The advent of AI in the interview process has revolutionized the way candidates prepare for and perform in interviews. With tools like Interview Copilot and Interview Assistant, job seekers can now receive real-time guidance and tailored responses during their interviews. These AI-powered platforms analyze the questions posed and generate appropriate answers, helping users to articulate their thoughts more clearly and confidently.
A startup developing AI-powered tools for job seekers, Final Round AI, offers an AI résumé builder, a cover letter writing service, and a mock interview tool. What is even more attractive to prospective interviewees–and controversial for prospective employers–it offers its Copilot: an app that listens in on an interview and feeds answers to the interviewee in real time.
Michael Guan, the startup’s CEO, called it a “magical teleprompter” — but made it clear he doesn’t consider it cheating. “Bluffing” is as far as he is willing to go.
At a time when the job market has dried up and employers have the upper hand, job interviews are becoming more stressful and demanding. Business Insider reports that “landing a job requires personality tests, on-site assessments, and several rounds of interviews (and that’s assuming you don’t get ghosted midway through)”.
Supporters of the AI technology tool argue that not only does it aid in reducing the stress associated with interviews, it also levels the playing field, allowing candidates to present their best selves. It’s undeniable that AI assistance can be a valuable resource for many, especially those who may struggle with on-the-spot questions or nervousness.
But others ask, “is it cheating?”
In the realm of job interviews, the term “cheating” can be quite subjective. Some may argue that any form of extra help or preparation could be considered cheating, while others see it as simply being resourceful. For instance, candidates might create detailed notes or “cheat sheets” to refer to during a virtual interview, which could include key points about their qualifications, questions to ask the interviewer, or reminders of the company’s mission and values. Others might use visual aids or a portfolio to showcase their work more effectively.
The ethical line between being prepared and being dishonest is not as clear as we might think. Misrepresenting credentials, skills or experience, for example, is a clear breach of integrity. Sending in a ringer to do the interview for you, is just as clear a violation of ethics. But what about all those other strategies—like notes–meant to show the candidate in their best light?
The debate in Silicon Valley regarding AI’s role is the latest version of the conundrum and it centers around ethical, practical, and technological concerns. On one hand, there’s excitement about AI’s potential to level the playing field, providing individuals with access to information and coaching that could enhance their performance in interviews. This could democratize opportunities, especially for those who may not have the same resources or connections as others.
On the other hand, there’s also apprehension about the fairness and authenticity of interviews if candidates are receiving real-time assistance from AI. It raises questions about the integrity of the process and whether it’s truly reflective of a candidate’s abilities and potential.
Then there’s the issue of transparency; should candidates disclose the use of AI assistance to potential employers; and how would employers verify this? The debate also touches on the broader implications for the job market. If AI becomes a common tool in interviews, it could shift the skills that are valued in candidates, emphasizing adaptability to AI tools and strategic thinking over traditional interview preparation.
In the end, like any other technological innovation, once it is introduced it becomes impossible to go back to the time when it did not exist. For AI interview assistance, it becomes a matter of defining its boundaries and managing how it will be used.
