AI interviews and the human work of hiring

The last few weeks, I have been helping our recruitment team with some hiring, and it made me curious about how recruitment is changing.

I have always appreciated tools that make the process smoother. Even something simple like Calendly can remove so much back-and-forth from scheduling. It gives candidates a cleaner experience, helps recruiters protect their time, and lets hiring managers move faster.

So when I think about AI in recruitment, part of me is genuinely excited.

There is real value in tools that help organize applications, schedule interviews, summarize repetitive information, or reduce administrative work. Recruiters are busy. Hiring managers are busy. Candidates also want faster responses.

But the more I read about AI interviews and automated hiring tools, the more I think HR needs to stay both open-minded and careful.

The interview is changing

For a long time, the interview felt like a very human moment. A candidate met a recruiter or hiring manager, answered questions, asked their own questions, and tried to show both skill and fit.

Now, more candidates are meeting technology before they meet a person.

Automated video interviews and AI-supported screening tools are becoming more visible in hiring. Harvard Business Review has written about where automated job interviews can fall short, especially when tools are used in high-stakes decisions without enough attention to the candidate experience and the limits of the technology. ^[1]

That is where my curiosity turns into caution.

If a tool helps schedule faster, organize applications, or reduce repetitive work, that can be helpful.

But if a tool starts assessing tone, facial expression, word choice, confidence, or “fit,” HR needs to slow down and ask better questions.

What is the tool measuring? Who tested it? Is it explainable? Could it disadvantage someone because of disability, accent, culture, internet quality, neurodiversity, or interview style?

Ontario is asking for more clarity

In Ontario, this conversation is no longer only theoretical. As of January 1, 2026, certain employers must disclose in publicly advertised job postings if artificial intelligence is used to screen, assess, or select applicants. ^[2]

I think that matters.

Disclosure does not solve every concern, but it creates a better starting point. Candidates should not have to guess whether AI is part of the process. Managers should not have to guess either. HR should know exactly where technology enters the hiring workflow.

What HR should ask before using AI

The takeaway

I am excited about AI, but I am also cautious.

That is not a contradiction. In HR, both can be true.

AI may help make recruitment faster, more organized, and more consistent. But hiring is still about people making life-changing decisions for other people.

A famous line comes to mind here:

With great power comes great responsibility.

For HR, that is the point.

The future of recruitment should not be less human. It should be more clear, more fair, and more intentional.