What to do with candidates who do not fit right now
Echipa HR 365 · reviewed 2026-09-07 · 5 min read
A talent pool is useful only if you can query it with a concrete question and get back fewer than twenty names. Beyond that, nobody opens it, and the promise “we will keep you on file” becomes a polite formula candidates have learned not to believe.
Why it usually does not work
Because everything gets saved, with no criterion, and searched by words from the CV. At five hundred accumulated applications, a search for “accountant” returns eighty results about which you know nothing: why they were rejected, how good they were, whether they are still available.
The problem is not the volume, it is the absence of a judgement saved alongside the CV. A candidate rejected for lacking a competence is an entirely different thing from one rejected for being the second best — and a year later, the only visible difference is the one you recorded at the time.
The three tags that make the difference
| Tag | What it means | What you do with it in 6 months |
|---|---|---|
| Runner-up | Good, but we chose somebody else | First call for any similar role |
| Good for another role | Not a fit here, but has something we need | Contact when that role opens |
| Not yet | Missing something they can acquire over time | Contact in a year, with the right question |
| No tag | Did not fit and will not fit | Not contacted; archived |
What you save besides the CV
- The interview notes, as answers. A year later, the CV reminds you of nothing; the notes do.
- What exactly they were missing, in one sentence. It is also the basis for the reconnection conversation.
- What they were looking for: role, schedule, location. It changes, but it gives you a starting point.
- The date of the last conversation. Without it, you do not know whether a month or three years have passed.
The six-month contact
A generic “I saw you applied to us a year ago, we have new roles” message is spam and is treated as such. What works is the opposite: a short, personal message that shows you remember the conversation.
Hello [name]. We spoke last year about the [role] position, and at the time we chose another candidate because [concrete reason]. We have now opened [new role], which is closer to what you told us you were interested in. If it is a good moment, I will send you the details; if not, tell me and I will not bother you again.
A model — reopening contact
The last sentence changes the reply rate. It offers a clear exit, so the message does not feel like pressure — and whoever says “not now” says it explicitly, which is information you can record.
How long you keep it and what you say about it
The operational part: set a retention period, apply it automatically, and tell the candidate at the point of application. A pool with no retention period grows indefinitely and becomes, within a few years, a risk nobody administers.
Should I tell candidates I am keeping them on file?
Yes, and it is worth asking for explicit consent. A candidate who said yes replies when you reconnect; one contacted without knowing they were on file usually reacts badly.
How often do I search the pool before publishing an advert?
Every time, and it takes five minutes if the pool is clean. It is also the test that tells you whether it is worth maintaining: if you never find anything, the tags are too broad.
Where to start
Open the pool and search for your last published role. If the result is a long list from which you cannot pick anyone, the problem is not the search but that nothing was marked at rejection.
From the next hire onwards, apply the three tags at rejection. In six months you will have the first pool that actually answers a question.
Who maintains it
A talent pool with no named owner degrades within six months. Not because it is hard to maintain, but because the maintenance consists of small gestures that, without an owner, belong to nobody: tagging at rejection, updating after a contact, clearing out the expired.
The real effort, for a company hiring ten to fifteen people a year, is under an hour a month. What makes it look large is that it accumulates: a pool left untended for a year needs a full day of clearing, and that day is never found.
The mistake that turns it into a spam list
Sending every new advert to everyone in the pool, every time. It is quick, it looks efficient, and it produces three effects, all bad: the reply rate falls to almost zero, people unsubscribe, and your reputation as an employer suffers in exactly the circle you were trying to keep close.
The practical rule: one individual message, written for that person, beats fifty sent in bulk. If you do not have time to write individually, the contact list is too long — which means the tags were too generous.
A CV database with natural-language search and your own tags
You search with a whole sentence rather than keywords, and the notes and rejection tag sit next to each candidate — so reconnecting starts from what was discussed.
You can create an account in a few minutes and use every module for 7 days, no card required.