Why Women Particularly Prefer A.I. in Recruitment Processes

The promise of A.I. in recruitment is significant. The technology could reduce biases, provide objective assessments, and even speed up many components of the recruitment process. But is that true? Recent research from Monash Business School presents a more complex picture. In this study, over 700 applicants for a web designer position were informed whether their application was assessed by a human or by A.I. The results were striking: women showed a clear preference for A.I. in recruitment processes, while men preferred a human evaluator.

Women are more concerned that a human recruiter might unjustly disadvantage them.

“Women were significantly more likely to complete their applications if they knew that A.I. would be involved, while men were less likely to apply,” said Professor Andreas Leibbrandt. This is interesting, as women seem to assume that an algorithm is a fairer evaluator than a human. Why? The answer likely lies in experiences with human biases, according to Leibbrandt. Women fear that a human recruiter may unjustly disadvantage them, for example, due to gender biases. A.I. then appears as a neutral (or better: a more neutral) alternative.

Unjust Disadvantage

A second experiment focused on the behavior of 500 (tech) recruiters. They were presented with applications where they sometimes knew the gender of the candidate and sometimes did not. They were also provided with the evaluation from an A.I. system as a reference in certain cases. What did the study reveal? When the gender was hidden, or when the recruiters only had the A.I. score, gender bias largely disappeared. “When recruiters knew the gender of the applicant, they consistently rated women lower than men. However, this bias completely vanished when the applicant’s gender was concealed,” said Leibbrandt.

‘The gender bias completely disappeared when the applicant’s gender was hidden.’

When recruiters had access to both the A.I. score and the applicant’s gender, there was also no difference in scoring between men and women. “These findings show that recruiters use A.I. as a tool and anchor—it helps remove gender bias in assessments.” From this, one might conclude: A.I. promotes objectivity. However, we must be cautious with this conclusion, Leibbrandt himself warns. The Monash Business School research mainly focused on the interaction between humans and machines, not on the algorithms behind the A.I. itself.

A.I. may appear neutral on paper, but in practice, this is not always the case. Take, for example, the finding that algorithms rate CVs lower if there is a two-year gap for parental leave. If that’s not enough of a reason for concern: this also applies to resume blinding, where such personal information has been removed. The algorithm still recognizes subtle cues that it then associates with gender. These ‘hidden’ biases in A.I. arise because many algorithms are trained on historical data. An A.I. system trained on data from a male-dominated sector implicitly associates male qualities with ‘success.’ As a result, subtle forms of discrimination can still seep through, even without explicit terms like ‘man’ or ‘woman’ appearing in the dataset.

More Diversity in the Tech Industry

The solution to this problem lies not only with the algorithm itself but also with the people who develop it. The tech industry faces a significant gender gap: only 20% of technical roles at A.I. companies worldwide are held by women. More diversity in A.I. teams improves the representativeness of training data and ensures more nuance in the development of algorithms. More women in the tech industry, therefore, helps develop more inclusive and fair A.I. systems. But as long as this is not the case, bias and blind spots remain a significant risk.

More women in the tech industry help develop fairer A.I. systems.

As a recruiter or HR professional, you are, of course, dealing with these technologies. How do you use A.I. safely and responsibly? The first step towards the responsible use of A.I. in recruitment is to build a foundational knowledge of how this technology works and where its limitations lie. Then you can use A.I. as a tool, but always with a critical eye—the same critical eye you are already accustomed to using when evaluating candidates.

Also Read

AI Friday powered by RecruitAgent.ai – 10 versions of fake in the global and local job market

There had always been “fake applicants,” who created a business model out of the cost-per-application (CPA) models of job boards (employers pay for applications, whether fake or not). These fake applicants largely came from “cyber slaves” in places like Myanmar, China, and Cambodia. But what happened in the summer of ‘22? Cyber slaves were replaced by AI, resulting in some recruitment groups today seeing 30-40% of all job applications as fake for certain vacancies.

The growth of “fake” in the job market is exploding, driven by AI. It’s because there is so much movement and dynamics in the labor market. Employers and job seekers are often too trusting, hoping for a great new job or employee. There’s also a lot going on in the matchmaking between employers and employees, creating fertile ground for fraud, scamming, and even human trafficking. Over the past year, I’ve done extensive research and have encountered the following forms of “fake”, beyond just the “fake applicants (1)” I’ve already mentioned.

2. Fake recruiters

The most common form of fraud (not just in the job market) is fake recruiters. They use resumes, an ideal source for identity fraud, which are uploaded to job boards like Indeed. They often approach people via WhatsApp or Telegram for nonexistent jobs, aiming to steal money and personal identity details. Also, many recruiters even have a second or third LinkedIn profile under a different name, though LinkedIn is trying to stop this through its verification program.

3. Fake traffic/fake clicks

More than half of the internet’s traffic comes from bots, and just under half from humans. This means when you pay for traffic and clicks, you’re also paying for bots, which wasn’t the intended purpose.

4. Fake references

In the UK, companies provide fake references. When conducting a reference check, you might speak to someone who gives a false reference, perhaps exaggerating skills, qualities, or work experience. Fake references are often used for criminal infiltration, with the goal of placing someone in a position with access to sensitive information.

5. Fake diplomas

For a few euros, you can get a diploma from a prestigious institution like Harvard, and it’s even advertised. There’s now a European diploma verification system called EMREX to combat this fraud, but it remains widespread. Increasingly, employers check diplomas by watching candidates log into their educational systems to verify the legitimacy of their qualifications.

6. Fake schools

A phenomenon in places like Canada where fake schools allow students to enroll, granting them permits to stay and work in the country.

7. Nonexistent employers

In China, the problem of fake employers (companies advertising jobs that don’t exist) is so large that the job board Job51 only allows postings after physically verifying that the company exists. Fake companies, like fake recruiters, are used to scam people for money, or as mule operations (e.g., paying to apply, paying for training, identity theft).

8. Fake agencies

Nonexistent recruiters naturally lead to fake recruitment agencies. The business model is the same as for fake employers. Fake agencies are also used for human trafficking. People are enticed with work permits and tricked into leaving money and personal data behind. This is the start of fraud or human trafficking, as seen with the 500 agencies closed in Kenya this year.

