Employers revealed spending a significant chunk of their time on fundamental hiring duties, a recent Indeed poll unveiled. Decision-makers dedicate almost half their time to hiring tasks, notably candidate sourcing and assessment, areas poised for potential automation benefits, according to a recent Indeed report. Over half of those handling hiring invest at least six hours weekly in candidate sourcing, with 22% exceeding 11 hours. Similarly, 50% allocate six hours or more weekly to assessment, and 15% surpass 11 hours.
The vast majority (90%) of employers endorse automation in hiring, citing its potential to heighten productivity, hasten hiring speed, reduce costs, and enhance candidate experiences. For current users, automation primarily aids in legal compliance, team collaboration, diversity promotion, and candidate communication. Yet, non-users envision its benefits in background checks, reference verification, resume screening, interview scheduling, and candidate sourcing.
Despite automation’s promise, employers unanimously agree on preserving the human touch in hiring, especially in interviews, evaluating soft skills, assessing cultural fit, and final decision-making.
John Fox, VP of Product at Indeed, distinguished automation from AI, emphasizing its role in relieving manual tasks, and allowing focus on human interaction. Tools like ChatGPT streamline repetitive recruitment tasks like crafting job descriptions, screening candidates, and assessments, experts note. However, as these tools gain traction, legal hurdles emerge at local and federal levels. New York City and other jurisdictions have imposed constraints on automated decision tools. Additionally, federal authorities plan investigations into automated tools’ monitoring and evaluation of workers.
The quest for streamlining hiring processes through automation has emerged as a solution to alleviate time-consuming tasks for employers. While there’s enthusiasm for its potential to enhance efficiency and candidate experiences, the human aspect of hiring remains invaluable. Automation, though promising, harmonizes with, rather than replaces, the human touch crucial in evaluating soft skills and cultural fit. John Fox’s distinction underscores the need to prioritize human connections amidst automation’s advancement. As tools like ChatGPT aid in repetitive tasks, the evolving legal landscape emphasizes the necessity for ethical and responsible implementation, highlighting the ongoing balancing act between technological innovation and human-centric recruitment practices.
