Solution: Candidate Assessment

How an Art Heist Transformed Financial Services Recruitment

Posted on by akessler
How an Art Heist Transformed Financial Services Recruitment

PeopleScout Assessment

How an Art Heist Transformed Financial Services Recruitment

PeopleScout’s assessment and creative teams helped a leading financial services company transform their entry-level recruitment process from a typical interview to an innovative, immersive experience, creating an assessment centre unlike any candidate had encountered before.

86 % assessment centre pass rate (up from 41%)
98 % offer acceptance rate (up from 73%)
98 % candidate satisfaction scores after the assessment

Situation 

A leading financial services provider, specialising in pensions, investments and insurance, was facing recruitment challenges. They needed to fill contact centre roles—mainly phone-based positions handling customer inquiries—but their process needed a revamp.

The numbers tell the story: In 2023, the company processed approximately 7,000 applications to fill 250 entry-level positions. That’s a mountain of CVs and a serious administrative burden. Their approach was pretty standard—online application, a telephone interview followed by  a face-to-face competency interview. They’d assess just 12 to 14 candidates per day, running two interviews simultaneously, seven times a day.

In addition to the scale of the effort, hiring managers kept gravitating toward candidates who already had contact centre or financial services experience. The client’s talent acquisition team spotted this bias and realised they were probably missing out on brilliant people who hadn’t worked in these specific areas before. These candidates might have exactly what it takes to excel—they just didn’t tick the “industry experience” box.

So, they decided it was time for a complete recruitment makeover.

Solution 

We stepped in to flip the client’s assessment approach on its head, creating something that was fair, inclusive, and—dare we say it—actually fun.

Our psychologists teamed up with our creative team to figure out how to support evidence-based hiring decisions while giving candidates an experience they’d never forget. What emerged was a multi-stage, immersive assessment that aligned with the client’s goals and gave everyone a fair shot.

Assessment Framework Development

Our psychologists rolled up their sleeves and did a deep-dive job analysis, systematically reviewing multiple information sources to define the capabilities, experience, skills, abilities and behaviours that make someone successful in these contact centre roles. They talked to hiring managers, incumbents and recruiters to understand what “good” really looks like—not just on paper, but in practice—securing stakeholder buy-in and support throughout the process.

From the research an assessment framework was created which guided the design of all the assessments. This research-driven approach meant the assessment process was built on best practice methodology while actually measuring what mattered for job performance. Our goal was to achieve:

  • A standardised assessment process ensures all candidates have the same experience, enhancing equality, diversity, and inclusion (ED&I) and increasing fairness
  • Objective assessment of candidates, focusing on evidence-based criteria that are relevant to job performance
  • Concrete, evidence-based rationale for hiring decisions, ensuring fair, accurate and defensible outcomes

Three-Stage Assessment Process

Our psychologists designed a multi-method assessment process to offer candidates multiple opportunities to shine. By mixing different types of assessments, we could accommodate different strengths and preferences while reducing bias—accommodating neurominority candidates and accounting for different preferences for showcasing abilities.

The three-stage process cleverly blended automated scoring with human insight, cutting down on bias while saving assessors’ time.

Stage 1: Telephone Screen

The client wanted to keep their phone interview—it was working well for them. So, our psychologists took what they had and made it better, creating standardised questions and scoring while keeping the motivational elements and assessing behaviours from the assessment framework.

Stage 2: Online Assessment

Here’s where we got bold: we ditched the CVs entirely. To reduce the likelihood of decisions being based on work history, we developed a gamified online assessment that tested the core behaviours we’d identified as crucial for success.

Working with the client’s test publisher, our psychologists advised on aligning their gamified assessment to the assessment framework, creating an automated sift stage ahead of the assessment centre which boosted pipeline efficiency. The highest scorers moved forward, regardless of their background—saving time and boosting objectivity.