9. Fake job boards

Entire job sites are temporarily set up, sometimes copying real company sites, with fake vacancies to achieve all the above-mentioned scams.

10. Fake vacancies

Much has already been written about this, such as the Resume Builder study, which claimed that 30% of job vacancies from employers are fake. Aside from carelessness and building talent pools, other reasons include keeping current staff on their toes or creating fear that everyone is replaceable.

@ceroswhaley #fyp #storytime #job #foryou #viral ♬ original sound – CerosWhaley

Why the Relationship with AI?

The fraud existed even without AI, but AI makes it enormously scalable and cheap. It’s a gigantic global problem that every employer, candidate, and agency faces, and it’s only growing. The reason it hasn’t received much attention is that employees are often temporarily in the market (only briefly encountering fraud), and other stakeholders, such as agencies, recruiters, and job boards, face core business threats. Despite these massive issues, they are largely denied or ignored by them. Acknowledging these problems means they must be addressed, potentially leading to significant revenue loss. Fake clicks and applications still generate money. I expect that the party positioning itself as a safe place for employers and candidates, nationally and internationally, could become a major game-changer.

Read more

AI Friday powered by RecruitAgent.ai – ‘Rise of A.I. calls for national agenda for future of labour market’

‘Rise of A.I. calls for national agenda for future of labour market’

Continuing labour market tightness, the CSRD, new labour laws, constant changes in required skills, and the rise of A.I. technologies. This and much more are on the agenda of HR departments across the Netherlands and other European countries. There is so much of it now, and it has such far-reaching implications, that it should be given much more attention, even beyond HR departments, according to a new report by Communication Concert and think tank Public Space Foundation. Indeed, it is time for a real ‘national A.I. agenda’, according to its authors.

‘The rise of A.I. requires a shared vision and policy and regular monitoring of developments.’

‘The next few years will determine how A.I. and digitalisation will fundamentally change how we work,’ authors Harm Rozie, Dorus Teeuwen and Steven de Waal. ‘A.I. can contribute to improved assessments, more efficient work and continuous professional development. Provided organisations recognise the urgency and are willing to integrate A.I., with attention to ethical considerations. This requires a shared vision and policy and regular monitoring of developments and their consequences.’

‘Vigilant and curious attitude’

The report advocates a multi-year agenda for the future of AI in the labour market and talent development, in which developments are monitored and findings shared. Innovation should be given room, but with a watchful and curious attitude. Several times a year, these developments and findings are shared nationally with all relevant parties: governments, employer and employee organisations, companies and developers, education, and science.

‘We must take the right steps now to prevent future repairs.’

They also advocate the creation of a platform where regular meetings are held to discuss the development of AI in the labour market and its impact on our lives. This platform should act as a space for shared knowledge and collaboration. Where people look not only at what is possible but also at the implications of these possibilities.’ Indeed, if we fail to do so, the A.I. revolution threatens to befall us, they fear. ‘We need to take the right steps now to prevent future fixes. This requires a broad Dutch base to monitor and steer A.I. developments.’

Competitive position of regions

The ‘exploratory research report highlights many recent A.I. developments in the labour market. Among others, the well-known matching party 8vance also contributed to it. Interviews were held, desk research was done, and interactive sessions with experts took place. Conclusions include the fact that many organisations now do not have a clear picture of their employees (skills, competencies, ambitions, dreams, etc.), making strategic personnel policy difficult, and AI could help improve that. However, there is also a significant effect on better matching, productivity, and health improvement if people fit better into roles that make them happy.

 ‘A.I. could, for example, improve the competitive position of regions by attracting companies based on available talent.’

Research by the employers’ association AWVN shows that many Dutch employers are still reluctant to use A.I. in their companies. This threatens to miss opportunities for the Netherlands, the authors say. ‘For instance, A.I. can improve the competitive position of regions by attracting companies based on available talent. But this requires detailed labour market data.’ And so to monitor the quality and accessibility of such data, a national agenda is crucial, they argue, alongside guidelines for personal data management and more A.I. training, for example, in schools and companies.

Objective skills analysis

Laurens Waling, evangelist at 8vance, says he welcomes the research. ‘At a time when organisations struggle with tight labour markets and constant changes in required skills, you can see that A.I. can offer solutions. By applying A.I., companies can better understand their employees’ competencies and align them with strategic goals. Think of using A.I. for objective skills analysis and personalised development paths.’

‘With A.I., companies can better understand their employees’ competencies and align them with strategic goals.’

According to him, the results of this research show that ‘the adoption of A.I. within HR can be a catalyst for more efficient processes, better matching and a fairer labour market. Companies that embrace these technologies can optimise their internal processes and strengthen their competitive position. The key to success lies in implementing A.I. carefully and ethically while keeping the human touch at the centre. The time is ripe to deploy AI as a strategic tool within HR. The question is: when are you ready?’

Read more

A job site that helps you based on your own LinkedIn profile, does it already work?

Recently, a new tool was launched on the engineering firm Arcadis careers site, allowing users to upload their resumes and receive recommendations for suitable vacancies. This week, another similar innovation was introduced.

Now, energy company Zonneplan is launching an A.I. tool on their new job site. And here, you don’t have to enter a resume; you need to paste a LinkedIn profile into a text field, after which the algorithm (named KIKI AI) promises to do the rest and present you with suitable vacancies.

‘Scrolling through vacancies for hours, looking for a job that suits you? At Zonneplan, that’s no longer necessary,’ says recruitment manager Eldert Wijkstra enthusiastically. ‘The chances of applying for a job that truly fits you are much higher thanks to this A.I.’ Kiki, by the way, doesn’t just work based on a LinkedIn profile; you can also chat with her. According to Wijkstra, the language model can understand connections within texts. ‘This means Kiki can also analyze which positions are suitable based on personal characteristics.’

‘Looks beyond simple keywords’

Kiki looks far beyond simple keywords, adds Dennis Stolmeijer. ‘Instead of drawing from a traditional text database, the content from our CMS is translated into a vector database,’ says the Head of Development at Zonneplan. ‘This means that the data is converted into a format that can be directly understood by a language model, allowing the A.I. to deliver much more accurate and relevant results.’ In other words, he promises Kiki to look beyond just the literal job description.

