When it comes to AI in employment, there is a disconnect between how employers and job seekers view the technology.
Indeed’s recent global AI survey found that 92% of U.S. HR and talent acquisition leaders are already using AI systems and tools in some way. However, a 2023 Pew Research Center survey found that the majority of Americans (61%) have no idea that their employers are using AI in recruiting.
While most U.S. employers are optimistic about the impact of AI on the workplace over the next 1-5 years (60%), job seekers are less optimistic (54%). In fact, job seekers are more afraid of the potential impact of technology (25%) than employers (16%). When asked what they were most concerned about, 47% of job seekers said AI would replace human judgment and intuition in hiring decisions. There have also already been reports of problematic AI systems impacting applicants.
So what can you, as an employer, do to reassure wary candidates that you are not outsourcing your recruitment to an algorithm?
We consulted three experts. Indeed’s Vice President of Data Science is Donal McMahon. Indeed, Hannah Calhoun, Head of AI Innovation. Alan Walker, co-founder of Udder, a consulting business that helps talent leaders leverage AI and other technologies.
Breaking through the AI wall
Generative AI is becoming more accessible. However, job seekers who are older, have lower incomes, or lack higher education are less likely to take advantage of such tools. This is important for the recruitment process, as using AI to create applications gives candidates an edge by increasing their chances of passing the automated selection process.
To level the playing field for applicants who are new to or familiar with AI, start by clearly communicating how AI will be encountered in the hiring process.
“Transparency is always a great way to build trust,” Calhoun said. “Helping a candidate understand where in the process the application interacts with her AI tools is extremely helpful.”
McMahon noted that mistakes are bound to occur when incorporating new systems such as AI into recruitment, so transparency also provides an opportunity to solicit feedback for improvements. “It gives us a chance to fix it the next time, and that creates a very powerful cycle that allows us to fix it the next time.” [experience] And then the next one gets even better,” he said.
And because these tools are created by humans, their screening tends to be influenced by the same systematic biases that affect human decision-making. In Indeed’s AI survey, 60% of job seekers expressed concerns about bias in the data that trains their employers’ AI recruitment systems.
McMahon advised collecting and analyzing data at every stage of the hiring process to identify and avoid unintentional bias. Indeed’s AI Principles, released by the Responsible AI team, ensure a fair and impartial process when introducing new technology.
McMahon advises other companies to write down what is important to them and what will guide their decisions, not just on a macro level, but in every tool they use and every interview they conduct. I recommend that.”
Walker cautions employers to build AI processes slowly to avoid accidentally escalating biased behavior. “It’s important to be very careful when testing,” he says. “You can never predict what will happen if you expand to more candidates, but if you test enough candidates enough times and then expand slightly, you can do more without doing too much damage. We can stop faster.”
Fortunately, it’s easy to fix the problem within automation. “Humans may make mistakes for a variety of reasons, but what you build is probably making mistakes for the same reason every time,” Walker says. “That means it could be easier to fix.”
Avoid the resume black hole
Many job seekers find that AI tools focus too much on keywords and ignore the detailed candidate story. When you apply for a job, you don’t know what algorithms or selection methods the employer uses, or whether it automatically sends your resume into the virtual abyss.
These concerns are not unfounded. According to a report from JobScan, nearly 99% of Fortune 500 companies filter candidates through applicant tracking systems, and these systems can be flawed. The company’s technology compares resumes and job descriptions and ranks candidates based on their impressive 70-80% match in keywords. This can unnecessarily exclude skilled candidates who may not be using the “right” terminology in their resumes.
In fact, 88% of executives know their company’s screening tools are rejecting qualified candidates, according to a 2021 Harvard Business School study. Furthermore, nearly half are aware that ATS will automatically reject candidates with gaps in their resumes of six months or more, even if the gaps are due to military deployment, caregiving duties, or medical conditions. are doing.
In a tight labor market, organizations cannot afford to lose out on qualified candidates based on their expertise. If too many keywords in your job description may unduly reduce the number of candidates filtered by your ATS, consider including only the minimum required skills.
Calhoon emphasized the importance of building quality assurance into AI-enhanced processes to avoid mis-screening potential talent. This can be as simple as him checking an AI-generated email before hitting the send button, or taking a closer look at a candidate’s profile after reading a promising summary.
“Everyone wants to know that their job application has been vetted and is being seen in the best light possible,” Calhoun said. “Even if you’re dealing with a huge pool of candidates and it makes sense to leverage automation and AI to streamline workflows, it still makes sense for talent to interact with humans, ask questions, and introduce themselves during recruitment. Make sure you have moments.”
Don’t sacrifice the humanity of hiring
A pressing concern among job seekers is that the use of AI in recruitment will replace the personal touch. Calhoun said it’s important to remember that employment is fundamentally human, and that’s how it should be.
“These are important decisions that impact people’s lives,” Calhoun said. “We’re trying to strengthen the capabilities of TAs and HR departments, but we’re not trying to replace their really smart, thoughtful judgment with algorithms.”
When you post a job on Indeed, AI recommends candidates that match the employer’s requirements. This allows you to select the best candidates and encourage them to apply with personalized messages. This process of using AI to streamline rather than replace human decision-making makes a candidate 17 times more likely to apply for the job than she is.
The challenge for many talent professionals is striking the right balance between machines and humans. Walker often finds solutions through experimentation.
He suggests testing different AI-powered approaches across the market and researching applicant experiences to see what works. For example, try a human high-touch, low-touch technology approach where communications such as initial outreach and interview follow-ups are personalized messages from recruiters. Then do a reverse test where communications are automated to see what works for your candidate base.
“What we’ve found is that certain parts of the world are very comfortable leveraging technology in most processes,” Walker said. “In other parts of the world, when they find out bots are involved, there’s a real backlash. It really depends on the market.” They suggest taking a more technology-focused hiring approach while providing human support if there are concerns.
AI will inevitably transform hiring and business as we know it. While increasing your use of new technology, be careful not to leave your top candidates behind.
This post was created by Indeed. Insider Studio.
