Why the Future of Recruiting Won’t Happen Any Time Soon

No comments

The year we were all to be put out of work by robots.

It’s also the year I expected to be able to pick up my iPhone and say “Siri, I want to hire a marketing manager.” And technology would handle the rest.

Alas, none of these seminal events have come to pass.

So lately, I’ve found myself fantasizing about job search on a newly colonized planet with no long history of entrenched and outdated recruiting tools and mores.

On this fantasy planet of mine, telepathic communication between job seekers and hiring managers has rendered Earth’s current recruiting practices as quaint artifacts of the past.

In this article, I’ll explore why my fantasy — and all the pundits’ futuristic predictions — remain a distant reality.

AI Disappoints

According to a recent HR.com/IBM study, only 25 percent of talent-acquisition professionals feel their recruitment technologies meet their current hiring needs to a high or very high extent.

That’s just the tip of the iceberg:

  • 68 percent of talent professionals have difficulty finding candidates with the right skills
  • 51 percent of talent professionals would like to spend less time sifting through resumes
  • 31 percent of hires are regretted

Lest you conclude that AI is the villain, consider the opinion of Ex-Google engineer Richard Liu, co-founder of Leap.ai — a platform that uses machine learning to analyze resumes, personal values, and job descriptions to suggest perfect-fit candidates for open roles.

“Resumes suck!” Liu declared in a Fast Company interview back in 2017.

And, if we’re all honest, the humble resume hasn’t improved much in the last two years.

If Liu is still correct (and I think he is), AI’s lackluster performance in the job search space could all come down to an old adage:

Garbage in, garbage out. Which begs a poignant question.

Why is Liu building a job search innovation around something as faulty and outdated as the resume?

Is this really the best the future of recruiting has to offer?

Rethinking the Resume

Also in 2017, Jennifer Carpenter, Accenture’s former global head of recruiting, predicted the death of resumes.

Similar to Nietzsche declaring God was dead almost a century later than Hegel, Carpenter wasn’t the first to sound the resume death knell.

My company is still hand-crafting resumes for senior executives. It’s safe to say they’re not going away anytime soon.

However, life beyond the resume could happen easily — and instantly.

LinkedIn is the most likely usurper of the resume. But while they may possess the technology to achieve this in a flash, candidate and corporate privacy are complex blockades that demand to be untangled.

For example, Intel (or any top corporation, really) wouldn’t want detailed information about their executives’ accomplishments to be readily available on the Internet.

And yet, this information would need to be made available to enhance the quality of data being fed into AI recruitment tools.

Lack of AI regulation is a growing issue, and one that I’ve explored in its own right. I invite you to check out my interview with global AI expert, Professor Toby Walsh on how AI might transform the future of recruiting — and the society — for both better and worse.

Killing the Resume

Imagine a world where we were able to regulate AI recruiting tools, conquer privacy concerns, and eliminate the resume altogether.

Freelance platforms such as Upwork, Expert360, and TopTal have already given us glimpses into this utopian future of recruiting.

Their platforms have largely stripped the resume out of the equation through the use of Amazon-like internal systems of reviews and ratings.

This could this work for non-freelance employees. LinkedIn’s current capabilities are nipping at the heels of this reality.

But while ratings and reviews offer hope, they’ve only been proven on freelancer/contractor platforms, where hiring decisions are made primarily by evaluating hard skills. Hiring softer-skilled talent such as a Head of HR through a system like this may prove to be problematic…

Source: ERE

TRG Guide

Sponsored By