We’re entering the high HR event season. We’ll get earfuls of speculation as to whether AI is killing off jobs or creating net-new jobs. We’ll hear HR leaders lament the crushing volumes of applications they’re receiving and also how they still can’t fill open positions. We’ll hear about how different generations of workers are re-thinking work, the ethics of using AI in various situations, their careers, loyalty/engagement and much more.

And while all of that introspection is underway, vendors will still be facing a chronic deficit in ideating radically new, different and powerful workflows/processes.  To help vendors out (and they need a lot of help here), here are some examples of what an HR vendor could show you if they really try.

One big problem needs to be solved

Recruiters today are dealing with record volumes of applications, resumes and cover letters. That’s the top-line problem. There are also numerous knock-on problems that also must be dealt with. Those knock-on problems include:

Large numbers of jobseekers could have wildly irrelevant credentials. This adds needless volume and make-work for recruiters as they contend with these non-value-added jobseekers.
Many jobseekers would not be eligible for hire under any circumstances. Some of these are applying to an on-site role when they don’t even reside in the same country as the work.
Some jobseekers are not real. These are virtual, synthetic or composite applicants who make up or reuse some or all of their credentials. These candidates might have AI or another person complete the application for them and provide correct answers to pre-screening interviews, tests or questionnaires.

In other words, the large volume of applications hides a number of fakers, cheats, frauds and other undesirable or unlikely job candidates. What HR/Recruiters need is a process/workflow that stems the volume of low-quality applications (i.e., a garbage in-garbage out issue), clears out the most irrelevant applicants, identifies the fraudsters, and, finally moves the most appealing applicants along to the next stage of the recruiting effort.

The potential solutions

If a vendor or corporation wants to solve this recruiting problem, an ideation workshop might be the right place to start. For instance, one radically reimagined process area this ideating group could focus on involves Talent Acquisition (TA). Here are some of the ideas that might surface:

Location, Location, Location – Recruiters could add logic to reject applications with unacceptable physical and IP address locations or if the candidate is based in a geographically undesirable or unworkable location. It’s not likely that someone based in Romania, for example, could work in an office-based role in West Virginia especially if the employer has explicitly stated that remote work is not possible and the firm is not sponsoring people for immigration visas. Smart employers could correspond with some of these applicants and ask them to submit their rationale for applying (e.g., it’s possible the applicant’s spouse is relocating back to the mid-Atlantic United States area).
Their volume is your problem – Recruiters could add an edit that checks to see how many positions a given applicant has applied to in their firm and how frequently. Persons that use automated submission tools often spam their applications across all open positions a firm has. Tracking this, and deleting these mechanically generated applications will relieve HR of considerable wasted time.  If the ideation team gets really creative, they might envision the creation of a blacklisting database that maintains candidate names and other identifiers (e.g., IP addresses). Spammy applicants can be placed on this list for a period of time.
Fuzzy credentials – Applicants that grossly misstate their abilities, education, work experience, etc. need to be vetted mechanically and at scale. The problem is that no central clearinghouse for such data exists and that employers must rely on self-reported data. However, employers might be able to take some steps to verify some of this data. For example, employers could require jobseekers to submit pdfs of high school and college diplomas. While AI tools could create facsimiles of these, employers could verify this data and the data on these documents would provide a number of verification data points. Employers could also require the submission of prior paystubs or W-2s from previous/current employers to verify prior employment claims. Something would need to be done to block out PII on the submitted images and the retention of submitted data would need clear policy and legal review. Applicants who submit fraudulent credentials could also be placed on a blacklist database.
Nothing beats in-person – Finally, there’s the problem of fictitious/nonexistent jobseekers. Employers may have no choice but to change their employment methods on this matter. Often, these ‘jobseekers’ seek technical jobs that permit 100% remote work. The actors behind these scams may be state-supported or criminal organizations looking to raise hard currencies and/or steal top secret or other intellectual property. A variety of low-tech mechanisms can stop a lot of this. For example, requiring candidates to appear in-office for interviews, pickup laptop, take training courses, attend mandatory all-hands meetings, etc. as this stops much of this unless the fraudster has an accomplice to assist in the deceit. Video interviewing is particularly susceptible to this kind of fraud as accomplices can provide all kinds of answers to aid in the interviews or tests.   

Another big problem area

“Unfilled open positions” is a term CHROs hate to hear in Executive Team meetings. It is a too frequent topic and HR is stumped with ways to resolve it. Let’s ideate some new ones, shall we.

HR leaders will tell you that they can’t fill open positions because of one or more of the following reasons:

Too few people want to take this role
Applicants want too much money for this work
Too few people possess the required education/experience
Recruiters are overfishing some talent pools and ignoring others
Etc.

