Recruitment Bingo
The jobs market is crowded. Very crowded. More people. Fewer jobs. It does not take a genius to see the problem.
Employers receive hundreds of applications. Sometimes thousands. One advert on LinkedIn can attract a tidal wave of CVs before the hiring manager has finished their first coffee.
HR teams cannot read them all. Not properly. Not fairly. Not in the time available.
So organisations reach for technology. Enter AI.
Automated systems scan CVs. They look for keywords. They rank candidates. They quietly reject most applicants before a human being ever sees their name.
It sounds efficient. And in many ways it is.
But applicants have noticed.
As Lydia Miller, co-founder of the recruitment platform Ivee, recently pointed out, there are now bots that can apply for 1,000 jobs while you sleep. Each application is tailored. Each CV tweaked for the algorithm.
Your AI meets my AI.
And suddenly the recruitment process starts to look like an arms race.
Research backs this up. Studies from Harvard Business School suggest automated screening systems routinely filter out capable candidates simply because their CV does not match the exact wording the system expects.
Good people disappear into the digital void.
So job seekers respond the only way they can. They game the system.
There are AI tools that rewrite CVs in seconds. Others generate cover letters that sound thoughtful, committed and just a little bit desperate for the role. Some will even rehearse interview answers.
A candidate can now produce a polished application faster than they can make toast.
Meanwhile employers install more sophisticated filters. More algorithms. More screening tools.
And round we go again.
It would be funny if it was not slightly absurd.
Picture the scene. An AI writes the CV. Another AI screens the CV. A chatbot schedules the interview. A candidate uses AI to prepare answers. Then the employer uses AI to analyse the candidate’s tone of voice and facial expression.
At some point you wonder whether any humans are actually involved.
The danger is obvious. Everyone is optimising for the machine, not the job.
The CV becomes a game of keyword bingo. The cover letter becomes polished but empty. The process becomes longer, colder and strangely less human.
And nobody is convinced it works particularly well.
According to surveys reported by the Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development, many employers admit they worry good candidates are being screened out too early by automated tools.
Job seekers worry their application disappears into a black hole.
Trust is not high on either side.
The irony is that both sides are trying to save time. Employers want fewer unsuitable applications. Candidates want a fair chance.
Instead we have created a system where technology is fighting technology.
The result? More applications. More automation. More frustration.
And perhaps less genuine connection.
At some point someone will rediscover the radical idea of a human reading a CV.
Slow. Yes. Old-fashioned. Possibly.
But at least the AI would finally get a day off.
Blair Mcpherson former Director author and blogger blairmcpherson.co.uk
