It’s higher than I thought it was. Prior to this year in our CandE Benchmark Research, it was an anecdotal question for participating employers – do you use artificial intelligence (AI) to screen and/or match and/or rank candidate applications that come in.
Many have said no to date, but now that we’ve included an answer this year to the question about utilizing AI recruiting technology in screening applications, 39% of employers said yes this year, and 22% said they’re considering it for this year and next.
That’s important for those who have had significant current volumes of applications and/or significant increases in application volume.
But it should come as no surprise after analyzing thousands of candidate comments in this year’s CandE Benchmark Research (which we’re still collecting data for) that one of the top 3 negative sentiment themes across industries is this:
AI/Automated Screening Issues: A significant concern is the reliance on AI/bots for initial resume screening, leading to quick rejections of otherwise qualified candidates who may not match specific keywords.
Which still isn’t true for the majority of employers. At least today. And the pre-screening questions (knockout questions) used during the application process aren’t AI. It’s helpful screening automation we’ve had since the beginning of ATS time, but it’s not AI or bots.
However, the AI transformation-misinformation train has already left the station, and the misconceptions around AI in recruiting and hiring for both candidates and employers are now runaway trains.
Employers we work with are trying to slow their runaway train with consistent and timely messaging that is personable and emphasizes “human recruiters review and screen all candidates”.
Which still is (mostly) true for the majority of companies today, because even when using AI screening tools to “bucket” more qualified applicants to review, the humans are reviewing candidates in those very buckets.
It’s also true that more candidates are using AI tech to help them in their job search, but our current CandE Benchmark data still shows that only 13% of candidates are using generative AI specifically to improve their resumes and cover letters, and only 3% are using AI-powered application platforms to apply for jobs. That could be underreported, but I know the companies we work with would like to post “super-powered serial bot appliers need not apply”.
Besides candidates complaining about being screened out by AI, another major negative sentiment theme in this year’s candidate comments across industries is around technical and system problems:
Technical/System Issues: Candidates encountered glitches and difficulties with online application portals, scheduling tools, and background check processes. These technical problems often added to frustration and delays, sometimes preventing candidates from completing the process or believing their application was properly submitted.
That’s not a new complaint. Actually, candidates complaining about recruiting technologies not working for them “period” isn’t new. Especially when they ultimately aren’t selected and they don’t get a job offer.
It’s the worst candidate market since the mortgage crisis and covid, except for industries like healthcare, and of course AI, but even then it sucks for too many today including new grads, professional candidates, management candidates, and, well, everyone.
Job candidates are going off the rails on this crazy AI recruiting tech train. So are recruiters and hiring managers. Employers have to figure out how to use AI in selection ethically, with compliance guardrails and “brakes” in place, and work with their vendors to help ensure that selection bias is reduced as much as possible. They also need to clean up and optimize their tech stack more than they’ve ever done, apply for their own jobs and experience their own processes, to prevent the brand-busting train wrecks to come.
