Personal thoughts on AI helper tools for job interviews

Photo by Sora Shimazaki: https://www.pexels.com/photo/professional-man-interviewing-an-applicant-5668863/

I recently read a comment on the /r/linuxadmin subreddit from someone who has developed and commercially runs a tool that helps job applicants in real-time, parallel to their interview. This tool doesn't just transcribe spoken words, which is fine by me. It can also solve coding problems and actively suggest what a candidate should say next to "ace the interview". It can even analyse the video feed to solve coding problems written down on a whiteboard.

This is precisely why I value meeting an applicant in person. Inviting them for a trial day of typical problems and conversations with potential future colleagues. It gives them a clear idea of what it's like to work for the company.

I understand that people can be in dire situations where they really need a job. Still, I do tend to have more sympathy for a person who is open and honest about their knowledge gaps.
However, I also disagree with seeing them as negative per se. Instead, it's a huge bonus when someone is able to say, "I don't know." Especially in such a delicate situation like a job interview.

If a candidate says, "I don't know." I will reply, "Perfect! Then let's iterate together on how you would proceed. Like you've just encountered a new problem at work without further knowledge."
I gain a great deal of insight into a person from their answers to such questions.

At a previous employer, I was interviewing a candidate. This applicant regularly said, "I don't know." This was to be expected. My colleague and I intentionally asked follow-up questions on the answered questions, constantly diving deeper into technical details. We didn't just want to check on the basics. We wanted to know if he understood the concepts and how he works. Company-specific and technical knowledge is something we can teach. Changing how an adult person thinks and approaches problems? This is something we cannot do.

After working in our team for two years, he told us the following: "Right after the interview, I'd called my wife. I told her, "Well, it looks I'm not going to get the job. It feels like I couldn't answer anything." can you imagine how surprised I was when I was invited for a trial day?"

We then explained to him why we interview the way we do, and he added, "In most companies, I was only asked basic questions. And more often than not, there was not one person from the technical department. Not even from the team they were hiring for."

The upshot is that companies need to get their recruitment processes right and not just tick boxes.
If you do the latter, you'll get solutions like those described above.

And I don't think that's a good development for anybody.

I have also learnt to redesign my interviews. I don't want candidates to leave the interview feeling devastated or like they're not good enough. They may not be a good fit for the company and we may have to turn them down for various reasons, but that doesn't mean they're bad at what they do. There are just too many variables that need to come together in order to hire someone.