Why human insight is irreplaceable in recruitment

HR faces an increasingly challenging and complex hiring process now that AI has entered the playing field, with the wrong decisions now risking internal disruption, high turnover, and further organisational harm.

Further to recent coverage of the extended reach of candidate fraud due to AI, remote working, and detection deficiencies, the emerging question for hiring managers is how to distinguish genuinely qualified applicants from an increasingly inconsistent talent pool.

According to OnTalent’s co-founder and the Recruitment, Consulting and Staffing Association’s (RCSA) ANZ president, Natasha Olsson-Seeto, traditional recruitment methods are no longer capable of making the distinction.

And, with Gartner research finding that 25 per cent of candidates globally could contain misleading information or be completely fraudulent by 2028, it has never been more urgent for employers to insulate themselves and their organisations with the right skills.

Olsson-Seeto explained that AI had not only helped candidates present themselves in a better light, but in turn, made it harder for employers to separate “polish from substance”.

She said: “The signs are often subtle. You may see generic language, inflated achievements without clear context, inconsistent career narratives, or examples that sound impressive but do not stand up to probing questions.”

“Em dashes are a dead giveaway. Also other formatting factors – like bold titles, bullet point structures.”

In this way, society has moved beyond the time when résumés and cover letters accurately reflected effort and experience.

To respond, hiring needs to be redesigned around evidence, inclusive of structured interviews, work-relevant tasks, stronger reference checking, and clear assessment criteria. Crucially, it must be understood that technology can support efficiency, but humans must be central to this process to execute fair, contextual decision making.

Olsson-Seeto surmised that recruitment processes need to test “judgement, motivation, values, and lived experience”.

She said: “The best way to test this is through structured, human-led conversations that ask candidates to unpack how they achieved something, what trade-offs they made, what they learned, and how they would approach a real scenario.”

Reflecting on whether AI has a place in job seeking, Olsson-Seeto acknowledged that utilisation for improved clarity and structure is understandable, but the invention of experience and capability or any attempt at impersonation or deception crosses the line of acceptability.

In this way, employers should make every effort to be “transparent about what is acceptable, then design processes that allow candidates to demonstrate their own thinking, not just submit a polished document”, Olsson-Seeto said.

“A human-centred approach means keeping people, context, and judgement at the heart of hiring. It means using AI carefully and deliberately, not outsourcing trust to it,” she said.

Olsson-Seeto further explained that best practice combines smart tools with human oversight, assessment, curiosity, and empathy – in other words, uniquely human skills.

“Processes need to be safe, responsive, transparent, clear, inclusive, and fair … the future of recruitment cannot be technology-led alone,” she said.

Want to see more stories from trusted news sources?
Make HR Leader a preferred news source on Google.