Dive Brief:
- Job candidates are unhappy with how artificial intelligence is being used in the hiring process, with 70% saying they were never told ahead of time that AI would be evaluating them, according to new research from hiring platform Greenhouse.
- The report found that 1 in 5 job seekers only discovered AI was being used once a job interview started. Meanwhile, 38% of U.S. candidates said they have already withdrawn from a hiring process because it included an AI interview, while only 12% said they would sit through an AI interview if it was required.
- In the U.S., the top reasons job seekers abandon the interview process are pre-recorded video interviews scored by AI with no human present (33%), companies failing to disclose how AI would be used (27%), AI monitoring during the interview process (26%) and a required AI-led interview (26%).
Dive Insight:
Out of 2,950 active job seekers across the U.S., U.K., Ireland, Germany and Australia surveyed for the report, 63% said they’ve been interviewed by an AI, up 13 percentage points from six months ago. Yet Greenhouse said that while AI interviews have become mainstream, early use of the tech has failed in terms of transparency, trust and candidate experience.
Fewer than 1 in 5 job seekers (18%) said employers had clear AI policies, but 57% said they believed disclosure should be legally mandated.
Nonetheless, job candidates said they found nearly identical bias from AI and humans. Thirty-six percent said they felt age bias from both humans and AI, while 27% said they perceived race or ethnicity bias from both.
“Most AI in hiring today is making a bad system worse: more applications, less signal, and less transparency,” Greenhouse CEO Daniel Chait said in a statement. “But the process AI is being built on top of was already broken.”
However, only 19% of U.S. candidates said they want less AI in hiring. The rest said they wanted the same or more, albeit with certain safety measures. Those include up-front disclosure, clear explanations about what AI is measuring and the option to request a human interviewer. In addition, 38% said they wanted to know that AI decisions are reviewed by a human before a hiring decision is made, and 29% said they wanted evidence that AI tools were audited for bias.
“Candidates are telling us exactly what they want, and it isn’t complicated: tell them when AI is in the room and what it’s measuring,” Sharawn Tipton, chief people officer at Greenhouse, said in a statement. “Right now, most employers are failing that test.”
She added that when candidates sense bias from AI, it can affect a company’s reputation.
“Until we get honest about what these tools are actually measuring and own it when they get it wrong, we’re just repackaging the same problem,” Tipton said.
A 2025 study published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Arts and Sciences found that candidates are also adapting to AI hiring tools by stressing analytical skills and downplaying intuitive and emotional skills if they believe AI is assessing them. As a result, HR managers may not be able to accurately assess the true capabilities of potential employees.