague adjectives internally, ghosting or lawyer-scared boilerplate externally. Examples of both, done properly.
Internal feedback: evidence, rating, recommendation
The format that works: for each attribute — the evidence (what they said/did), the rating, and one line of reasoning. Example, done badly: 'Great communicator, really sharp, a bit junior. 3/4.' Done well: 'Communication 4/4 — explained the billing-system migration to a hypothetical non-technical stakeholder without being asked to simplify; checked my understanding twice. Ownership 2/4 — both project stories used *we* throughout; when pushed on her specific role in the launch, named only coordination tasks. Would suit the senior IC role better than the lead role.'
Notice what the good version enables: another interviewer can weigh the same evidence differently, the debrief can compare specifics, and six months later you can audit whether your signals predicted performance.
Never write in internal feedback: anything about protected characteristics or their proxies (age, accent, 'energy', family situation, health), unverifiable vibes ('something felt off'), or comparisons to named employees. Write as if the candidate could legally read it — in many jurisdictions, they can.
Candidate-facing feedback: kind, specific, bounded
Most companies send nothing or boilerplate. If you offer real feedback (do — it's rare enough to be memorable employer branding), the formula is: one genuine strength with specifics, one growth area framed as the gap to THIS role, no debatable judgments, no comparisons to other candidates.
Example: 'Your walkthrough of the churn-analysis project was the strongest technical explanation we heard — clear structure, honest about the dead ends. Where we saw a gap for this particular role was hands-on experience running experiments end-to-end yourself; the role needs someone who has owned that loop repeatedly. That's a stage-of-career gap, not an ability one, and we'd genuinely welcome an application as that experience builds.'
Keep it to one strength and one gap. Feedback conversations you can't exit, relitigation of the decision, and detailed rubric-sharing all create risk with no upside — bounded kindness is the goal.
We're building an AI candidate you can rehearse real interviews on — built from the actual CV, with coaching on your technique. Free for the first cohort.
FAQ
What should interview feedback include?
Internal scorecard feedback: per-attribute evidence (what the candidate actually said or did), a rubric rating, and a recommendation — no vibes, no protected-characteristic proxies. Candidate-facing feedback: one specific genuine strength plus one growth area framed against the role's requirements, kindly bounded, with no comparisons to other candidates.
Should you give rejected candidates feedback?
When you can do it safely, yes — specific, kind rejection feedback is so rare it becomes employer-brand gold, and candidates often reapply stronger later. Keep it bounded (one strength, one gap, framed against the role), avoid debatable judgments, and skip it entirely where legal counsel or local norms advise silence.
Keep reading
General hiring guidance, not legal advice. Employment law varies by jurisdiction — check locally before adopting questions or processes.