A day off from technology is often a resolution we take only to break. But why has it become so difficult to survive without any Google searches for even a single day? I could not get an answer to the question until a prospective job interview came my way. It was hard to overlook how the entire selection process has been mechanized and dehumanized right from submitting applications to selecting candidates for interviews and eventually conducting the interviews. It is not hard to see how technology is replacing human involvement and guiding the work culture, thought processes, and eventually our lives. Hence, our dependence on it has been ever increasing but is this takeover without pitfalls?
The corporate world is abuzz with claims of hire efficiency, and unbiased selection when it comes to technology driven recruitment process, but there are no specific data to support the notion. At the individual level it is discouraging to know that the resume you make putting your best presentation skills is run through Applicant Tracking System (ATS) to look for specific keywords that the prospective employer might find useful, and if your resume does not have them, it would not make to the next level.
A resume is just not a random spread of keyword insertions, it is a progression story of an individual who has acquired skills and techniques along the way. Studies show that about 75 percent of the resumes are rejected by ATS before they are viewed by employers. Certainly, technology has its down side as well. So, when you have mentioned ‘reporting’ (journalistic reporting) as a key skill, and you get an email from a hiring manager who wants you to submit an application for the position of a ‘Reporting Analyst’ that requires expertise on various software reporting tools (Tableau, Qlik), you precisely know what has gone wrong.
In order to make work fast-paced and orderly, are we losing on the human discretion and intelligence in making choices? Once the ATS picks profiles with set keywords, the recruiters often without even passing a glance on the resume, sometimes contact the wrong professionals, thereby raising a question on the efficacy parameters. It also underscores the value of human intelligence and discretion, over algorithms.
Just think of all the people who made a career change during the time when resumes passed through recruiting software. Probably Jeff Bezos, Ellen Degeneres, John Grisham, and many more would have found it difficult to make a different career move had there been a sifting mechanism in place, booting out their profiles for the lack of keywords. Human brain has immense potential to evolve and acquire new skills. Though prior training and expertise are definitely advantageous, but it is equally important to bring in new thoughts and ideas to achieve extraordinary results.
The mechanization is not limited to the shortlisting of probable candidates but overrides every step of the recruitment process. It is no secret that prospective employees and employers depend on search engines to decide upon the questions and answers of the likely interview. Set of questions like ‘Your most challenging work so far’ to ‘Why do you consider yourself the best fit for the role?’ are so trite that it is hard to bring novelty to the answer, which is also available on the internet. Adding another level to the robotic process of evaluation is the use of facial analysis technology to screen a candidate through a video interview. The technology uses algorithm created through facial expressions, word choices, and intonations of candidates often without their knowledge to determine if they suit the role or not.
The next aspect that predominates the recruitment process is how well you can market yourself, which is kind of a paradox. The company is eventually looking for a dedicated and sincere employee than an overrated boaster. I sometimes wonder why employers want to choose candidates who can magnify on their abilities and hide their shortcomings. People are born with different abilities and while the ability to showcase your skill verbally is great, yet not everyone is seasoned for it. In the hunt for best talents, organizations should also come up with innovative ideas in making informed choices. Researchers from the University of Massachusetts have found out that around 81 percent interviewees lie at some point during a job interview. It is probably because there is a certain framework of interview process developed by extensive mechanization where candidates are evaluated on set parameters and any divergence from the clichéd answers results in a fallout.
Isn’t it time to rethink on hiring strategies? The process of human evolution in diverse fields would not have been possible, if varying thoughts and ideas were not encouraged and nurtured. The Society of Human Resource Management estimates that in the United States, on an average, employers spend around $ 4, 129 per job on the hiring process and hiring talent remains the primary concern of CEO’s across industries. But if a software professional is short listed for a JAVA Developer position while he has progressed to become an AWS Data Architect, just because ATS finds ‘JAVA’ as one of the skill sets mentioned in the resume, the screening software is surely picking the wrong candidate. Technology and mechanization have tremendous impact on our lives today, but they certainly require a human check before they are promoted to the driver’s seat of evaluating human potential.
Mechanization should not bring the impeccable uniformity of factory based products among the workforce lest we would lose the uniqueness and possibilities of human thinking to be reduced to a set of keyword combinations.
Sincerly sensed and well depicted a very practical issue