Here's a question worth asking honestly: how much of your ATS are you actually using?
Not in terms of logging candidates and moving them through stages. In terms of the automation capabilities; the communications workflows, the feedback prompts, the triggered updates, the touchpoint sequencing - that the platform was designed to handle.
For most in-house recruitment teams, the honest answer is: not much. And according to new research, that underutilisation is one of the biggest self-inflicted wounds in candidate experience today.
What the data shows
At the Talent Labs Collaborate London event in April 2026, Jobtrain facilitated five independent hackathon sessions with approximately 100 talent acquisition professionals from across UK sectors. Three out of five groups independently raised lack of automation as a significant amplifier of their candidate experience problems - not as a root cause, but as the factor that turned manageable challenges into persistent failures.
The pattern groups described was consistent. Manual processes creating inconsistency and delay. Absent automated communications at key touchpoints - application received, shortlisting completed, interview confirmed, outcome communicated. Feedback prompts and status updates that could be automated sitting unused. And - critically - ATS capabilities that teams knew existed but hadn't yet configured or implemented.
This last point is important. The research isn't pointing at a technology gap. It's pointing at a configuration and adoption gap. The tools are there. They're just not switched on.
Why this happens
There are several reasons why automation capabilities go underused, and most of them are understandable.
Implementation gets rushed. When a new ATS is deployed, the priority is getting the core hiring workflow functional. The automation layer - the communications templates, the triggered workflows, the hiring manager prompts - gets marked as 'phase two' and then quietly deprioritised as day-to-day hiring volume takes over.
Teams don't know what's possible. ATS platforms have added significant automation capability in recent years, and not every user is aware of what their platform can now do. Capabilities that didn't exist at implementation may be available today.
There's a fear of impersonality. Some teams consciously hold back from automating communications because they worry it will feel cold or generic to candidates. This is a real concern - but it's better addressed through the quality of the template than the decision to automate or not. A warm, well-written automated message is significantly better than a manual one that arrives three days late or not at all.
The cost of not automating
Every touchpoint that isn't covered by a triggered communication is a moment where a candidate might be sitting in silence, wondering what's happening with their application.
Research consistently shows that candidate anxiety - the uncertainty about where things stand - is one of the primary drivers of negative candidate experience. It's also one of the easiest to address, because it doesn't require personalisation or judgement. It just requires a timely, accurate update.
When those updates don't come, candidates make assumptions. They assume they've been unsuccessful. They assume the organisation is disorganised. They assume - correctly or not - that they're not valued. Some of them accept other offers. Some of them tell people.
The time and resource pressures that TA teams operate under are real, and the research acknowledges them. Three out of five groups also cited time and resource constraints as an underlying driver of candidate experience failures. Automation isn't a silver bullet, but it's the most direct available response to the gap between what teams want to deliver and what they have capacity to deliver manually.
What good automation looks like
The hackathon groups were specific about what they wanted automation to handle. Confirmation of application received - immediate, warm, informative about next steps and timeline. Shortlisting updates - whether moving forward or not. Interview confirmations and reminders. Post-interview acknowledgements. Outcome communications at every decision point, so no candidate is ever left without an update.
Alongside these candidate-facing workflows, groups identified hiring manager-facing automation as equally important. Prompts to submit feedback immediately after an interview. Reminders when feedback is overdue. Visibility for recruiters of where the bottlenecks are forming.
.png?width=800&height=566&name=Candidate%20experience%20report%20(1).png)
The goal isn't to remove human contact from the process. It's to ensure that the human moments - the conversations that benefit from warmth, judgement, and genuine personal engagement - aren't buried under admin that a well-configured system could handle in the background.
A practical starting point
Map your current candidate journey end to end. At every stage, ask two questions: is there a communication that should be going out here? And is it currently being sent consistently, every time, to every candidate?
The gaps you find are your automation priority list. Work through them, build the templates, and configure the triggers. Then review the workflows quarterly to make sure they're still accurate, professionally worded, and aligned to your current process.
The technology is almost certainly already there. It's just waiting to be used.
The full research report - five independent hackathon groups, 100 UK TA professionals, 20+ practical solutions - is free to download. If automation and candidate communications are on your agenda, it's worth an hour of your time.