Fixing AI Recruiting Tool Data Bias: CHRO Alert!

Features in AI Recruiting Tool Technology

In a recent Harris Poll Association Workforce Monitor online survey, more than 2,000 American citizens were asked about AI recruiting tools. A third of those surveyed recently think AI hiring tools are more biased than employing people alone.

The findings demonstrated a higher level of suspicion among employed job searchers in the United States over the use of AI in hiring, with almost half (49%) of survey participants thinking that AI recruiting tools are more prejudiced than human recruiters.

Just 29% of individuals who have no immediate plans to change jobs think AI recruiting tools are less prejudiced than people, compared to 43% of those who are at least thinking about changing jobs. Additionally, according to the poll, 39% of job seekers had applied for jobs using AI Recruiting tools.

Concurrently, the survey discovered that 39% of job searchers have using AI Recruiting tools to help with their application process. Use varies by race/ethnicity among US citizens: only 17% of White Americans report using AI while applying for jobs, compared to 36% of Hispanic and 34% of Black persons.

This research is consistent with the USA Equal Employment Opportunity Commission’s guidelines on integrating AI into a job search while upholding the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Civil Rights Act of 1964. It also comes amid continuous debates about AI screening tools that inherently display bias when making critical decisions.

The intrinsic biases of some AI screening systems employed by businesses are coming up more and more in conversations as AI becomes more commonplace.

Due to the potential for data bias, human resource executives must make sure that the organizations they partner with for recruitment processes undergo independent audits to guarantee that the data sets they use are free from prejudice. Their lack of industry understanding about AI and the dangers of data bias is one of the reasons HR and procurement executives are not asking the proper questions.

Although some job seekers use AI Recruiting tools on their own, hiring managers should “increase transparency and accountability in their hiring processes and use tools that meet current and emerging ant-ibias standards,” according to ASA Chief Executive Officer Richard Wahlquist. “This does not equate to trusting AI to make fair hiring decisions,” Wahlquist said.

Richard Wahlquist, the CEO of ASA, stated, “Job seekers may feel comfortable using artificial intelligence tools in their job search, but that does not equate to trusting AI to make fair hiring decisions.”

Hiring managers must strive to improve accountability and openness in their hiring procedures as AI Recruiting tools are used more frequently. They must also make sure that the tools they use adhere to both established and developing anti-bias standards. It’s also crucial that technologists and legislators carefully analyze policies aimed at reducing bias in AI hiring practices.”

She would also point out that in order for CHROs and leaders in diversity, equity, and inclusivity to get involved in influencing governance and risk management procedures given the pervasiveness of data bias, they must receive training on AI data bias, digital literacy, and AI strategies.

NYC 144, the state’s anti-bias hiring law, was just passed and put into force in New York. It controls the use of video interview software and resume screeners, among other automated employment decision tools (AEDTs), in the hiring or promotion of applicants. The intention is to expose any potential bias in recruiting practices so that the businesses can take steps to eradicate it.

Note: Methodology of the Survey

The Harris Poll, acting on behalf of ASA, surveyed 2,037 persons in the United States who were at least 18 years old online between June 20 and 22, 2023, 1,225 of them were employed. Harris online surveys are measured for sampling precision using a Bayesian credible interval of +/-2.7%.

Source