Disclosure on AI use in spotlight amid rising uncertainty from jobseekers
Being silent on how artificial intelligence (AI) is used in hiring can sow distrust in the entire process, according to an expert, as new research suggests jobseekers who have encountered AI in hiring view it more positively than negatively.
Trent Cotton, head of talent insights at talent acquisition platform iCIMS, warned employers that being silent on AI use in the hiring process is "not neutral."
"When employers don't say anything about how AI is used, candidates don't conclude that nothing happened. Disclosure is particularly important when AI is being used to evaluate candidates," Cotton said in the latest iCIMS report.
He pointed out that not having an explanation of where AI is involved or how AI influences hiring decisions will leave candidates with limited information about the process.
"That uncertainty raises questions about transparency and accountability, regardless of whether the technology is being used responsibly," he said.
Widespread concerns on AI use
Cotton issued the warning amid widespread concerns among jobseekers about how AI influences hiring decisions, eroding their trust in the entire process.
A poll from Gartner last year revealed that 25% of employees globally would trust their employers less if they used AI to evaluate their information.
A recent iHire report also showed that 44.3% of jobseekers are increasingly looking at employers' use of AI in hiring as negative.
But this experience is not absolute, according to the year-end iCIMS research, which polled 1,000 jobseekers in the US. It found that 44% have never encountered AI screening in their search this year, while just 32% encountered it several times or in most of their applications.
Their experiences with AI also varied, according to the iCIMS report. Most candidates reported limited encounters with automated interview scheduling, AI-scored assessments, and AI-generated communications.
"We have treated AI in hiring like it's already total, when for most candidates, it's still occasional," Cotton said.
"While the technology is becoming more common, candidates' experiences suggest adoption is uneven across hiring activities."
Their perception is also mixed, with 45% of jobseekers encountering AI in hiring saying the effect was positive. Just 21% said it was negative.
Another 42% of candidates who went through automated screening believed they were evaluated fairly, while 33% were concerned that they were not.
"That's a more positive response than much of the conversation about AI in hiring might suggest," Cotton said.
"It also raises another question: if candidates aren't overwhelmingly negative about their experiences with AI, what concerns remain about how employers are using it?"
How to be transparent on AI use
The research suggests there is "room for employers to improve transparency," according to Cotton, who noted a "recurring reluctance among talent leaders when explaining how AI is being used in hiring."
Cotton found that some talent leaders are treating it as proprietary information, while others have not yet determined how much information should be relayed.
"But as AI becomes more involved in screening, assessments, and other hiring activities, employers need to consider what candidates should reasonably know about the process," Cotton said.
"That doesn't necessarily require a lengthy explanation. It could be as straightforward as telling candidates when AI will be used to evaluate their responses, what role it plays in the decision, and where human review occurs."
Whether greater disclosure improves candidate confidence is something worth examining as AI adoption continues, according to Cotton.
"For now, the practical question is fairly simple: If AI is influencing a hiring decision, does the candidate understand how?"
