Why you should hold off on introducing A.I. in the hiring process

This post was originally published on this site

There’s been much chatter about the potential uses of A.I. in hiring, from helping to eradicate biases to extinguishing rote tasks. But what does the rest of America think about employers integrating A.I. in hiring? It turns out that most would prefer leaders leave A.I. at the door.

In a recent Pew Research survey, 66% of respondents said they would not want to apply for a job where A.I. was used to make hiring decisions. Seventy-one percent said they would be totally opposed to the technology making a final hiring decision, and 41% were against it being used to review job applications. 

“The most common reason among these people saying no was that they thought it would lack the human touch and wouldn’t be able to pick up on intangibles,” says Colleen McClain, a research associate at Pew. “It wouldn’t be able to judge things like personality, and it wouldn’t have the human connection that hiring needs.”

Despite theories that A.I. could extinguish some human biases in the future, the overall data speaks to a bubbling skepticism among the U.S. workforce. This sense of doubt was particularly apparent among Black survey respondents. “Some 20% of Black adults who see racial bias and unfair treatment in hiring as a problem say A.I. would make things worse, compared with about one in ten Hispanic, Asian and White adults,” wrote another Pew researcher in a blog post on the topic.

The findings suggest that it will take several more years and much education on HR’s part before employees—and prospective employees—get comfortable with the idea of A.I. greenlighting their offer letters.

Amber Burton
amber.burton@fortune.com
@amberbburton

Reporter’s Notebook

The most compelling data, quotes, and insights from the field.

While it might appear that mass layoffs have become more commonplace as of late, history tells us it has long been corporate America’s go-to strategy to rectify business challenges. 

“The idea that you would have job security is sort of a 20th-century invention…I think what’s sort of weird about this moment right now is that it’s really been determined by this COVID shock to the system,” Louis Hyman, a historian of work and business at Cornell University, told Vox.

Around the Table

A round-up of the most important HR headlines, studies, podcasts, and long-reads.

– Women’s trust in their employers erodes quickly after entering the workforce and only rebounds when they reach upper management. Harvard Business Review

– Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg told employees he isn’t ruling out additional layoffs in the future. Wall Street Journal

– Consulting firm Deloitte plans to cut 1,200 jobs in the U.S. Financial Times

– Google planned to build an 80-acre campus in San Jose, but its recent cost-cutting efforts and the precarity of in-person work forced the tech giant to pause the project. CNBC

Watercooler

Everything you need to know from Fortune.

Dogged leadership. A Utah digital marketing agency CEO claimed remote employees weren’t “working hard” and praised an employee who sold his family dog to comply with return-to-office mandates. It didn’t go over well. —Chloe Taylor

Safety over buybacks. All 12 of the unions representing railroad workers asked the industry to spend less on stock buybacks and more on safety measures after the industry spent $165 billion on the former. —Josh Funk

Abortion access preserved. The Supreme Court protected access to the abortion drug mifepristone on Friday, blocking a lower court ruling that revoked the pill’s Food and Drug Administration approval. —Mark Sherman

Lyft cuts staff. Lyft plans to lay off about 1,200 employees, roughly 30% of its current workforce. —Lynn Doan

Silver screen salaries. Pay equity even plagues Hollywood’s A-listers. Actress Priyanka Chopra reveals it took her 20 years to earn as much as her male costars. —Jane Thier