‘Our method ensures that search results are not only based on simple keywords, but also on context and nuance.’

The A.I. assistant uses ‘ prompt stuffing ‘ to extract only the relevant vacancies from the database. Stolmeijer: ‘This method ensures that search results are not only based on simple keywords but also on context and nuance, which leads to much more accurate and personalized job matching. This way, job seekers can find the right job at Zonneplan more quickly and effectively.’ The intention is that it will also be possible to ask the chatbot questions beyond vacancies later ‘so the applicant can better discover if Zonneplan is a good fit for them.’

Putting it to the test

Promising, indeed, but let’s also put it to the test. Does this add something to the candidate’s experience? The first personal experience may be bad luck, but unfortunately, it did not start very promising. Heading to LinkedIn to retrieve your profile URL feels a bit cumbersome, but when the tool spins for minutes to develop suitable vacancies, it quickly raises questions. Could it be due to my profile? Am I not a good fit for Zonneplan? I’m left in the dark about it. In the meantime, I’ve manually scrolled through the vacancies that are less than 40 on the site.

The waiting does allow me to read the quirky text snippets by the tool. ‘The job train is on its way,’ ‘Donut worry, jobs are coming,’ and ‘Sherlock Holmes is looking for’ ‘watermelon-fresh jobs’ and ‘vacancies as refreshing as ice cream’; there’s no lack of wit. It does make the waiting more pleasant. Only ‘millions of options are being analyzed’ seems a bit exaggerated. However, on the second attempt, I didn’t experience that anymore: the matching now goes very quickly, and miraculously, the algorithm comes up with two more or less suitable vacancies. Great!

"No
No more scrolling through job listings to find one that suits you, but rather an A.I. assistant that helps you find the right path based on your own LinkedIn profile. That's what energy company Zonneplan promises on its new job site. Is this the future of job searching?

A Trend Born?

The big question, however, is: wouldn’t I have found these vacancies myself if I had scrolled through the list? It seems unlikely. Is the problem of manual scrolling here so significant that this matching tool offers a solution? To be completely honest, of course not. That these two vacancies have a specific link to my profile (and many other vacancies on the site do not) is something I could have figured out myself. It would be more interesting if unexpected vacancies appeared for me and, for example, matched more with other parts of my profile.

It is, of course, notable that in such a short time two major job sites have come up with a tool of roughly the same scope.

Just like with the tool from Arcadis, the conclusion (for now) can unfortunately only be an excellent idea, but it will probably not make the lives of most job seekers much more accessible (yet). Perhaps that will follow if the chatbot learns to have conversations beyond vacancies, but the input of a LinkedIn profile does not seem necessary. However, it is notable that in such a short time, two major job sites have developed a tool of roughly the same scope, trying to make matching easier early. Could this mean a trend is born?

Want to Know More?

Do you want to know which organizations are top regarding online candidate experience? On October 15, Digitaal-Werven will present the award for the best corporate career website for the 18th time. You can register here:

Digitaal-Werven

`

Everything You Need to Know About ‘Talent Density’: The New Buzzword in the HR World

Once you’ve heard it once, you suddenly start noticing it everywhere. It is a case of selective perception, so to speak. Without much prompting, it seems. But in any case, HR guru Josh Bersin recently highlighted it, Jocelyn Lai also spoke about it at this spring’s ERE Recruiting Conference, consultants and media wrote pages about it, and while in the Netherlands last month, recruitment guru Kevin Wheeler delved deeper into it. In other words, the concept of talent density, first coined in 2022 by Netflix CEO Reed Hastings, suddenly seems to be rapidly taking over the HR world.

Meeting of the Recruitment Leaders Network with Kevin Wheeler in May.

So, let’s first look at what we mean by it. According to Hastings, it’s about the belief that a company’s success depends on the quality of its workforce. It’s about always recruiting and selecting the best possible candidates and creating a high-performance culture, including a continuous evaluation system that ensures only the best performers stay on board.

Multiplying Value

So far, perhaps, nothing new. But what sets the concept of ‘talent density’ apart is that Hastings clarifies that recruitment is not about filling a vacancy but rather finding people who indeed ‘multiply’ value. Not: people who do what is asked of them. But people who challenge the status quo and bring new skills and ideas. Netflix’s idea is that each new employee should elevate everyone else’s productivity in the company and the team.

‘Most managers don’t want to hire someone who can take their job. But that’s exactly why we have this problem.’

This threatens an insecure manager because most managers don’t want to hire someone who can take their job. But that’s precisely why we have this problem, according to Bersin. According to the HR guru, it’s no longer the case that larger organizations perform better than smaller ones; rather, ‘talent density’ is what makes the difference. ‘Look at how OpenAI, a tiny company, outperforms Google and Microsoft.’

No Normal Distribution

Bersin says that we often (wrongly) think that an organisation’s talent distribution follows a normal distribution, with a few outliers, a few underperformers, and the majority performing moderately. ‘As the saying goes: A-managers hire A-people, B-managers hire C-people. So over time, if we don’t continually adjust, we end up with an organization almost destined to perform mediocrely.’

‘In any population, there are a few people who just have God-given gifts to perform better.’

However, Bersin suggests that we would be better off assuming a Pareto distribution of talent, also known as the 80/20 rule, where 20% of people are responsible for 80% of the organization’s output. ‘Research showed that performance in 94% of the groups studied—researchers, entertainers, politicians, and athletes—did not follow a normal distribution. These groups instead fall into what is called a Pareto distribution. In any population, a few people just have God-given gifts to perform better, and they seem naturally much better than everyone else.’

Performance is Contagious

The theory of talent density considers this and tries to maximize the percentage of high performers in the organization. After all, good and bad performances turn out to be contagious. Research by Professor Will Felps found that even when other team members were exceptionally talented and intelligent, bad behaviour from one individual could drag down the whole team’s effectiveness. However, if your talent density is high, you have a higher proportion of superstar talent within your teams, and you have increased the average talent density by limiting the number of poor to average performers.

A chef would rather focus on Michelin-star ingredients than his general shopping list.

