An upcoming crisis in the age of AI
Managers, recruiters, and job seekers were promised that AI-driven hiring would make the process faster, fairer, and more efficient. Instead, what we got was a system that strips away human judgment, favors homogeneity, and turns job applications into a bitter rejection process.
AI and automation in recruiting were meant to solve problems—but for many, they’ve only created new ones. As hiring managers, recruiters, and candidates experience these new tools, frustrations are mounting. The very technology designed to improve hiring is killing diversity and making the candidate experience worse for everyone involved.
Manager’s headache
While hiring managers used to have meaningful conversations with recruiters about candidates, about desired profile characteristics and skills, the process feels more like a list of one-dimensional criteria (number of years of experience, language, etc). Once fed into the system, the filtering process provides a shortlist generated by an algorithm that supposedly selects the “best” candidates. The problem? The system weeds out great talent for the wrong reasons.
The AI favors keywords, formatting, and arbitrary data points over what makes an individual whole, its unique combination of experience, competences and potential. If a candidate’s résumé doesn’t match the exact wording in the job description, they’re gone. If their experience comes from an unconventional background, they’re invisible to the system. We see exceptional professionals—diverse candidates, career changers, and self-taught experts—completely ignored because they don’t fit the AI’s rigid mold.
And the selected applicants all look very similar. The algorithm prioritizes what has “worked” in the past, which means it replicates the same hiring patterns over and over again, reinforcing bias instead of breaking it… and killing diversity (Yes, I know – this is not the fashion of the moment, but I am confident that we will come to our senses and realize the great benefits of diversity).
Deprived recruiter
As a recruiter, the job was once about relationships: skimming through résumés, talking to candidates, and advocating for people who had unique skills or compelling stories. Today, most of the time is spent on fighting an automated system that decides who gets a shot and who doesn’t—often for arbitrary reasons.
AI-powered applicant tracking systems (ATS) reject candidates for the smallest inconsistencies. Even worse, some AI systems discriminate based on factors they shouldn’t—like gaps in employment (which disproportionately affect women and caregivers) or names that don’t fit a Western mold.
When recruiters, especially Head Hunters, receive a list of candidates who all look alike, how can they prove their added value (which is scouting the market and presenting strong applicants with various strengths and backgrounds)?
The solution: diving into the intricacies of the system, tweaking job descriptions, gaming the algorythm to discover the well hidden gems of short list level 2, long list or no list. By using AI that prioritizes efficiency over fairness, recruiters have just been deprived of the heart of their mission – their intuition and judgement.
Disheartened candidates
As for job seekers, applying for jobs has never felt more dehumanizing. So much effort is put in the application letter and résumé, then… Nothing. No response. No feedback. Just silence.
The candidate doesn’t even know if the application has been seen by a human. Maybe it got filtered out because of missing the right buzzwords. Maybe it wasn’t in the AI’s preferred salary range. Maybe there was a gap in employment history that the system automatically flagged as a red flag.
Best case, a generic automated email bursts in within a few hours of the application, reinforcing the cold and impersonal feeling, confirming the absence of human intervention. Are companies even trying to hire the best people, or just the ones who can game the system best?
The False Promise of AI in Hiring
AI was supposed to make recruiting better. Instead, it’s made it harder for hiring managers to find talent, for recruiters to advocate for candidates, and for job seekers to even get their foot in the door.
Companies say they care about diversity, but their AI-driven hiring processes are reinforcing the same biases they claim to fight. They say they want to improve candidate experience, but automation has made it colder and more frustrating than ever.
The solution? Bring back the human element. AI should assist in hiring—not replace human judgment. Recruiters should have the power to override flawed algorithms. Hiring managers should be able to see a broader range of candidates, not just those the AI deems “acceptable.” And candidates deserve transparency, feedback, and an actual chance to be seen.
Until we fix this, we’re not just losing great candidates—we’re losing the soul of recruiting itself.
What’s your experience with AI in hiring? Have you felt the impact as a recruiter, hiring manager, or job seeker? Let’s talk about it in the comments.
Conseil en stratégie et organisation 
Leave a comment