If AI Is Optimising And Approving CVs Why Are Recruiters ‘Ghosting’ Candidates?

If AI Is Optimising And Approving CVs Why Are Recruiters ‘Ghosting’ Candidates?


Last Updated:

AI helps streamline hiring filtering thousands of applications, ranks candidates, and presents a shortlist. But despite advances, AI screening still leans heavily on structure

Automated recruiting systems often process large numbers of applications without human interaction. Many applicants receive little or no communication after submitting applications. (Image: AI, Representational)

Automated recruiting systems often process large numbers of applications without human interaction. Many applicants receive little or no communication after submitting applications. (Image: AI, Representational)

For years, job seekers have been told to optimise- add the right keywords, match the job description, format the CV so it passes the system, use AI tools to refine phrasing, quantify impact, and make every line searchable. Many have done exactly that and yet, the outcome often feels unchanged.

Applications disappear into silence and interviews never materialise with rejections, if they come at all, offer little explanation. “I did everything recruiting experts said,” says Yukti Singhla, a 29-year-old marketing professional who has been job hunting for months. “I used AI to optimise my CV, matched every keyword, even checked my ATS score. It said I was a strong fit and so I applied to over 40 roles but did not hear back from even two.”

“AI helps identify the right talent pool, including candidates who are immediately fit and those who can be trained,” says Kapil Joshi, CEO of IT Staffing. Across industries, candidates are doing exactly what the system demands and still finding themselves stuck in silence.

Why Are AI-Optimised CVs Getting Rejected?

At first glance, AI appears to streamline hiring. It filters thousands of applications, ranks candidates, and presents a shortlist. For companies dealing with scale, this is essential.

Kapil is the CEO of IT Staffing at Quess Corp, India’s leading business services provider and a global staffing giant. He explains how embedded these systems have become, “We rely on AI extensively in the initial stages, with sourcing and screening largely automated through our AI-led tools. These systems parse large candidate databases, conduct automated screening calls and interviews, and stack-rank profiles based on role fit, helping reduce manual effort by around 40% to 60%.”

But he adds an important layer and add, “Shortlisted profiles are always reviewed by recruiters, so the process remains balanced and strong candidates are not missed.”

What Does AI-Screening Tools Look For In A CV?

Despite advances, AI screening still leans heavily on structure- keywords, formatting, phrasing matters. Madhu Rajputra Peravalli, Co-Founder and CEO of Troogue, puts it plainly, “Keywords, still. And candidates know it. There’s a whole industry now around optimising CVs for ATS systems. Formatting matters too because non-standard layouts break most parsers.”

This creates a strange loop. Candidates tailor CVs to satisfy algorithms, often at the cost of clarity or individuality. Yet even well-optimised CVs can fail if they do not align perfectly with predefined patterns.

“A CV is a self-reported marketing document,” Peravalli adds. “It tells you what someone claims, not what they can do.”

Are High-Potential Candidates Being Filtered Out By AI?

AI is trained on historical hiring data. That data reflects past decisions, preferences, and biases. If those patterns favour certain institutions, career paths, or job titles, the system learns to replicate them.

Sanjeeta Mohta, Finance and Talent Manager at Learning Spiral, explains the risk. “Algorithms learn from historical hiring data created by humans who, too often, have created biases in their hiring practices. If companies give preference to candidates from certain educational backgrounds or organisations, algorithms will replicate and possibly magnify those biases.”

Career changers, self-taught professionals, and those with non-linear journeys can be filtered out, not because they lack ability, but because they do not match the pattern. Yukti doesn’t come from a top-tier university. Her career path includes a freelance phase and a short gap.

She adds, “I always thought those experiences made me more adaptable. Now I’m not sure how the system reads them.”

Peravalli agrees, especially when AI is limited to CV screening. “The training data tends to reward linear career paths, big brand names, and Western-style job titles. In India, that’s a terrible filter because many strong professionals have non-linear careers.”

For candidates like Yukti, it raises a difficult question. “Am I being judged on what I’ve done, or on how closely I match what they expect?”

Do AI Systems Understand Career Gaps And Transferable Skills?

While AI tools are improving, they still struggle with context. A career gap might signal risk to an algorithm, even if it reflects personal growth, caregiving, or education. Transferable skills, especially in emerging or hybrid roles, are often harder to detect. When Yukti took a six-month break during the pandemic, she used the time to learn new tools and take on short-term projects, she says “I thought it showed initiative, but I don’t know if that comes through.”

Joshi acknowledges this gap and says, “Aspects like cultural fit, learning ability, or non-traditional career journeys are not always fully captured by AI alone. This is where human intervention becomes important.”

Mohta highlights another issue by adding , “AI recruiting systems do not have a robust dataset identifying transferable skill sets for many new or hybridised jobs. Candidates with those skills may not show up as qualified.”

“A CV will never tell you if someone can think on their feet or communicate under pressure,” says Peravalli. “That’s not what CVs do. But an AI interview can.”

He points to a growing shift from document-based screening to performance-based evaluation.

“AI evaluates how a candidate structures their thinking, how they explain what they’ve done, and how they handle follow-up questions. The AI doesn’t have bad days, doesn’t have favourites. Same lens, same rigour.”

Is AI Quietly Fueling Recruitment Ghosting?

“Even a no would help,” Yukti says. “At least then you know where you stand.” Candidates often describe the same experience: application submitted, confirmation received, and then nothing.

Mohta believes AI plays a role, even if indirectly, “Automated recruiting systems often process large numbers of applications without human interaction. Many applicants receive little or no communication after submitting applications. This creates a situation where candidates feel ghosted.”

The scale that AI enables can also dilute accountability. When hundreds or thousands of applications are processed automatically, follow-ups become less likely.

Joshi offers a different perspective and emphasises, “In our experience, AI is actually helping improve engagement. It enables timely communication and follow-ups, with improvements of up to 45% reduction in candidate drop-offs.”

Both views can be true at once. AI can improve communication where systems are designed thoughtfully. But where they are not, it can amplify ‘ghosting’ silence.

If AI Shortlists Candidates, Who Makes The Final Call?

Despite automation, hiring remains a human decision. “Final hiring decisions are completely driven by human judgment,” says Joshi. “Recruiters and hiring managers assess candidates through interviews, case discussions, and problem-solving scenarios.”

This introduces a second layer of filtering, one that is less structured and more subjective. A candidate may pass AI screening but fail to resonate with a recruiter. Or they may simply be one among many similar profiles.

How Transparent Are AI Hiring Decisions?

For many candidates, this remains the most frustrating gap.

  • Why was the application rejected?
  • What could have been improved?
  • Did anyone actually review the CV?

In traditional hiring, answers are rare. AI has the potential to change that, but adoption is uneven. Peravalli points out the contrast, “We share a detailed report with every candidate after their AI interview. Strengths, gaps, where they did well. That’s real, usable feedback.”

He adds a pointed observation, “The real question is why manual hiring has gotten away with zero transparency for this long.”

News education-career If AI Is Optimising And Approving CVs Why Are Recruiters ‘Ghosting’ Candidates?
Disclaimer: Comments reflect users’ views, not News18’s. Please keep discussions respectful and constructive. Abusive, defamatory, or illegal comments will be removed. News18 may disable any comment at its discretion. By posting, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
img

Stay Ahead, Read Faster

Scan the QR code to download the News18 app and enjoy a seamless news experience anytime, anywhere.

QR Code



Source link
[ad_3]

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *