Despite a rush to apply emerging tech to HR practices, experts acknowledge important limitations when it comes to candidate use of AI use in the job application and interviewing processes.
Recent data shows the urgency of addressing this issue: A March 2025 survey of 1,200 British and American job hunters performed by Adzuna, a search engine for job ads, found that 65% of job seekers have integrated AI into their job search.
Dr. Serena Huang, a 2025 HR Tech Top Influencer, expresses caution about AI’s potential to mislead employers about an applicant’s abilities. “While AI can indeed function as a productivity tool, it differs fundamentally in its ability to generate original-sounding content that may mask a candidate’s true capabilities,” she says.
Hiten Sheth, director analyst at Gartner, presents emerging research findings that underscore the need for vigilance on the part of HR leaders.
He says early signals point to a growing issue: “In our recent recruiter experience survey, 84% of recruiters reported encountering some form of candidate fraud—including falsified applications, document fraud, information inconsistencies and identity mismatches.”
Sheth says this trend makes it increasingly difficult to identify candidates who are genuinely equipped for success in new roles.
The scale of the problem is particularly acute for technical roles. According to interview platform Karat, one tech leader recently reported suspecting that more than 80% of their India-based candidates were using AI tools on coding tests, despite explicit prohibition. Some industry experiments suggest that this number could be closer to 100%, leading to a five-fold increase in cheating detection rates over the past two years, as reported by Karat.
However, Sheth feels that there is a time and place for candidate use of AI during the preparation process. “When it comes to applications, I’m supportive of candidates thoughtfully leveraging AI tools to help them present their qualifications effectively,” he says. “AI can be a valuable tool for resume positioning, helping qualified candidates articulate their experiences in the most compelling way.”
Both experts highlight AI’s potential to create more equitable opportunities, particularly for non-native speakers and those who struggle with written communication. Sheth elaborates: “AI use in applications can level the playing field by helping those with communication barriers to present their credentials and convey their strengths and backgrounds more clearly.”
Huang disagrees with labeling AI use as inherently dishonest because that definition overlooks its potential as a legitimate preparation aid when used thoughtfully. “This is particularly important to help level the playing field for candidates from different backgrounds, including non-native speakers,” she adds.
Clear boundaries for interviews
When it comes to interviews, Sheth draws a clear line, saying that the interview stage requires a different standard with strict boundaries. He indicates that AI assistance should only be leveraged by candidates when explicitly allowed by the organization as part of a deliberate assessment strategy.
“The key is transparency and appropriate guardrails that maintain hiring integrity while embracing innovation,” says Sheth.
He believes that for interviews, unless explicitly permitted, candidates should refrain from using AI assistance. “Interviews serve as critical verification checkpoints to ensure candidates genuinely possess the skills claimed in their applications,” he says.
Huang focuses more on how companies should adapt their hiring processes rather than setting explicit rules for candidates. For companies adapting to AI-assisted candidates, her recommendation is to redesign the interview processes completely.
She suggests a shift toward experience-based assessments that require candidates to demonstrate skills in real-time through live collaborative problem-solving exercises. These include impromptu discussions of hypothetical scenarios and technical demonstrations with on-the-spot modifications.
Emphasizing uniquely human capabilities
Both experts tout the importance of evaluating distinctly human attributes.
Huang proposes that organizations should consider interview components designed to reveal uniquely human capabilities. For example, she says, HR teams should consider adding simulated customer service scenarios where candidates must respond to an emotionally charged situation to evaluate their empathy and EQ.
She adds that creative collaboration serves as a powerful evaluation tool, indicating that HR teams can consider collaborative design sessions where multiple candidates join team members to solve a business challenge in real time. “This approach demonstrates how candidates come up with new ideas, build upon others’ suggestions and navigate disagreements, which are all skills that AI assistance cannot authentically develop,” she says.
Sheth similarly acknowledges the need for candidates to demonstrate core abilities without AI. “Some organizations may intentionally design assessments that incorporate AI tools to simulate real-world workflows, where AI use in interviews and assessments may be permitted,” he says. However, Sheth believes that the fundamental expectation must be that candidates should be able to demonstrate core skills without AI assistance.
Huang offers concrete recommendations for interviewers. She suggests creating interview segments that build upon previous answers, making it difficult to rely on pre-prepared content. She says asking candidates to explain their thought processes and reasoning, not just their conclusions, can be very valuable.
The future role of AI in hiring
This shift in interview strategy reflects a broader shift in recruiting, where both candidates and employers are increasingly leveraging AI. As applicant use of AI tools becomes more common—from resume generation to interview preparation—employers are also exploring ways to integrate AI into their own processes. This evolving dynamic raises important questions about how AI should be used responsibly on both sides of the hiring equation.
Regarding the role of AI in hiring’s future, Huang says AI should enhance human decision-making rather than replace it. She believes the tech shows tremendous power for reducing the burden in scheduling and coordination, providing structured frameworks for evaluation to mitigate unconscious bias and creating accessible preparation resources for candidates from non-traditional backgrounds.
However, she reminds HR leaders that AI should never make final hiring decisions without human oversight. Most importantly, she says, AI should not create barriers that disadvantage candidates without access to advanced preparation tools.
As a rule of thumb, Sheth says, “The key is transparency and appropriate guardrails that maintain hiring integrity while embracing innovation.”