In the words of Reed Hastings: ‘In all creative roles, the best is easily 10 times better than the average. The best publicity expert can create a stunt that attracts millions more customers than the average.’ Netflix’s strategy, therefore, is to hire 1 highly talented professional who does the work of at least 3 rather than hiring 3 mediocre talents, he says. Better to have one outstanding chef than three mediocre pizza makers. Or think of the chef himself: he would also instead focus on Michelin-star ingredients than his general shopping list.

High Performers All Over the Place

The core principle of talent density suggests that surrounding yourself with high performers naturally stimulates innovation, productivity, and overall success. It would also lead to better collaboration, as team members enjoy learning from each other and pushing the boundaries of what is possible, and a better employer brand because a company known for attracting top talent becomes even more attractive to other potential top candidates. This could also create a so-called ‘wave effect’: the presence of high performers would motivate others on the team to be innovative.’

‘I’ve heard in many companies that 1 software engineer in the right role can do the work of 10 others.’

According to Bersin, the concept fits perfectly with today’s era, where there is no longer an abundance of people but rather a structural talent shortage. ‘We, therefore, need a better way to think about performance in a world where companies with fewer people can outperform those that grow too large.’ He says the concept of talent density can be helpful in that regard. ‘It’s no coincidence that Bill Gates once said that, in his opinion, there were only 3 engineers who made Microsoft great. And I’ve heard this in many other companies, where 1 software engineer in the right role can do the work of 10 others.’

More Than Indeed and LinkedIn

So what should recruiters do with this? According to someone like James Ellis, for example, a greater focus on solid employer branding is needed, as top candidates are unlikely to apply if you don’t effectively bring your company to their attention. Recruiters should also broaden their candidate sourcing beyond traditional sources like Indeed and LinkedIn. According to him, a structured selection process focused on core competencies and the candidate’s potential contribution to the organization is also crucial.

‘I believe it’s impossible to objectively and fairly classify someone as an A-player.’

Bersin says it’s about ‘a paradigm shift’ in talent acquisition. But Wheeler also has his reservations. ‘I believe it’s impossible to objectively and fairly classify someone as an A-player,’ he says. Moreover, he points to ‘the diversity dilemma.’ In other words: ‘Striving for a workforce consisting solely of A-players raises serious concerns about diversity and inclusion. A narrow focus on a limited set of skills or backgrounds can lead to homogeneous teams lacking the varied perspectives that fuel innovation and problem-solving.’

A post shared by Lattice (@uselatticehq)

 

What About Diversity?

Wheeler also points to research by Laszlo Bock, former head of HR at Google, who has already shown that selecting only the best people doesn’t automatically lead to superior results. ‘Bock’s findings emphasize the importance of diversity in teams and suggest that a mix of personalities, experiences, and viewpoints can spark creativity, improve decision-making, and ultimately lead to greater business success.’

Example of a talent density review at Lattice

Wheeler may have a point, but on the other hand, so many people and organizations are now working with the concept of talent density that it doesn’t seem likely to disappear anytime soon. It may still be something primarily happening in America (the Dutch term talent density barely yields any Google results, for example), but as with management trends, sooner or later, they always cross the pond. So it’s better to be prepared. Especially as a recruiter.

 

Want to Know More?

Boosting your talent density is impossible without the right Talent Intelligence. So buy your tickets for the Global Talent Intelligence Conference in September here. Or contact us for information on group tickets.

GTIC

Why a Gap in Your Resume Can Still Be Detrimental to Your Career

A gap in your resume? Companies’ attitudes toward it seem to be changing somewhat. Once considered something best concealed by candidates, as it significantly reduced job prospects, this perception appears to be shifting. According to a LinkedIn survey (2022) of 23,000 employees worldwide, nearly two out of three respondents reported having taken a career break. Subsequently, the platform introduced a ‘Career Breaks’ feature, allowing users to showcase the skills they acquired during that time.

On social media, many people see a career sidestep as a strong signal.

During the COVID-19 pandemic, it seemed less of a blemish on your resume if you couldn’t work for a while. Additionally, it appears that newer generations (and especially Gen Z) generally view career breaks and less traditional career paths less negatively. Social media has contributed to this: it’s no longer a shame to announce that you’re taking a break; it’s often seen as a strong signal. Whether simply to ‘recharge your batteries’ or acquire new skills, such decisions are typically met with much appreciation and admiration.

The critical question: Is it a punishment?

Then, the critical question arises: social media users may be okay with you taking a break and creating a gap in your resume, but do employers feel the same way? Is it still considered a ‘punishment’ or not? Or perhaps the opposite is true: could taking a sidestep or a break benefit your career? Researchers Boris Groysberg and Eric Lin decided to investigate and reported their findings in Harvard Business Review. And it turns out the situation is still quite nuanced.

The larger the gap in the resume, the smaller the chance of getting a callback.

For example, they cite a 2019 study in which ResumeGo sent fictitious resumes to over 36,000 job openings. They discovered that a resume without a gap had a callback rate of over 11%, while a resume with a 1- or 2-year gap had a callback rate of about 10%. If the gap was larger, the callback rate dropped significantly: for gaps of 3, 4, and 5 years, the rates were 4.6%, 3.7%, and 3.1%, respectively. However, context mattered. If you didn’t explain the gap, the callback rate averaged only 4.3%. If you mentioned that you were pursuing education during that time, it rose to 8.5%. Health issues resulted in a callback rate of about 7%, and family issues nearly 6%.

Skeptical

There’s also reason to be sceptical that a gap in your resume no longer matters. In the fall of 2023, the two authors surveyed over 400 managers on LinkedIn. Their responses: 61% still viewed a gap in the resume as a negative sign. The biggest concern was reliability (29%), followed by motivation (27%), retention risk (25%), and skill deterioration (19%). Interestingly, women judged gaps more harshly than men: only 4% saw it as a positive signal, compared to 10% of men.

And a gap in your resume doesn’t only affect recruitment decisions. The authors also looked at what it could mean for your further career progression. They examined compensation data for executives with and without a gap in their resumes. It turns out there’s still a significant negative effect. Without a gap in your resume, you could expect an average salary increase of 22% when starting a new job. With a gap, that increase was only 14%. According to the researchers, this effect is even more pronounced for younger executives, which is logical because they have shorter career histories.

