Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Recruiters are going analog to fight the AI application overload

wired.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 119 posts

Re: Recruiters are going analog to fight the AI application overload

#91

Post by marcosdumay »

Aurornis wrote: post #58

I've participated in a coaching and resume review program for many years. Most college students always struggled to write resumes, but at least they were aware of their shortcomings and reached out for help. Something about ChatGPT has convinced a lot of them that they don't need help or even to put much effort into the process. They hate writing resumes, so they just dump some words into a ChatGPT prompt and copy-pa…

The exact same dynamic used to happen with Word templates, and I'm sure there were something similar before it.

Then entire idea of a resume is garbage, the thing is useless for filtering candidates, and everybody that actually succeeds at either side of the hiring game does it by not relying on resumes. Yet hiring professionals insist this is the way, worldwide.

Re: Recruiters are going analog to fight the AI application overload

#92

Post by patrickmay »

williamdclt wrote: post #88
vundercind wrote: post #66

This has long seemed like the obvious solution, to me, for publications that saw an untenable spike in submissions for the same reason. Just make ‘em print and send a it in the mail. Instant reduction by 95+%, most of the best stuff still comes in.

> most of the best stuff still comes in I don’t see why “the best stuff” would be more acceptant to printing than the rest. Actually I’d expect that the best candidates won’t bend over backwards to submit their application, they have choice

I suspect it's not the printing but the postage that adds the most friction.

Re: Recruiters are going analog to fight the AI application overload

#93

Post by vundercind »

williamdclt wrote: post #88
vundercind wrote: post #66

This has long seemed like the obvious solution, to me, for publications that saw an untenable spike in submissions for the same reason. Just make ‘em print and send a it in the mail. Instant reduction by 95+%, most of the best stuff still comes in.

> most of the best stuff still comes in I don’t see why “the best stuff” would be more acceptant to printing than the rest. Actually I’d expect that the best candidates won’t bend over backwards to submit their application, they have choice

If you can provide much-faster decisions, that’s huge. You’d not turn off serious submissions that way. Many of these want to have an exclusive option at the story for months because their workload is so high. Cut that to even 60 days and you’d make writers very happy.

Re: Recruiters are going analog to fight the AI application overload

#94

Post by mathgeek »

kthejoker2 wrote: post #10
altdataseller wrote: post #8

This problem is exasperated by the fact that recruiters are often the ones getting laid off first in a downturn or cost effiency initiative. So there’s even less humans filtering through applications. Even though it’s an issue I really don’t see companies spending a ton of time and energy fixing it. As mentioned in the article, they could simply stop posting jobs on LinkedIn or rely only on inbound candidates. It’s n…

Exacerbated*

Both words are appropriate, as exasperated means “made worse or more intense”. They are synonyms.

Re: Recruiters are going analog to fight the AI application overload

#95

Post by ics »

mathgeek wrote: post #94
kthejoker2 wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exacerbated*

Both words are appropriate, as exasperated means “made worse or more intense”. They are synonyms.

Exasperated, or exasperation, is a feeling experienced by a person. Exacerbation describes a change in quality of something (usually inanimate).

Re: Recruiters are going analog to fight the AI application overload

#96

Post by mathgeek »

ics wrote: post #95
mathgeek wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Both words are appropriate, as exasperated means “made worse or more intense”. They are synonyms.

Exasperated, or exasperation, is a feeling experienced by a person. Exacerbation describes a change in quality of something (usually inanimate).

Correct, although IMHO it’s also fine to use exacerbation in this specific example (if you see the problem from a process standpoint instead of the frustration faced by job seekers and recruiters).

Re: Recruiters are going analog to fight the AI application overload

#97

Post by dangus »

> …in one case when the person moved on to the next interview, they couldn’t answer questions about the task. “Not only have they wasted their time, but they wasted my time,” says the recruiter. “It’s really frustrating.”

I’m on the prospective employee’s side here. If I had to do a complex task for every application I’d be driven mad. That’s a waste of the applicant’s time.

Plus, the employee you should want to hire is the employee that can do tasks in the most creative low effort way. Why should I hire the employee who takes 8 hours to grind through a task when the employee who uses ChatGPT to bust it out in 1 hour gets the same correct output?

Company recruiters have had the leg up on applicants for years with ATS systems. I’m glad the applicants have flipped the script and forced the recruiters to actually do work to find good candidates.

Re: Recruiters are going analog to fight the AI application overload

#98

Post by dangus »

hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #40

The interesting thing to me reading this is that it's basically saying how much recruiters and hiring managers dislike/are wary of this AI-infused job application process. On the flip side, I've heard tons of complaints on the other side from job seekers: not just that job hunting is hard in a down market, but that the reign of modern ATSes means that it's a constant "battle against the algorithm" to even get noticed…

You hit the nail on the head there.

All these applicant aid products like AutoApplyAI are solving the problem that employers created. It’s been a huge burden for applicants to go through the process. Any tool I can use to automate my job application process is something I’m going to immediately be interested in.

Plus, applicants need the job to survive, while the employers aren’t really on that same level of desperation.

Re: Recruiters are going analog to fight the AI application overload

#99

Post by fakedang »

nnurmanov wrote: post #59
mead5432 wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I generally agree that relying on a network and human referrals is the way to go but building an effective network is much harder than it used to be. Meetup groups and local conferences were a good source to make connections pre-pandemic but that has really withered in the last couple years. Past collaborators are also a great source but she is junior and doesn’t really have any she can leverage. My initial advice to…

My suggestion is to focus on a fewer number of companies, instead of sending resume in bulk. When you narrow your choices you can study well and notice bugs or issues that need to be addressed. Fix them, send the results to someone in the company, it will increase your chances substantially.

Tried this before, doesn't work.

I've had more success sharing financial models on printed paper, than on working on code for free, building plugins and the like.

Re: Recruiters are going analog to fight the AI application overload

#100

Post by rad_gruchalski »

surfingdino wrote: post #73
LikelyABurner wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The thing that especially infuriates me is recruiters in this article turning around and trying to throw LinkedIn under the bus. No one likes the nightmare dystopia of a platform that is LinkedIn. The only reason most people I know have LinkedIn accounts in the first place is because HR types have outsourced so much of their job to LinkedIn that it's viewed as professional suicide to not have a LinkedIn profile with…

What gets me is that they request a CV even though my whole work history is already on LI. My CV is just a reformatted LI profile. But then again, recruiters are mostly sociology, political science, or philosophy grads who chose an easy degree thinking they were clever and found themselves being used as a mop in the Victorian sweatshop that is the recruitment industry.

They require your cv for at least two reasons: 1) to figure out how serious you are, or do you expect they send a screenshot of your LinkedIn profile to their client? if you want to talk to their client, do your homework, if you can’t be bothered, well, will you be bothered when you join? 2) due diligence-are you who you say you are? is your cv in line with your LinkedIn, or are you just one of those AI generated clowns?
Post reply on HN