How AI Is Ruining Job Interviews

If you've applied for a job recently,

there's a growing chance the first person interviewing

you isn't a person at all.

They just said, okay, well,

we would like to do a phone interview and we will be

calling you at this time.

And so, at first, I'm like talking like I

would to a person and then it clicks in that this is

not a person.

Nearly two-thirds of job seekers surveyed in 2026

said they've already been interviewed by AI,

a 12% increase from six months prior.

There are several reasons why employers are leaning

into AI to conduct more interviews.

I think some companies probably are using it as a

cost-saving measure if they do not have

an in-house recruiter.

Employers are also facing a historic surge in job

applications, with the number of U.S.

applicants for each open role doubling since the

spring of 2022, according to LinkedIn.

I think the biggest reason would be time saved.

One thing it's important to remember is that throughout

the ups and downs of the economic and just sort of

hiring climate over the last six or so years,

what used to be really robust recruiting teams have

been cut down quite a bit to be sometimes even just 1 or

2 people, depending on the size of the company.

And with the influx of applications,

there are a lot of great folks out there,

and for some companies, I imagine it is nearly

impossible to screen all of their qualified applicants.

So what does an AI interview actually look like?

The process varies depending on the software the employer

uses, but the system usually starts with a brief

introduction, then asks a series of questions based on

the job description, recording your answers along

the way. Afterward, the software sends the

hiring manager the information they might need,

which could include a short summary of the conversation,

a score showing how closely a candidate matched the job

requirements, an assessment of their performance,

and a final overall score or ranking.

The hiring manager then ultimately decides who moves

to the next round, which usually involves a

human-to-human conversation.

While it all sounds very convenient for the

employers, AI interviews still have some obvious

limitations.

AI interview tools really stink at asking follow-up

questions because LLMs are coded on what they expect

the next word to be.

And so what I've seen in those systems recently is

that people will use gibberish with the tool,

and then the tool will ask a follow-up question,

but they ask it with the gibberish embedded because

it doesn't have the intelligence to ask a good

next question.

What I found is if you're pausing to think and you're

letting a moment really sink in, or you're processing the

question and you're letting it go,

it will interrupt or move you straight onto the next

question without giving you the opportunity to think on

it, noodle a little bit, and then give an answer,

or take 30 seconds and restate what you were trying

to say. It really does a bad job of the human element of

the interviewing process.

In response, some job seekers are deciding the

trade-off simply isn't worth it.

They're giving me an opportunity to speak and

record my answers.

But if I hesitated in any sort of way,

the recording would end and then they would move on to

the next question. So I never really ever got to

formulate any sort of answer.

But sometimes the concerns go beyond a frustrating

candidate experience.

Researchers have also warned that AI hiring tools can

reinforce bias, and complaints against some

software providers allege discrimination based on

factors like age, race, and disability.

I couldn't even record the video because I have a

condition called nystagmus, and that causes involuntary

movement of my eyeballs.

When I'm talking, my eyeballs are continuously

moving. Every time it would stop the video and say,

please look straight ahead and speak.

I couldn't finish the video.

I had to stop it, you know?

And I thought that that was,

that was probably like the lowest point in my search

because it was just demoralizing that,

you know, I couldn't be treated like a human being

to have a conversation with.

According to a recent survey,

nearly 4 in 10 U.S.

candidates say they've already withdrawn from a

hiring process because it included an AI interview.

12% of those surveyed said they would withdraw their

application if one were required.

That's notable in a tight labor market that currently

gives employers much of the leverage.

I have spoken with people who have varying degrees of

positive to negative interactions,

but I think the one through line that it really is

lacking in that human experience.

I think having an interview in a digital environment is

one of those things that we human beings think we're

really good at, but I actually don't think

we are, because there are these social and emotional

components that come up when a human is talking to a

machine, right? There's no one there to say,

it's okay, don't be nervous.

And broadly, we also have some of that performance

anxiety of how do I show up my best when I don't have a

person on the other side to nod or confirm that I'm

giving them the answer that I need.

And you know, the endurance of giving your

best answer over and over again without a human

interacting is something that we as a society

aren't really good at.

For job seekers who do decide to go through with an

AI interview, here are a few tips.

So I recommend you always start by being very,

very clear and saying yes or no.

Yes, I did this.

No, I have not done that.

And you need to answer that explicitly,

all right? No need for nuance here.

Remember, it's a bot on the other side.

Really enunciate.

Remember that you're talking to a language model and you

can ask for restating more clear answers,

an example of what it's saying.

A lot of them have these conversational elements

built into it.

Candidates are really struggling with AI

interviewing because they think it's an all-new skill,

or that they should be applying a different

methodology to be successful in that environment than

they typically would in a traditional interview

environment. The truth is, and I find myself telling

people this a lot, is that the same rules

apply. You just need to communicate about your

experience in a slightly different way in an AI

environment than you do with a person,

because there's not a person to fill in all of the gaps

that you don't mention explicitly.

Employers are hoping AI can deliver on speed and scale

in hiring, but as applicants push back against an

increasingly automated process,

companies may have to find a balance between efficiency

and maintaining the connection that

candidates still value.