{
  "registry_version": "1.0.0",
  "data": {
    "title": "Generic \"closer alignment\" rejection template",
    "status": "active",
    "evidence_ids": [
      "evidence.hidden_workers_untapped_talent_hbs_accenture",
      "evidence.behind_the_privilege_shield_safeguarding_ai_bias_testing_data_in_employment_decisions_norton_rose_fulbright_2026"
    ],
    "content": "# Generic \"closer alignment\" rejection template\n\nA standard automated email saying that the team has decided to proceed with candidates whose profiles match the requirements of the role more closely.\n\n### Diagnostic Non-Inferences\n- Does not establish which specific skill was deemed insufficient.\n- Does not establish whether a human reviewer read the full resume.",
    "aliases": [
      "A-002"
    ],
    "id": "obs.generic_closer_alignment_rejection_template",
    "type": "observation",
    "summary": "A standard automated email saying that the team has decided to proceed with candidates whose profiles match the requirements of the role more closely.",
    "stages": [
      "ingestion",
      "screening",
      "recruiter",
      "technical",
      "hiring-manager",
      "team",
      "compensation",
      "offer",
      "post-offer"
    ],
    "evidence_level": "supported",
    "probes": [
      {
        "id": "PROBE-A-002-1",
        "action": "Compare the wording of the CV with the exact requirement phrases in the published job description.",
        "expected_signal": "Reveals a possible vocabulary mismatch between the candidate's wording and the ATS rubric.",
        "cost": "low",
        "outcomes": [
          {
            "id": "every-phrase-present",
            "label": "Every phrase the posting names — the acronyms, the named tools, the certifications, the years figure — appears in the CV as sent, in the posting's own wording, and the dated history covers the years figure.",
            "excludes": [],
            "because": ""
          },
          {
            "id": "same-work-other-words",
            "label": "One or more required phrases appear nowhere in the CV, while the work behind them is described there in different vocabulary — another tool name, a job title, a project description.",
            "excludes": [],
            "because": ""
          },
          {
            "id": "countable-shortfall",
            "label": "A requirement the posting states as a number or a named credential is not covered by the CV: fewer years in the dated history than the figure, or a certification the CV does not hold.",
            "excludes": [],
            "because": ""
          },
          {
            "id": "nothing-to-compare",
            "label": "There is nothing to compare against: the posting has been taken down, or the text now on the page differs from the version applied to and no copy of that version was kept.",
            "excludes": [],
            "because": ""
          }
        ]
      }
    ],
    "specimens": [
      {
        "kind": "email",
        "label": "Rejection email",
        "subject": "Update on your application",
        "context": "day 9, sent at 03:14 local time",
        "lines": [
          {
            "text": "Thank you for your interest in our company and for the time you invested in the process.",
            "tell": false
          },
          {
            "text": "After careful consideration we have decided to move forward with candidates whose profiles more closely align with the requirements of the role.",
            "tell": true
          },
          {
            "text": "We wish you the best in your search and encourage you to apply for future openings.",
            "tell": false
          }
        ],
        "reading": "Nothing in the text is specific to this candidate, this conversation or this role. The message is a routing decision rendered as prose."
      },
      {
        "kind": "chat",
        "label": "Request for specifics, and the reply",
        "lines": [
          {
            "speaker": "Candidate",
            "at": "day 9",
            "text": "Thanks for letting me know. If it is possible, I would value one line on which requirement was the gap — it would genuinely help me aim better.",
            "tell": false
          },
          {
            "speaker": "Recruiter",
            "at": "day 11",
            "text": "Unfortunately we are not able to share individual feedback. It was a very competitive process.",
            "tell": true
          }
        ],
        "reading": "The follow-up returns the same shape of answer. A template that survives a direct question is a policy, not an opinion about you."
      }
    ],
    "perspectives": [
      {
        "actor": "actor.candidate",
        "sees": "A message sent at 03:14 with no sentence specific to this candidate, this role or this conversation, and a follow-up that returns the same wording.",
        "reads": "The text is the standard wording for this outcome. Which requirement was the gap is not stated in it, and asking returned the template again.",
        "does": "Records the date and the exact wording, and compares the wording of the CV against the requirements as they were published, since the message names no gap to work from."
      },
      {
        "actor": "actor.recruiter",
        "sees": "A rejection step in the queue and, afterwards, a request for one line of specifics.",
        "reads": "The wording is the one approved for this outcome; what the panel scored beyond a recommendation is not in the recruiter's record either.",
        "does": "Sends the approved wording and answers within it, because anything more specific is quoted back afterwards as a stated reason."
      },
      {
        "actor": "actor.employer_policy",
        "sees": "One approved wording covering every rejection at every stage, and the disclosure rule that sets what may be given as a reason.",
        "reads": "Identical wording across all outcomes is what makes each of them consistent and defensible if any one is challenged.",
        "does": "Sets the template once for the whole funnel; the hours a candidate spends inferring a reason from it are not a figure this layer holds."
      }
    ],
    "non_inferences": [
      "Does not establish which specific skill was deemed insufficient.",
      "Does not establish whether a human reviewer read the full resume."
    ]
  }
}