‘No death sentence’

Notably, the researchers found that the negative effect of a resume gap was most evident in larger companies, where it is seen more as a warning signal. Also notable: the negative effect lasted longer for women than for men. They suggest that men can more easily ‘catch up’ by proving themselves at a new employer. Their conclusion: ‘A gap in your resume is not a death sentence for your career, but it’s also not irrelevant. The extent to which you can explain it can mitigate the negative effects, but not eliminate them.’

‘How you explain a gap on your resume can mitigate the negative effects, but not completely eliminate them.’

Looking at the entire career trajectory, a gap in your resume generally hurts your earnings. However, if you’ve already had a longer career, you have less to worry about, while those just starting are more vulnerable to a resume gap. The researchers note that companies, especially large ones, still use it as an important signal, although it may be unclear what that signal may be. ‘Hiring managers still make decisions based on incomplete information, using imperfect signals as input.’ For example, a gap in someone’s resume, whether it’s explainable or not.

Unintended side effect

The researchers suggest that the societal trend of taking time off could even lead to an unintended side effect. The more people have a gap in their resume, the more selective the group that doesn’t have to present such a gap becomes. The greater the chance they will stand out positively in a recruitment process, the higher their chances for promotion. Employers still view it as an important signal of someone’s suitability. ‘And so, a larger number of people with a gap in their resume could potentially widen the pay gap rather than narrow it.’

Read also

3/4 of recruiters say they prioritize ‘quality’ above everything, but half have no idea how to measure it

It always sounds nice, phrases like: “We go for the best candidate.” “Only quality counts.” “It doesn’t matter what you look like; if you’re good, you’ll get the chance.” Or, also nice: “Quality rises to the top.” Therefore, it’s not surprising that more than three-quarters of the talent acquisition experts indicate that quality of hire is the most important thing on their agenda for 2024, according to research by the international recruiter network Higher. At the same time, the same research shows that most have no idea what that quality is exactly or how to measure it.

Most recruiters have no definition of quality of hire, nor how to measure it.

Nearly half of those interviewed (47%, a large part of whom are also in the Netherlands)) even admit they have not made the quality of hire measurable. This is even though they see engaging with high-quality talent as one of their highest priorities. “The big problem is that recruitment teams generally have no standardized way to define what ‘good’ looks like or how to measure it meaningfully,” says Phillip Blaydes, founder of Higher. According to him, this is necessary, knowing that mishires can cost up to twice their salary.

Management Reviews

Of those who claim to measure the quality of hire in some way, most rely on periodic reviews (usually from the manager) after 1, 3, and/or 6 months. Many also look at the number of candidates who pass the probationary period, and 1 in 5 also keeps an eye on turnover in general. Finally, about 5% say they look at the sales performance of the employees in question to assess the quality of hire.

However, these are all rather limited and, in any case, derived means for this, says Brian Evje in the research report. “Performance may be a reliable measure of recruitment quality, but at the same time, it depends on many factors beyond the control of the recruitment team.” Quality is in the eye of the beholder, Blaydes sums up. “After all, what ‘good’ looks like for quality of hire at Google will be very different than at, for example, the Lego Group.” Therefore, he recommends everyone build a clear scorecard and use it consistently.

How do we best map out these metrics and predictors of success?

In other words: “Collect performance data from your current employees and other data such as turnover, employment, and engagement. Use this data to determine top performers’ characteristics, skills, and values and align them with strategic objectives. What are the similarities that make these hires of high quality? How do we best map out these metrics and predictors of success? What does ‘good’ look like for each metric? For example, if you say that the promotion rate is an important indicator of the quality of hire, what is the benchmark for a good rate?”

Limited Horizon

The research also shows that many TA experts have only a limited horizon. Only 35% of them say they look more than 12 months ahead. Another similar number has a horizon of about 6 months, while 20% look no further than 3 months ahead, and 11% even say they do not do any planning at all. However, this is not so surprising, according to Blaydes. The economic outlook is quite unclear, and it is difficult to anticipate next year’s recruitment demand. However, he advises organizations to gather as much data as possible.

What is your organization trying to achieve in the long term – and what is needed from the talent function in that case?

“Integrating talent data with external data will help leaders in talent acquisition develop a more strategic view of the prevailing trends in the talent landscape, see where they can have the greatest impact, and where they can prevent challenges before they snowball. Simply put: What is your organization trying to achieve in the long term – and what is needed from the talent function?” This might also facilitate another discussion: what exactly makes a good recruiter?

Busy, Busy, Busy

Despite not knowing exactly how to define quality and not looking ahead, the surveyed recruiters are busy, busy, busy. As many as 7 out of 8 say their department is understaffed or only at capacity’. Only 13% say they have overcapacity. Much relief does not seem to be on the way for them. Three-quarters of organizations say in the research they do not plan to hire extra recruiters. If they intend to do so, about half want to do it in-house; the other half prefer an RPO arrangement.

Engaging RPOs or freelance experts can be an effective way to quickly scale up and down.

This last option also fits well with the current uncertainty, says researcher Blaydes. “Engaging RPOs or freelance experts could be an effective way to quickly scale up and down, offering in-house talent teams some breathing room and maximum flexibility in managing their fluctuating recruitment needs.” According to some respondents, this also aligns with another trend: the rise of A.I. This could replace some of the tasks of current recruiters.

More Information?

Read the entire research

Higher Research

AI Friday powered by RecruitAgent.ai – SearchGPT: OpenAI’s Revolutionary Search Engine Challenges Google

Searchgpt: more than just another search engine

Unlike traditional search engines that return a list of links, SearchGPT aims to understand and organise information, presenting users with coherent summaries and direct answers to their queries. The system leverages OpenAI’s powerful GPT-4 language model to interpret search intent and provide context-rich responses.

Critical features of SearchGPT include:

  • Conversational interface: users can ask follow-up questions, maintaining context throughout the search session.
  • Real-time information access: the engine pulls current data online, ensuring up-to-date results.
  • Visual answers: though details are still emerging, this feature promises to enhance search results with relevant visual content.
  • Clear attribution: each piece of information is linked to its source, promoting transparency and credibility.
  • Publisher collaboration: OpenAI is working with news partners and publishers to ensure fair representation and attribution of content.

