It could be more beneficial for certain job searchers to converse with a bot.
Compared to candidates vetted by human recruiters, candidates interviewed by an AI speech agent had a 12% higher chance of receiving a job offer, according to a recent research. Additionally, they were more likely to begin working and remain after 30 days.
This hiring attempt was a bet for the experienced recruiters. They were proven incorrect by the AI. According to the survey, 78% of candidates chose the AI interviewer over a human recruiter when given the option.
In order to compare AI and human recruiters in a comprehensive hiring experiment, behavioral economist Luca Henkel of Erasmus University Rotterdam and economist Brian Jabarian of the University of Chicago Booth School of Business teamed up with international recruitment business PSG Global Solutions.
The experiment included over 70,000 individuals vying for entry-level customer service positions across 48 job advertisements in the Philippines. The positions were with 23 Fortune 500 businesses and 20 European enterprises.
Applicants were randomly allocated to one of three interview conditions: human recruiter, AI recruiter, or a combination of the two.
Human recruiters evaluated transcripts and a standardized language and analytical abilities exam before making the final recruiting choice in each instance. The researchers were able to isolate one variable—the interview conversation—thanks to that strategy.
The AI and humans used the same interview guide. After asking about eligibility, it went on to discuss career objectives and prior work experience before concluding with job specifics. The results, however, varied.
Why AI performed better
9.73% of candidates interviewed by AI recruiters were offered jobs, compared to 8.7% of those interviewed by human recruiters.
The study also discovered that they were 18% more likely to begin job and 17% more likely to remain employed after 30 days.
The researchers discovered that AI interviews, which used natural language processing, were more organized, covered a wider range of subjects, and promoted more detailed responses. Conversational depth and other signs that human recruiters often praise were emphasized in AI-led interviews, while weaker signals like filler responses or pointless queries were minimized.
Upon reviewing the transcripts, recruiters gave AI-interviewed candidates greater scores than those they interviewed in person.
According to Jabarian and Henkel, “AI-led interviews elicited more hiring-relevant information,” and candidates stated that they were just as satisfied with AI recruiters as they were with human ones.
However, the system was not flawless. When they discovered they were interacting with AI, about 5% of candidates left the interview, and in 7% of situations, the agent ran into technical difficulties. Additionally, applicants thought the conversation was less “natural” than speaking to a human.
According to Henkel, AI may be a useful tool in the recruiting process if it is carefully developed without degrading the experience of applicants.
According to Jabarian, they are seeing new ways every day that AI technology is influencing the structure and ethos of the contemporary workplace. Their objective is to provide solid data to support that change.
AI’s impact on recruiting
The usage of AI in hiring and job-search processes has grown. It is being used by companies to go through the hundreds of applications they receive, and by candidates to help customize their resumes.
In May, Emily DeJeu, an assistant professor at Carnegie Mellon University’s Tepper School of Business and an expert in AI communication and etiquette, told that as businesses look to automate and streamline the early hiring process, AI-powered video interviews are probably going to become more popular.
“We by default pursue it — there’s a kind of inevitability to it,” she added, referring to a time and money-saving technology that promises to speed up everything.
According to tech investors, AI might revolutionize hiring.
Former Benchmark general partner Victor Lazarte stated in an April “Twenty Minute VC” podcast that recruiters should be particularly concerned about AI taking their jobs.
He predicted that AI models will eventually outperform humans in interviewing candidates — and much more efficient than corporations’ messy, manual hiring procedures.
Not everyone, though, is convinced. Hundreds of frustrated job searchers reported thousands of rejected applications, while hiring managers said they are inundated with applications, many of which are AI-optimized to appear like a great fit, according to a Business Insider investigation.
AI has turned the recruiting process into a “cat and mouse game” where employers and applicants use technology to attempt to figure each other out, according to Hatim Rahman, an associate professor of management and organizations at Northwestern University.
Consequently, there is a need to identify “more human signals in both the process of searching and applying,” he continued.
