Recruitment in the age of AI

1

Does anybody have any best practice to share in preventing or filtering applications that are written by machines?

We have made it clear we are looking for human-drafted text, and yet we are swamped in machine applications where people claim to have experience in the abstract with no relation to their CV. (Not to mention the carbon copy motivation statement repeated over 100s of times.) We spent between 2-3 staff days simply filtering these out last recruitment round.

I’m doubtful about cloud applications that claim to act as “AI detectors” and I believe there are serious privacy issues to contend with there anyways.

I’ve read some organisations have kind of given up on shortlisting from textual applications and are doing lightning rounds of interviews with a longer list of people based on CVs. I’m not sure this is ultimately really a time-saver.

Then of course many large institutions in the US and UK have started instituting “automated interviews” which I find abhorrent and likely discriminatory. What a world.

Any relevant human experiences, tips or tricks would be greatly appreciated.

(Just for laughs, I thought this professor was clever to include a hidden prompt in his essay assignment, but I can’t see us doing that :sweat_smile: https://www.huffpost.com/entry/history-professor-ai-cheating-students_n_69178150e4b0781acfd62540/amp)

1 Like
2

very interested in any responses you get to this.

My personal current position as someone also on the frontline of recruitment is that there’s no way to stop candidates from using it, and that for some people it reduces a barrier to applying and therefore could be an accessibility tool, so accepting/accommodating its usage is necessary to some extent. But should one judge an application that’s clearly used AI with the same metrics as one that has not, how does it factor into scoring and interviews… no idea. That’s as far as I have got :joy: