Jobseekers are increasingly utilising artificial intelligence (AI) tools to streamline the application process, leading to significant challenges for HR departments across various industries. As these automated technologies become more accessible, they have introduced a layer of complexity that both employers and applicants must navigate. According to the Financial Times, many large employers have adopted a “zero-tolerance attitude towards the use of AI” in recruitment, highlighting the growing concern over the integrity of the hiring process.

This situation evolves from employers’ past initiatives aimed at refining recruitment methods. In the 2010s, companies implemented automated recruitment technologies to reduce human bias and increase efficiency in candidate selection. Asynchronous video interviews, where candidates respond to questions without an interviewer present, have become increasingly common. However, these impersonal methods have garnered widespread disapproval from applicants, many of whom report feeling confused and dehumanised.

One candidate shared their experience, stating, “I did one of these and it was the hardest and most humiliating experience I’ve ever encountered.” This sentiment echoes a broader discontent among jobseekers, many of whom struggle under the pressure of such technology during high-stakes interviews. In a notable instance, an applicant recounted using a makeshift setup in a hotel room for a dream job interview, only to feel overwhelmed by the situation.

In response to these challenges, jobseekers have turned to generative AI tools like ChatGPT to enhance their application submissions and improve their performance in assessments. Platforms such as TikTok have seen videos demonstrating how to leverage AI in asynchronous interviews, where candidates simply rehearse answers generated by AI.

However, the phenomenon has led to an “AI arms race” that seems to compromise the efficiency and fairness originally intended by these recruitment technologies. Stephen Isherwood, joint chief executive at the Institute of Student Employers, voiced concerns regarding the influx of AI-generated applications, stating, “It does mean you’re getting ever more applications coming.” This saturation complicates the ability for employers to identify truly qualified candidates.

Moreover, different access levels to paid AI tools are creating new disparities in the hiring process. Jamie Betts, founder of assessment company Neurosight, highlighted findings that 31 per cent of male jobseekers reported using a paid AI tool compared to just 18 per cent of female jobseekers. He noted a concerning trend in assessment performance, indicating poorer outcomes for applicants from underrepresented backgrounds.

As a response to the challenges posed by AI in recruitment, some employers are exploring alternative online assessments that are less susceptible to manipulation, including gamified tests. There is also potential for a return to in-person assessment centres to confirm technical skills, a move supported by Isherwood and Betts.

Even companies such as HireVue, which specialise in asynchronous video interviews, acknowledge the need for more dynamic assessment approaches. A report from the company stated, “One of the best ways to reduce cheating behaviour of all types is to utilise a multi-stage workflow,” suggesting that incorporating live interviews could enhance the validity of candidate evaluations.

Employers face a delicate balance between leveraging technology for efficiency and ensuring fairness and equity in recruitment. The ongoing developments in the recruitment landscape illustrate a recognition that technological solutions alone cannot resolve the inherent complexities and challenges of evaluating human potential.

Source: Noah Wire Services