Challenging the status quo

SearchGPT’s launch signals OpenAI’s intention to compete directly with Google, which has been scrambling to integrate AI features into its search engine. While Google’s AI Overviews have faced criticism, OpenAI’s approach seems more refined, focusing on user experience and information quality.

The new search engine also pressures Perplexity AI, which has gained traction with its AI-powered “answer engine.” However, OpenAI’s collaboration with publishers and emphasis on proper attribution may help it avoid the copyright controversies plaguing Perplexity.

A new era of search

SearchGPT represents a significant shift in how we interact with information online. Instead of sifting through multiple websites, users can receive comprehensive, contextually relevant answers in a single interface. This could dramatically reduce the time and effort required to find accurate information, potentially changing user behaviour and expectations in online searches. However, this new technology also raises questions about the future of web traffic for content creators and the potential for AI to misinterpret or misrepresent information. OpenAI seems aware of these concerns and is taking steps to address them through publisher collaborations and opt-out options.

How can recruiters benefit from SearchGPT?

Here are three key ways this technology could transform recruitment processes:

  1. Job Description Optimisation: SearchGPT’s advanced language processing could revolutionise job descriptions. The AI could help recruiters create more effective job descriptions by analysing successful postings and understanding market trends. It could suggest optimal keywords, relevant skills and qualifications, and inclusive language to attract diverse applicants. This optimisation could lead to higher-quality applications and improved candidate-job matches.
  2. Interview Preparation: SearchGPT could streamline the interview preparation process by generating role-specific questions based on the job description and candidate profile. It could also summarise the latest industry trends and suggest behavioural questions aligned with company values. This support ensures more focused and productive interviews, potentially leading to better hiring decisions.
  3. Enhancing Candidate Experience: In today’s competitive job market, providing an excellent candidate experience is crucial. SearchGPT could offer immediate, accurate responses to candidate queries, provide detailed information about the company and role, and offer personalised guidance through the application process. This level of responsiveness could significantly improve candidates’ engagement and perception of the company.

Looking ahead: the future of AI-powered search

The tech world watches keenly as SearchGPT begins its limited rollout to 10,000 initial users. Users can sign up through their ChatGPT account on the dedicated SearchGPT page to join the waitlist.

The success of this new search paradigm could prompt rapid innovation from competitors, potentially leading to a new generation of AI-enhanced search tools. For users eager to experience AI-powered search now, Perplexity AI offers a glimpse into this future while waiting for broader access to SearchGPT.

As the technology evolves, we can expect continued accuracy, context understanding, and user experience improvements. However, monitoring how these AI-powered search engines handle complex queries, maintain information accuracy, and navigate the ethical considerations of AI-generated content will be crucial.

In conclusion, SearchGPT represents a significant leap forward in search technology. While its full impact remains to be seen, it’s clear that AI-powered search can transform how we discover and interact with information online.

Read more

Staff shortages now even threaten Adele’s concerts in Munich

Never mind, I’ll find someone like you who sings Adele in one of her more famous songs. She must hope these are prophetic words, as they are appropriate: the singer is still searching hard. And this time, not for love like in the song, but for enough staff. Next month, she will give no less than 10 concerts in Munich, her first in Europe in years, and a complete stadium for 80,000 visitors is being built for it. However, experienced people are hard to find when setting up and dismantling the enormous concert hall.

Whether you are available for just a few days or longer, Live Department in the South German city welcomes all hands. ‘We offer both summer jobs and part-time positions for those who can handle the workload. Experience with forklift operation, height work such as scaffolding, and steel construction is advantageous, but anyone familiar with and appreciative of festival work is welcome,’ according to the job posting, which is still online. The minimum requirement is a B1 level in German. In exceptional cases, very good English may also suffice. Accommodation can also be arranged upon consultation.

Broader Trend

It signals a broader trend, according to the leading German publication Focus. Although unemployment is currently rising in Germany, experienced workers are hardly available. And they are needed for unique projects like this temporary stadium. Earlier this year, the German government organized an official top conference to discuss staff shortages. Labour force participation in Germany was higher than ever before in 2023. Also, last year, a sort of ‘points system’ was introduced to make it easier for German companies to temporarily hire staff from abroad.

Fortunately, there is also good news for stage builders in Munich. It has previously been shown that staff shortages lead to higher absenteeism. And that is also true in Germany. However, research conducted by Randstad over 10 years ago by R2 Research shows that there is a good remedy for this: music. Of the employees surveyed, 71% believe that productivity increases with music at work. And 50% think that music leads to fewer sick calls. Which music was mentioned as the most healing? It’s obvious… Adele’s, of course, Adele’s music.

Impression of the temporary concert stadium in Munich.

Also to Germany?

Are you a Dutch company interested in helping solve the German staff shortages? Werf& is organizing the first Webinar Tage in September in collaboration with its international sister, totalent.eu. The webinars will be free for the German-speaking DACH audience to watch. Click here for more information:

Partner Brochure

Photo Credit: Adele, during the last time she performed in Europe, in 2016

What the Netherlands (and Brainport) Can Learn from the Canadian Migration Approach

From Baby Boom to Migration Boom. Canada is known for its very friendly approach to migrants. With the ageing of the baby boomer generation in mind, the Canadian government is implementing a particularly open migration policy. Between 2024 and 2026, the Canadian government aims to admit approximately 1.5 million people, which is about 4% of the current population. In the next 10 years, it would amount to as many as 5 million immigrants in a country with a current population of about 39 million. In other words, 1 in 9 Canadians in 2034 do not live in Canada.

1 in 9 Canadians in 2034 do not currently live in Canada.

To compare this with the Netherlands, imagine having a government that states that we should admit another 2 million migrants in the next 10 years, reaching a population size not expected until 2060, according to current projections. Meanwhile, the ageing population in Canada is slightly less severe than in the Netherlands.

More Housing Needed

Migration alone in Canada necessitates at least 1.0 to 1.5% more housing per year. This is in addition to the demand from native Canadians due to factors like divorces and children leaving home. Consequently, the demand for housing is about twice as high as the supply, which increases by only about 0.5 to 1.0% annually. However, building additional houses was insufficiently or not at all included in the Canadian government’s migration plans.

Attracting foreign talent, especially in an attractive country like Canada, is a much smaller problem than realizing housing.

