AI in Hiring: Two Sides of the Same Story
From AI-generated resumes to recruiter ghosting, are we losing trust in the very process that’s supposed to bring people together?
The Recruiter’s Perspective: Can We Still Trust the Hiring Process?
AI is changing the way we work, but it’s also changing the way we get hired. And as someone who has spent years in recruiting, I’m starting to wonder, can we still trust the traditional hiring process?
Candidates are using AI to rewrite their resumes to perfectly match job descriptions. On paper, they look like the ideal fit. But when you start asking questions, you sometimes discover that the experience and technical skills aren’t actually there. Technical assessments, once a reliable way to evaluate someone’s abilities, are becoming more complicated too. With tools like Claude capable of generating sophisticated code and solving technical problems, how do we know whether we’re evaluating the candidate’s skills or the AI tools they’re using?
And it doesn’t stop there.
We’re conducting interviews through Google Meet, hiring people we’ve never met in person, and sometimes discovering that candidates aren’t even located where they claim to be. I want to be clear: I’m a huge supporter of remote work, I work remotely and I believe in giving people the benefit of the doubt. I’ve met incredible candidates through virtual interviews, and I know that great talent isn’t limited by geography. But I’d be lying if I said these experiences weren’t sometimes discouraging, frustrating, and even a little scary.
The challenge isn’t that candidates are using AI. AI is here to stay, and knowing how to use it effectively is becoming a valuable professional skill.
The challenge is knowing where AI assistance ends and misrepresentation begins.
The Candidate’s Perspective: A Job Market Full of Frustration
It’s easy to talk about the challenges recruiters are facing, but let’s look at this from a candidate’s perspective.
The job market is difficult, competition can be overwhelming, and candidates are frustrated. They’re applying to dozens, sometimes hundreds, of jobs and hearing absolutely nothing back. And let’s face it, recruiters don’t always have the best reputation. We’ve all heard the complaints about recruiters ghosting candidates, failing to provide feedback, or disappearing after what seemed like a great interview. As a recruiter, I find that frustrating too. But why is this happening?
Are candidates applying to every job they see, regardless of whether they meet the qualifications? Are recruiters so overwhelmed with applications that meaningful communication is becoming impossible? Or has the entire process become so automated that we’ve lost the human connection?
I suspect it’s a combination of all three.
AI has made it easier than ever for candidates to tailor resumes and submit applications. At the same time, recruiters are using AI to streamline workflows, review applications, and manage increasingly complicated hiring processes. In theory, this should make hiring more efficient.
But are we actually making better matches, or are we just moving more people through the process faster?
Are We Losing the Recruiter / Candidate Relationship?
One of the things I’ve always enjoyed most about recruiting is getting to know people. Understanding what motivates someone, what they’re passionate about, what kind of environment they thrive in, and what they’re hoping to accomplish in their career.
A resume can tell me where someone has worked, their education and what they’ve done. But it doesn’t always tell me who they are or whether they’ll be happy and successful in a particular role. And that’s where the relationship between a recruiter and a candidate becomes so important.
At the end of the day, a recruiter wants to make a great hire, and a candidate wants to find a great job. We’re supposed to be working toward the same goal. So where are we missing the mark?
I think part of the problem is that both sides are becoming increasingly skeptical of each other. Recruiters are questioning whether resumes accurately reflect someone’s experience. Candidates are questioning whether job postings are legitimate, whether anyone is actually reviewing their applications, and whether they’ll ever hear back.
When both sides enter the process with doubt, building a genuine relationship becomes that much harder.
Should Candidates Apply to Everything?
This is something I’ve been thinking about quite a bit.
When you’re searching for a job, especially in a difficult market, there’s a natural temptation to apply to as many opportunities as possible. And I understand why. But is submitting 200 applications really more effective than thoughtfully pursuing 20 positions that genuinely align with your experience and interests? There’s no perfect answer. Sometimes candidates need to cast a wider net, especially when opportunities are limited. But I do think there’s value in being intentional.
Research the company. Understand the position. Be honest about your qualifications. And when you have the opportunity, build a relationship with the recruiter rather than treating every application like another transaction. And recruiters need to meet candidates halfway.
That means being transparent about expectations, communicating throughout the process, and remembering that there’s a real person behind every application. Not every candidate will be the right fit, and that’s okay. But candidates deserve clarity and respect, even when the answer is no.
AI Can Make Hiring Faster. Can It Make Hiring Better?
I genuinely believe AI has the potential to improve recruiting.
It can help recruiters spend less time on administrative tasks, organize information, and focus on the parts of the job that require human judgment. And candidates should absolutely be able to use AI to prepare for interviews, improve their resumes, and communicate their experience more effectively. But we need to rethink how we evaluate talent. Maybe a polished resume shouldn’t carry as much weight as it once did. Maybe technical assessments should involve more live discussion and practical problem-solving, with clear expectations about when AI tools can be used. After all, if someone will be using AI in their day-to-day job, shouldn’t we also understand how effectively they can work with it? The goal shouldn’t be to catch candidates using AI. It should be to understand what they actually know, how they think, and what they can contribute.
We also need to remember that hiring isn’t just about technical qualifications. It’s about communication, collaboration, motivation, and finding people who will thrive in the environment you’re building. Those things are much harder to measure through a resume or an automated screening process.
So, Where Do We Go From Here?
I don’t think the resume is completely dead. But I do think its role is changing.
A resume should be the beginning of a conversation, not the final measure of someone’s qualifications. AI isn’t going away, and neither are the challenges it brings to recruiting. But I don’t believe the solution is to approach every candidate with suspicion or automate every part of the hiring process. If anything, I think we need to move in the opposite direction.
More transparency. More meaningful conversations. More trust.
Candidates need to be honest about their experience and thoughtful about the opportunities they pursue. Recruiters need to be responsive, realistic, and willing to look beyond a perfectly formatted resume. And companies need to create hiring processes that evaluate real abilities without losing sight of the people behind them. Because ultimately, hiring isn’t just about filling a position or landing a paycheck. It’s about finding the right people, building great teams, and creating environments where everyone actually enjoys the work they’re doing.
Maybe it’s time to bring the human side of hiring back to life.
