Technology

59605 readers

3302 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

Follow the lemmy.world rules.
Only tech related content.
Be excellent to each another!
Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
Politics threads may be removed.
No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

267

The job applicants shut out by AI: ‘The interviewer sounded like Siri’ (www.theguardian.com)

submitted 8 months ago by FlyingSquid@lemmy.world to c/technology@lemmy.world

26 comments fedilink hide all child comments

When Ty landed an introductory phone interview with a finance and banking company last month, they assumed it would be a quick chat with a recruiter. And when they got on the phone, Ty assumed the recruiter, who introduced herself as Jaime, was human. But things got robotic.

“The voice sounded similar to Siri,” said Ty, who is 29 and lives in the DC metro area. “It was creepy.”

Ty realized they weren’t speaking to a living, breathing person. Their interviewer was an AI system, and one with a rather rude habit. Jaime asked Ty all the right questions – what’s your management style? are you a good fit for this role? – but she wouldn’t let Ty fully answer them.

“After cutting me off, the AI would respond, ‘Great! Sounds good! Perfect!’ and move on to the next question,” Ty said. “After the third or fourth question, the AI just stopped after a short pause and told me that the interview was completed and someone from the team would reach out later.” (Ty asked that their last name not be used because their current employer doesn’t know they’re looking for a job.)

A survey from Resume Builder released last summer found that by 2024, four in 10 companies would use AI to “talk with” candidates in interviews. Of those companies, 15% said hiring decisions would be made with no input from a human at all.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] krashmo@lemmy.world 29 points 8 months ago (1 children)

The problem with that is that the people defining what makes the process "better" actually enjoy making it more annoying for you. It's going to be even more obnoxious than it already is, which is pretty goddamn terrible to start with.

[–] darkfarmer@sh.itjust.works -4 points 8 months ago (1 children)

That part where you say "people enjoy making the process worse", seems unlikely to me. When people make stuff like this, I kind of doubt anyone is sitting there thinking "Mwhahaa these little bitches are gonna hate this!"

Like, I get it. This would probably piss me off as an applicant too. But ultimately, the goal is to hire someone. Initial phone interviews are all the same. They last like 10 or 15 minutes even with a human on the line, and they're just looking for basic qualifications. So I also see from the hiring perspective how this could be useful. It's meant as a baseline filter.

It might be a step in the right direction but it sounds like it's not ready yet.

[–] irotsoma@lemmy.world 0 points 8 months ago

Nah, lots of places try to make interviews as unbearable as possible. It's "how they judge your ability to work under pressure". Like my previous employer would fly you in seemingly with as many layovers as possible so you're exhausted by that night. Put you up in a crappy hotel and make you come in super early. Put you in a tiny room and make you stay there for about 9-10 hours of intensive back-to-back interviews with a 30 min box lunch break. Pretty similar tactics as the military. And it's not uncommon in tech.