AI can automate a large and growing share of the recruiting process, and within a few years it may be capable of handling almost all of it. For employers, the question is what AI should be doing in hiring, not simply what it could, and that means deciding where people still need to be involved. Human in the loop is the standard response, but it can amount to little more than a person reviewing and approving what the AI recommends. A recruiter in that position becomes a validator rather than a decision maker, and a process built that way can feel just as impersonal as one with no human in it at all. Human in the loop is not the same as human agency, where recruiters apply their own judgment, context, and knowledge of the business to the decision. So how should employers decide not just where people belong in the process, but what they are there to do? My guest this week is Rob Devlin, founder of Devlin Talent.. In our conversation, Rob explains why the problem has to come before the technology, what human agency looks like in practice, what recruiters should do with the time AI gives back, and how choosing which parts of hiring to keep human can become a competitive advantage. In the interview, we discuss: Starting with the problem, not the product What should AI be doing, rather than what could it do? Why AI won't fix a broken process Using AI to improve the intake meeting Human in the loop versus human agency What to deliberately choose not to automate Six lenses for looking at any AI decision Where human conversations create competitive advantage What TA leaders can build themselves before buying new technology Why the AI decisions being made today are designing the future of work Follow this podcast on Apple Podcasts. Follow this podcast on Spotify.
続きを読む
一部表示