Stage 3: Immersive Assessment Centre

Candidates were expecting a standard, corporate assessment process. But, with the assessment centre invitation they received a video that parachuted them into an alternative world where—for one day only—they became part of a fictional organisation, an underground resistance movement tasked with stopping ruthless art thieves from pulling off the art heist of the century.

Within this world, candidates did an interview, a mock customer conversation exercise to understand customer-facing roles, and a group exercise with clues and problem-solving tasks.

We dressed the assessment room and utilised themed props—ticket stubs, Instagram posts, umbrellas, and even a Magic 8 ball—creating an assessment experience unlike any they had encountered before.

The candidates worked together to solve puzzles and piece together clues. The high-energy, creative challenges included finding criminal targets, cracking cryptic codes, locating target artwork and galleries, and responding to the intel of a double agent. All of it was woven into a cinematic experience delivered by professional actors.

The whole assessment centre was anchored in science and a robust assessment framework—all within just two hours.

By creating this fantasy world full of brain-teasing challenges and tasks, candidates had such a good time they relaxed and brought their true selves to the event. As a result, the in-room assessors could then use the scoring guides to easily identify the core attributes the client was looking for in its recruits.

“The highlight was seeing them laughing and interacting as a team during the group assessment. It was almost like they forgot they were interviewing for a job.”

Talent Acquisition Leader

To ensure the success of the assessment centre, we provided comprehensive training and clear assessment guides for managers, assessors, and facilitators, ensuring they understood assessment best practices and had a detailed briefing of the exercises themselves.

Results 

In the first four months of assessment centres, we achieved:

  • 0% “no show” rate (down from 25%)
  • 86% assessment centre pass rate (up from 41%)
  • 98% offer acceptance rate (up from 73%)
  • 60% attrition, now at the lowest rate since the pandemic
  • 37 days in recruiter time saved since removing CVs from the pre-assessment centre stage
  • 98% candidate satisfaction rate at the end of the assessment centre
  • 92% new joiner satisfaction rate

Importantly, candidates who received offers came from a variety of backgrounds, including nail technicians, chefs, employees from a world-famous golf course and a football club, and former retirees returning to work.

Candidate Feedback:

“The best interview experience I’ve had.”

“I forgot I was being assessed.”

“I have never had an interview experience with this much human touch.”

“The best one I have done. The others were old school and formulaic.”

“The playfulness was different level.”

“It’s nice to be tested on ‘you’ rather than experiences you may have been fortunate or unfortunate to have gone through.”

“I’ve been bragging about how much fun it was.”

Client Feedback:

“Our new immersive assessment process sees us shift immediately from an old-fashioned, competency-based interview to a modern selection process focused on behaviours, underpinned by robust occupational science. We’ll jump from lagging behind our peers, to a market leading proposition that will ultimately see us making better informed hiring choices. Results so far have been really encouraging, and it’s been great to see such positive initial feedback from our managers and candidates.” – Talent Acquisition Leader

“It was a new refreshing way to carry out recruitment, and one I think will bring in the right people. I enjoyed the interview section as I felt like the questions were much more suited to what we are looking for. I also felt the role plays were great as it gave us a real insight into the candidates’ customer service skills. Overall, I felt it was a big success and look forward to doing the next recruitment day.” – Hiring Manager

“The role play gave an insight into the candidates’ behaviours which is the most important thing. The group exercise really allowed people to immerse themselves into the exercise, and I feel we saw their true colours.” – Hiring Manager

At a Glance

  • COMPANY
    Financial service company
  • INDUSTRY
    Banking & Financial Services
  • PEOPLESCOUT SOLUTIONS
    Recruitment Process Outsourcing, Talent Advisory
Let’s Connect

Is Skills-Based Hiring Really the Next Big Thing?

Posted on by akessler

In the recruitment space, skills-based hiring is on the tip of talent acquisition leaders’ tongues. Is it worthy of all the ink spilled or just the flavour of the month?

The internet is buzzing with headlines framing skills-based hiring as a revolutionary step forward—a clean break from “outdated” methods like focusing on academic qualifications. But as usual, we want to take a more critical look.