Attracting foreign talent, especially in an attractive country like Canada, is a much smaller problem than realizing housing. And since housing is not a requirement for labour migrants (note: this does not concern refugees), they are sometimes even accommodated in sports halls. This, combined with the most expensive housing market in the G7 countries (since 2000, house prices have become almost 2.5 times more expensive), puts pressure on the Canadian government’s plans.

Numbers but Not the Right Skills

Canada is a highly desired destination country. Thus, the problem is not the number of migrants but migrants with the right skills, competencies, and qualities. And what happens now that Canada’s borders are wide open? Neither the government nor the business community clearly understands who they need. Both have also not coordinated this well. Therefore, while quantity is achieved, quality is not. This impacts unemployment (which has risen to well above 6%), and salary development (which is under pressure for starters, young people, and generic roles).

The entire Canadian social system is actually under pressure due to migration.

In short, the people coming to Canada are not necessarily the nurses and mechanics needed. This does not relieve the labour market but rather burdens it further, quickly eroding support for the uncontrolled degree to which the borders have been opened. The housing market is suffering, and healthcare, education, and social services (everything within the public domain) are under pressure from the current migration boom. The entire social system of Canada, in other words.

Cultural and Language Barriers

This extra pressure arises from above-average demand by newcomers and cultural and language barriers that need to be overcome. This is also part of the problem: there is insufficient insight and coordination on (when) what skills and qualities are needed, and there is also a lack of data and information about the people entering. Only this year is the government starting to measure and register the numbers and skills of incoming migrants.

In Canada hebben ze de deuren wijd opengezet voor migranten, in de hoop zo de vergrijzing op de arbeidsmarkt te bestrijden. Wat kan Nederland leren van deze Canadese aanpak, en hoe kunnen we de fouten voorkomen die daar gemaakt zijn?

However, Canada has not abandoned its ambition to admit nearly half a million people annually. The country has taken various measures to gain better control over the process. These include:

  • Closing simple loopholes in the system;
  • All applications will now be processed online to gain more control over the influx. This process now takes longer (up to 3 months), causing discouragement. Previously, this sometimes happened in writing – with a stamp in a few minutes;
  • The quota has been set on the influx of specific skills/professions;
  • Students are allowed to work fewer hours (from 40 to 20 per week, or even less);
  • Rejecting applications for procedural errors. If a form is filled out incorrectly, you are rejected and thereby discouraged;
  • Instead of focusing on acceptance, the focus is now on rejection;
  • Only issuing visas on the personal title of migrants to combat human trafficking.

Many Parallels with Brainport

Regarding migration – whether knowledge workers, international students, or labour migrants – the lack of housing seems to be the biggest problem in the Netherlands. Especially for permanent immigrants, the social disruption associated with it may be an even more significant challenge. From healthcare to education, the broad public system is poorly equipped. In particular, regions like (Greater) Eindhoven and Amsterdam face challenges similar to those faced by Canada. How will Dutch twenty- and thirty-somethings ever be able to afford a house here?

The labor market no longer works in such a way that when someone retires, that gap needs to be filled.

Ageing is often used to explain why more people are needed in an economy. However, the labour market no longer works, so when someone retires, that gap needs to be filled. In many factories where once 1,500 people worked, now only 60 people work. Ageing is not a problem in the healthcare labour market; rather, it lacks quality in retaining young people in this field. Focusing on quantity does not solve the underlying problem of shortages in quality/skills.

de arbeidsmarkt werkt al lang niet meer op de manier dat als iemand met pensioen gaat, dat gat ook opgevuld moet worden. canadese

BIG or Teaching Qualification

In short, bringing more people to the Netherlands does not solve the problems in education and healthcare. Especially if we also stick to admission thresholds in BIG, teaching qualifications, or proficiency in the Dutch language. The same almost applies to technicians, although obtaining the right certificates and qualifications here is slightly easier, provided they are available in the right language. Therefore, the labour market problems are not so much a numerical problem and are certainly not (only) caused by ageing. It is more of a qualitative problem.

If entry requirements are relaxed, sufficient entrants will first come from Dutch labor reserves.

This problem is also not solved through migration unless the entry requirements for many professions and sectors are relaxed. And in that case, sufficient entrants will first come from Dutch labour reserves. So what wise lessons can we learn from the Canadian experiences? How can we bring about necessary and smart immigration to the Netherlands?

8 Tips

      1. The Dutch government and business community should align quotas for people’s required skills/qualities. Employers commit to these quotas. When these people come, the Dutch government ensures sufficient alignment in the public domain.
      2. Let go of the salary requirement for knowledge workers and work with quotas on skills/professions. These skills/qualities must be testable and personal.
      3. Employers must have conducted a Labor Market Impact Assessment, in which they can prove and demonstrate that these people/skills/qualities are not available in the Dutch market. They must also demonstrate that they pay at least market-conform rates.
      4. Newcomers to the Netherlands must know how the Dutch labour market works (in case they lose their jobs) and have housing before arriving.
      5. You must first have lived and worked temporarily in the Netherlands, and then you can get a permanent contract. This provides more certainty about the cultural fit with the company, the Netherlands, and/or the region/province where you live and work.
      6. Employers who attract international people must regularly demonstrate that they possess intercultural skills. Newcomers must also regularly test their intercultural skills.
      7. The Netherlands must also have one clear route to bring people in. Currently, UWV and IND differ too much, and there are loopholes here, among other things, via international treaties or regional agreements.
      8. The Netherlands must have a much better view of the international talent currently available within its borders. Data, registration, and measurement must be requirements. Every international worker must have a ‘skills passport’ or a Europass.

Want to Know More?

The first edition of the conference Internationalization of the Dutch Labor Market occurred in Rotterdam in 2023. The second edition will take place in The Hague on September 9. During this conference, participants will be inspired by facts, context, practice, best practices, dilemmas, challenges, issues, and solutions. No sacred cows, just facts and practice. Problems and solutions. So sign up now:

Internationalization

 

AI Friday powered by RecruitAgent.ai: HeyGen

Who or what is HeyGen?

HeyGen is a start-up that has just raised $60M Series A to Scale visual storytelling for businesses. What was considered impossible a few years ago is now within everyone’s reach. HeyGen is one of the more expensive AIs, but it’s worth trying. The value for money is excellent. You can try it for free, but after that, it costs at least $48 per month.

