Asynchronous interviewing, done right
Async loops promise scale and respect. They usually deliver neither. Here is the version that does.
Async interviewing was sold as the alternative to brutal scheduling cycles. In practice it often makes the experience worse — candidates record video answers into the void, get no human feedback, hear nothing for weeks. The good version is harder than the bad version. It is also better. Here is what good async looks like in 2026.
Use writing, not video
Video answers favour candidates with quiet rooms, good lighting, and a particular kind of presentational confidence. None of those correlate with job performance for most knowledge work. Written answers are more egalitarian and easier to evaluate consistently.
Three questions, not twelve
Every additional question lowers completion rate and signal quality. Three well-chosen questions tell you more than a 45-minute take-home that gets resented.
Reply to every submission
A two-sentence acknowledgement within 48 hours is the bar. Anything less is asking candidates to invest free labor in a black box. The good async loop is faster than synchronous, not slower.