Let’s step away from the hype to examine the real pros and cons of skills-based hiring. More importantly, let’s figure out how skills-based hiring can work for you.

Skills-Based Hiring: Is it Really New?

There are three common myths being perpetuated by many of the articles about skills-based hiring:

Myth 1: Educational qualifications have been the main barrier to good hiring decisions.

The argument goes that recruiting teams rely too heavily on degrees and don’t think enough about skills—and if they just focused on skills instead, all their hiring issues would be solved.

This misrepresents how most employers actually make hiring decisions. While education requirements do exist in job descriptions, they’re rarely the primary factor in final hiring choices. Most recruiters already consider multiple factors including experience, cultural fit and demonstrated abilities. Skills-based hiring has its positives and certainly feels more inclusive than rigid degree requirements, but it’s not the revolutionary shift from degree-obsessed hiring that many articles suggest.

Myth 2: Everyone talking about skills is talking about the same thing.

One reason the history of skills-based hiring is hard to track is the absence of a clear, consistent definition of what constitutes a “skill.” In the context of skills-based hiring, a skill could be a competency, strength or motivation—anything that enables a person to do the job well. That landscape is far more nuanced and complex than most articles let on.

The reality is that defining skills is a lengthy process and requires careful consideration of context. But most writers on this subject don’t bother to grapple with this complexity. Instead, they gloss over any real explanation of what skills are, feeding the perception that skills are so simple and universally understood that we don’t need definitions. This creates the illusion that organizations should be able to easily incorporate skills-based approaches without doing the hard work of actually defining what they mean by “skills” in their specific context.

Myth 3: Skills-based hiring and talent management is a new idea, and the bandwagon is leaving the station.

Headlines will have you believe that skills-based hiring is “the next big thing” and a silver bullet that will solve all your workforce woes. However, this doesn’t really reflect most hiring processes.

Even if you’re not actively thinking about skills-based hiring, it’s likely that it is embedded—at least partly—into your hiring process already. Today, recruiters rarely just think in terms of hiring somebody because their qualifications line up to the “essential” section of the job description.

So, skills-based hiring isn’t a new idea. The term might be, but not the practice.

These myths lead us to feel that the noise around skills-based hiring is misleading. It suggests that skills-based hiring is driving the recruitment industry right now, when in reality, very few are moving forward with it in an overt, intentional way.

Getting Started with Skills-Based Hiring When Time and Budgets Aren’t Huge

If you do want to embrace skills-based hiring, here are some practical steps:

1. Start with an Audit

If you’re keen to implement skills-based hiring, first of all, feel reassured that it’s likely already part of your approach, even if you don’t call it that. Start by establishing where you are along the skills-based continuum.

Diagnostics come into their own here. Assess your hiring processes in a structured way, identifying gaps, strengths and opportunities for improvement. It can be beneficial to bring in an external partner like the PeopleScout Assessment Design team, to provide robust, evidence-based, unbiased feedback to maximise impact.

2. Defining Your Skills

Then it comes down to defining skills—for now and the future. These can’t be vague; they need to be carefully defined so that they can be accurately applied. You’ll build these from research, both internally and by looking externally. If you want to have an organisation-wide approach, you’ll need to consider skills relevant for leadership and entry level roles and across departments. Engage your department heads and hiring managers to map these.

3. Look at Your Non-Skills Criteria

You don’t have to remove looking at academic qualifications from your hiring process entirely. However, if there are instances where you’re using an academic qualification as a stand-in for a skill—say, a humanities degree as a signifier of good written communication skills—you can probably move away from it and start focusing more explicitly on the skill itself.

Skills-based hiring can open doors for many candidates—and expand your talent pool. Perhaps your ideal candidate did not go to university, but their written communication skills are more than adequate for the role.

4. Kick Off a Pilot

Even without a big budget to fund an overhaul of your recruitment processes, it’s still possible to make a start. To make it manageable, begin with a small, pilot process. Your audit can help you identify the best starting point—perhaps it’s a particular department or role type.