HeyGen is a platform for creating videos using AI

It offers a range of features, including:

  • Choose from over 100 AI avatars or create your own. This is particularly nice and fun, and it’s effective in presentations because you can do fun things with it, giving you an AI image.
  • AI Voices: Select from various high-quality voices or record your own. This way, you can speak many languages with your voice.
  • Text-to-Speech: Input text, and HeyGen automatically generates a voice-over. You can also translate your videos into other languages.

How can recruiters, especially recruitment marketeers, benefit from it?

Here are some suggestions besides the interactive avatar.

  • Easily and quickly add video to job postings or create job vacancy videos. This is essential if you recruit a lot via Instagram and TikTok but also enriching for recruitment through other channels.
  • Create videos for the application, pre-onboarding, and onboarding process. This way, you can welcome people in all languages. Of course, you can still make a video yourself, which is advisable if you want to stay in your role and hire in the language you speak.
  • Use HeyGen to record video interviews with standard questions. Candidates can watch these videos, record their answers, and return them.
  • Create videos in multiple languages (translated or with multilingual avatars) that enhance the company’s image and showcase the company’s culture. AI avatars and AI voices help achieve a consistent and professional appearance.
  • Quickly and easily create videos for social media.
  • Produce multilingual training videos for new employees, including instructions and company policies. Use the translation function to make these videos available in multiple languages.

Beyond digitally cloning yourself, the multilingual function is compelling for recruiting international workers and talent. While you can rely on Scotty or Mona for preselection, HeyGen offers many fun recruitment options and everything post-preselection. Have fun playing with it!

Read more

6 Differences Between Men and Women in Job Interviews

What was once a black box is becoming increasingly transparent. Where job interviews used to be a somewhat mysterious swamp or a ‘muddy pool of misinformation‘, there is growing interest in what happens in these interactions with candidates. With the help of AI and many conversation transcripts, a lot of interview intelligence is gathered around this process. For example, in the Netherlands, In2Dialog and Cammio are working on this, while in the U.S., BrightHire and Pillar are making significant strides. What does this yield? Among other things, these six insights into the differences between men and women:

#1. Women receive more questions and less time

As a female candidate, you receive an average of 20% more questions during an interview. At the same time, you are given 25% less time to answer these questions. This is especially true of male interviewers, according to Pillar CEO Mark Simpson, after analyzing over 1,000,000 job interviews. ‘This is a signal that male interviewers generally think that women need more time to prove their worth.’

#2. Women need to prove themselves more

Not only do women receive more questions, but they are also asked more frequently about their strengths (in 45% of the interviews compared to 33% for men), weaknesses (40% versus 31%), and failures (24% versus 18%). Additionally, women are more often asked why the organization should hire them (47% compared to 37%) and why they want the job (46% compared to 35%).

Women are more frequently asked why the organization should hire them and why they want the job.

‘Although these questions are not inherently negative, they focus on proving one’s value. The fact that men encounter these questions less often suggests that some interviewers view men as more capable,’ says Simpson. ‘Structured interviewing, where each candidate receives a similar set of questions focused on the skills required for the position, reduces the frequency of questions demonstrating one’s value by 42%.

#3. Women find it harder to discuss salary

Pillar’s analysis also examines how specific candidates react to different topics brought up during an interview. For example, it shows whether a candidate reacts positively or negatively. It turns out that women, in particular, experience discomfort when the topic of ‘compensation’ comes up.

Women experience increased discomfort when the topic of ‘compensation’ arises.

It’s hardly surprising—research has shown this before—but women exhibit measurable discomfort here, something pointed to as a significant explanation for the persistent pay gap. To address this, Simpson advises interviewers to ‘explain your company’s compensation structure and how it aligns with industry standards and internal policies. Encourage the candidate to ask questions about the compensation package and thoroughly address any concerns. Generally, this topic requires a thoughtful and respectful approach.’

#4. Men talk more to each other (about sports)

Perhaps not a huge surprise, but Pillar’s research shows that female candidates receive significantly less small talk and chit-chat during their interviews. Male interviewers and candidates, on the other hand, are more likely to find common ground through discussions about sports. ‘But this can lead to biases about how much you like someone (and how much you like their answers),’ warns Simpson.

‘Talking about sports can lead to biases.’

Men spend 32% more time on small talk when interviewing other men. In conversations with female candidates, however, such topics rarely come up. ‘While a bit of chit-chat is important for building a good rapport, inconsistent interview behaviour arises because interviewers do not behave the same way during interviews with men and women. A simple solution for this is to limit personal small talk,’ says the Pillar CEO.

#5. Candidates prefer a female interviewer

After interviews, female candidates report having had a better experience when interviewed by a woman. Sentiment scores, which measure the candidate’s experience, are typically 18% higher with female interviewers. Female interviewers also tend to ask more about ‘soft skills’, such as teamwork, communication, and conflict resolution. These questions appear 24% more frequently in conversations among women than with male interviewers.

Soft skills appear 24% more frequently in conversations among women than in conversations with male interviewers.

‘Although all candidates should have women interview women and men interview men, we recommend using a diverse panel,’ advises Simpson. ‘A diverse interview panel is much less likely to have biases than a single person or a team of “similar” people.’

#6. Women have longer conversations

This might also seem slightly noticeable, but it is certainly not necessarily bad, says Simpson. When women interview other women, the conversations tend to last 10 to 15% longer than when men conduct the interview. Simpson: ‘As long as the candidate has enough time to shine, this is not a problem.’

On average, candidates speak only 62% of the time, much less than the ideal 75%.’

Earlier, he showed that the ideal job interview (not a screening interview) lasts between 45 and 60 minutes. He says it is good if the candidate speaks 75% of the time. ‘Generally, interviewers talk too much. In all interviews on Pillar, we see that candidates speak only 62% of the time.’ According to him, this provides insufficient time for a thorough assessment of the candidate’s abilities, skills, and overall fit for the role. Although women do tend to have slightly more time for this than men…

Want to know more?

Do you want More Talent Intelligence? At the end of September, we will discuss this further during the second edition of Global Talent Intelligence. Buy your tickets here, or contact us for information on group tickets.

GTIC