Buried in the excuses are some sobering issues, recruiter biases, unproven theories, out-of-date tech and more. If ever there was a process area in need of serious, rigorous reimagination and reinvention, this is it.

Potential solutions

Re-hiring alumni – Many firms will not consider re-hiring a former employee. While these persons already know the products and business practices of the firm, HR will NOT lift a finger to cultivate interest in or a relationship with these persons. This thinking could be illogical and wasteful. It could also be illegal if it is a subtle form of ageism/age discrimination.   

This is also a data problem that is all the more critical in an AI world. Without accurate data on former employees, HR is unlikely to tap into these resources. Remember, not all former employees were fired for performance reasons. Many left voluntarily. Some went to care for a sick child or elder parent. Some went to college. Some just needed a break. Maybe their spouse re-located. But whatever the reason, HR doesn’t always know or remember why a person left or which persons would be great assets to re-recruit. HR doesn’t have the data it needs for this and an AI tool with no data is of no value. There is massive opportunity here.

Why doesn’t HR retain or keep current information about former employees? The likely reason is that this functionality wasn’t included with many or most HRMS solutions on the market. Worse, of the few products out there, these alumni products are mostly creators of generic newsletters to former employees with no targeted outreach. These tools assume recipients will initiate all contact while HR/Recruiting will not take any active role.  This is backwards. Jobseeking alumni aren’t inclined to pore over a former employer’s website in the off chance an opening will just happen to be available that moment. No, if a recruiter wants these people, they need systems to help them cultivate/renew a relationship with this person and identify new roles for them to fill. Moreover, the software needs to recommend roles that don’t just mimic their past responsibilities and skills as the person may have progressed into newer career levels.

Recruiters need a highly focused CRM (candidate relationship management) solution populated with very current information. Some of that data might come from social media (e.g., LinkedIn profiles), third party databases and other sources.

Value in Over-Qualified Persons – “Over-qualified” persons are another overlooked resource pool. Without any evidence, recruiters often dismiss, out of hand, any applicant that seems over-qualified for a position. The excuse given is that these people will jump to another employer as soon as a more skilled or better compensated opening pops up in another firm.

That’s not necessarily true. Several firms have offered positions to older, very/over experienced hires as they found common ground with these workers. These employers get people with lots of managerial, vertical industry and customer experience savvy who mostly want part-time or flexible roles. In fact, many older workers mostly want to supplement their income, work reasonable hours locally, and aren’t really interested in pursuing a career anymore. They’ve already proven what they’re capable of. Don’t believe me? Check out some of the frontline talent at your local big box hardware store.

Recruiters also shy away from over-qualified jobseekers as they believe these persons will demand high salaries/wages. Like so many opinions recruiters hold, fact-based evidence might tell a different story.  If a firm were to restructure some roles to more of a part-time role, change the time demands, etc., then new hires might be very interested and interested for many years to come.  A higher hourly wage could be offset via a significant reduction in attrition related costs (e.g., new hire acquisition costs, termination costs, retraining costs, etc.).

My take

The point of this piece isn’t to provide all of the answers. It is to trigger more HR leaders to develop more expansive ways to solve their organization’s key HR issues. This requires imagination, exploring new ideas with colleagues, determining what changes are feasible and where/if AI has a role to play in any of these efforts.

Your firm would do well to apply business process reengineering principles as part of your HR reimagination efforts. Specifically, you should:

Slay some sacred cows – Isn’t it time to finally kick some widely held beliefs and old business practices, policies, etc. to the curb especially since no one has seriously vetted their applicability for this AI Age and new business realities?
Focus on Low/Non-Value work first – These are the work activities and processes that generate little value but cost a lost to support. Don’t let your AI initiatives generate negative ROI.
Expect resistance – Remember that physics law of ‘a body at rest will remain at rest’? People hate change. Any serious reimagination effort will ruffle feathers. In fact, the greater its potential disruption, expect to see a corresponding increase in change management challenges.
Carefully choose your first big initiative – You’ll need a big success to help others in the firm get their AI and other efforts greenlit. Make this project big, doable and absolutely capable of success. If the first big effort fails or delivers no real transformation, it won’t inspire others or company leadership to do more similar efforts.
Etc.

Employers who accept newer AI-enabled solutions as-is may be in for a surprise as new solutions may not possess transformative capabilities. These solutions might be copycats or an incremental improvement of existing solutions. As such, they won’t likely solve your critical issues.

BEFORE you agree to subscribe to more HR software, do the ideation work. Then contact a number of solution providers with cutting-edge solutions. See if they’ve uncovered something better than your team has come up with. Next, review all new ideas and technology (including this article) with your Legal and Security personnel. You won’t be pushing the envelope far enough unless you make someone in Legal or Security a bit antsy.

Good luck…