4 ms·

Employers Are Buried in A.I.-Generated Résumés

7 points by thm 1y ago

archy_ 1y ago
I don't really know how to feel about this. I've seen enough misconfigured Workday instances that result in most decent candidates never getting their resumes looked at because they didn't keyword-optimize enough, so it feels quite justifiable. But for those businesses that actually review resumes, it's gotta be brutal. Also, archive link: https://archive.is/ux6E7 https://archive.is/ux6E7
ungreased0675 1y ago
There are other ways to find employees than collecting resumes through a web portal. Can organizations be flexible enough to change long-established routines? That’s an open question.
- deleted 1y ago
  [deleted]
- beepyaus 1y ago
  Here's a thought, why not conduct a series of 5-minute long interviews, and at least weed out the truly automated AI bots etc? You can speak over Zoom for 5 minutes and answer some reasonable questions? -Great you're on to the next stage. The 'keyword mining' and AI vetting that currently is reality has to stop. Sure, filter out typos and bad grammar, but certainly for large companies get more human eyes reading resumes and develop one's intuition. Maybe at the other extreme, are the large corporations that have 15 rounds of interviews; that should never be allowed.
- 6510 1y ago
  Nike use to have a thing where you could design your own shoes. Maybe we could use that and have the education factories manufacture the employees to fit the occupation. What an utterly obvious solution, I'm surprised no one thought of it! It logically follows that the new employee should pay say 30-60 k and work for free for the first 1-2 years. Yes, that would be pretty reasonable. Cant contain the sarcasm sorry.
  - ungreased0675 1y ago
    I don’t understand what you’re being sarcastic about.
    - 6510 1y ago
      Imagine we have a million or perhaps a billion years of experience teaching our offspring things and you could fill a sizable library with things written about it. Then one day the level of failure to implement the things we've learned reaches a point where we cant tie learning to doing things anymore. The point where to start "teaching" by mocking incompetence seems to be written into the dna. I'm trying not to but.... man...
dlcarrier 1y ago
Oh no, a hiring practice that doesn't really work is not working! Anyway… HR exists for compliance, not effectiveness, so as long as your HR department pretends its going through the motions, you will have an easier time when people sue you for not hiring or for firing them.
deleted 1y ago
[deleted]

7 points by thm 1y ago

I don't really know how to feel about this. I've seen enough misconfigured Workday instances that result in most decent candidates never getting their resumes looked at because they didn't keyword-optimize enough, so it feels quite justifiable. But for those businesses that actually review resumes, it's gotta be brutal. Also, archive link: https://archive.is/ux6E7 https://archive.is/ux6E7

ungreased0675 1y ago

There are other ways to find employees than collecting resumes through a web portal. Can organizations be flexible enough to change long-established routines? That’s an open question.

deleted 1y ago
[deleted]
beepyaus 1y ago
Here's a thought, why not conduct a series of 5-minute long interviews, and at least weed out the truly automated AI bots etc? You can speak over Zoom for 5 minutes and answer some reasonable questions? -Great you're on to the next stage. The 'keyword mining' and AI vetting that currently is reality has to stop. Sure, filter out typos and bad grammar, but certainly for large companies get more human eyes reading resumes and develop one's intuition. Maybe at the other extreme, are the large corporations that have 15 rounds of interviews; that should never be allowed.
6510 1y ago
Nike use to have a thing where you could design your own shoes. Maybe we could use that and have the education factories manufacture the employees to fit the occupation. What an utterly obvious solution, I'm surprised no one thought of it! It logically follows that the new employee should pay say 30-60 k and work for free for the first 1-2 years. Yes, that would be pretty reasonable. Cant contain the sarcasm sorry.
- ungreased0675 1y ago
  I don’t understand what you’re being sarcastic about.
  - 6510 1y ago
    Imagine we have a million or perhaps a billion years of experience teaching our offspring things and you could fill a sizable library with things written about it. Then one day the level of failure to implement the things we've learned reaches a point where we cant tie learning to doing things anymore. The point where to start "teaching" by mocking incompetence seems to be written into the dna. I'm trying not to but.... man...

dlcarrier 1y ago

Oh no, a hiring practice that doesn't really work is not working! Anyway… HR exists for compliance, not effectiveness, so as long as your HR department pretends its going through the motions, you will have an easier time when people sue you for not hiring or for firing them.

deleted 1y ago

[deleted]