Something interesting happened to me last week: I applied to a position and then received a text from someone named Jamie about setting up a time to talk about the job description. At the moment, I was busy, so I didn't answer the text, however, about 10 minutes later, my caller ID said, " Maybe: Jamie". I picked up because I figured, "Why not do this now?", until I heard a robotic voice.
"Hello, this is Jamie from (Company). I am calling to talk to you about the position and ask some questions to see if this job is a good fit. I will ask you some questions and then you can answer. This session will be recorded."
I was immediately turned off and hung up. To have a robot/AI call and ask you questions about something as important as possible employment seems so impersonal, but I'm sure to a company, it may seem efficient.
Are these recordings being reviewed by humans?
I know that may seem like a silly question, but considering recruiters and companies are using AI to sort through everything, including resumes and job applications, I think it's a very important question that can add some context to the selection process. Last week, I was interviewed by a company that disclosed that they have AI create transcripts of their telephone agents' conversations with customers, and then the AI scans said transcripts and grades them with "Neutral, Good, or Bad." as part of their metrics. Is it efficient? Probably, but what about context?
AI is not perfect, and biases are embedded in it's training more often than not, so I feel this could be a problem, especially if it is used in the employment process. What steps are being taken for those whose first language may not be English?
And then there are the security risks...
We have something in cybersecurity called the "inherence factor" which often appears in the form of biometrics— something unique to us like fingerprints, retina scans or voice recognition.
What happens to the recordings if we don't get the job?
How do we know if our biometric data isn't being used?
What is the company's data retention policy (how long are you keeping my voice in your system)?
Let's say the company is ethical and has good intentions : is my biometric data secure from hacking?
I feel that companies should have the answers to these questions readily available before using AI. It's become a trend to use AI in almost everything that we do to streamline processes and cut costs, but we also seem to be cutting out the human aspect of finding a good fit for a position.
What are your thoughts on AI interviews? Are they the future?
If you've had a similar experience, please share in the comments!
Picture credit : Illustration: Shoshana Gordon/Axios
Top comments (10)
If I get a phone call and it's an AI impersonating a human being, I only continue talking if he's alerting me about a Terminator on the hunt.
I have a LOT of concerns about AI and automation, most of them related to lazy/badly configured ones. Especially if it's making business decisions.
Paulo, you make an excellent point! A friend of mine mentioned that so many of the AI/automation programs are badly configured which often eliminates great talent.
There's no way I would (at this point) depend on AI to make business decisions. It's just too early for that.
I mean, it's not like AI didn't already make companies look bad, right?
Air Canada Has to Honor a Refund Policy Its Chatbot Made Up - wired.com/story/air-canada-chatbot...
Yep, nodding along to all your questions. We'll see how this plays out in the next few years. 😐
Thank you, Jess for reading! It just feels so shortsighted, and honestly, I have a bit of disdain for recruiters that wag their fingers at potentials for using AI to build their resumes and describe it as lazy, but at the worst, we are simply trying to get ahead and make it past the AI that they are using, too.
That's bizarre, I would have hung up too.
I don't have so much of a problem with AI evaluating resumes because I imagine they can be fairly good at that (while missing some nuance and probably judging "unconventional" candidates unfairly), and it's just a dead piece of paper.
But when it comes time to call a real live human, it needs to be another real live human doing the calling. That's just basic courtesy. Not to mention that AI isn't nearly advanced enough yet to do this job well.
I agree -- if the AI is configured correctly, it should be fairly good at that. However, from what I am hearing from recruiters, ATS is often misconfigured, and it eliminates talent.
It's dehumanising, and TBH I would have big doubts about working for any company employing such methods. If they can't be bothered to give their time to you, why give yours to them? It's totally disrespectful
Voice recording can be used in impersonating and financial scams...
Just saying.
I wouldn't have a problem with it if I thought it was an actual fully developed system. But how would we know? The questions you bring up are exactly what we need to know.