Once you’ve started, you’ll want to closely monitor it to ensure that the benefits are genuine. Try not to feel pressured into investing too much time, money and resources into skills-based hiring because it is a hot topic. Make changes bit by bit, turn to evidence, and stay reflective.

The Bottom Line

Don’t get overcome by buzzwords. In all likelihood, skills-based hiring has been a part of your process for a while now. If you want to concentrate more on skills-based hiring, start small, remain sceptical of the hype, get external insight, be evidence-based and keep evolving your approach.

[Webinar] Smart Hiring in the AI Age: What UK Candidates Are Really Doing in 2025

Posted on by akessler

[Webinar] Smart Hiring in the AI Age: What UK Candidates Are Really Doing in 2025

Discover How Gen AI Usage Amongst Job Seekers is Really Impacting UK Recruitment in 2025

Ready to separate AI hype from reality in your hiring process? Join us on Thursday, 17 July at 11am BST for an eye-opening webinar based on our recent YouGov research that reveals what’s actually happening when candidates use generative AI (Gen AI).

In this webinar, PeopleScout’s Head of Assessment Design, Amanda Callen, and Talent Solutions Director, James Chorley, are back to explore the latest developments in Gen AI usage amongst job seekers. While your competitors panic with blanket AI bans or stick their heads in the sand, you’ll gain the strategic advantage of data-driven decision making.

In this webinar, we’ll cover:

  • Real Data, Real Insights: Amanda and James will walk you through our exclusive UK research findings, including the surprising truth about Gen AI adoption rates among job seekers
  • Assessment Vulnerability: Identify which parts of your recruitment funnel are most at risk—and which concerns might be overblown
  • Candidate Psychology Revealed: Understand the unexpected attitudes candidates have toward AI disclosure and what this means for your process
  • Future-Proof Strategies: Learn practical, tested approaches to maintain assessment integrity while embracing technological innovation

Register now and receive access to our full research report.

Debunking Myths About Gen AI in Recruitment [Infographic]

Posted on by akessler

With all the buzz around ChatGPT, Gemini, and other generative AI tools, you might think every job seeker is leveraging these technologies to gain an edge. Headlines suggest AI has completely transformed the job application landscape, with candidates using it for everything from CV creation to interview preparation.

But how widespread is it? PeopleScout’s recent research reveals a more nuanced picture of how job seekers are actually incorporating AI into their search process. Our comprehensive study, The AI-Enabled Applicant: How Candidates Are Really Using Gen AI in Recruitment, offers surprising insights that challenge common assumptions about AI’s prevalence amongst UK job hunters.

The infographic below highlights key findings that talent acquisition professionals and hiring managers should consider when evaluating their recruitment strategies in today’s AI-influenced landscape.

These findings present a more balanced view of AI’s role in recruitment than many headlines suggest. While generative AI tools are certainly making an impact, they haven’t revolutionized job seeking to the extent many predicted. Less than 20% of recent job changers in the UK used AI at all, with adoption varying significantly by age and education level.

For talent acquisition leaders, this data suggests an opportunity to develop thoughtful policies around AI use. The lack of communication about AI expectations (with only 5% of job changers reporting employers mentioning AI) points to a need for greater transparency. Organizations might consider clarifying their stance on AI usage while recognizing that many candidates find these tools genuinely helpful in navigating the application process.

As AI technology continues to evolve, staying informed about actual usage patterns—rather than assuming widespread adoption—will help recruiters make more effective decisions about how to design fair, efficient hiring processes that account for the reality of candidates’ Gen AI use.

Want to learn more? Download PeopleScout’s full research report, The AI-Enabled Applicant: How Candidates Are Really Using Gen AI in Recruitment, for comprehensive insights and strategic recommendations.

Protecting Recruitment Integrity in the AI Era 

Posted on by akessler

Generative AI (Gen AI) is disrupting the job-seeking landscape, offering powerful tools that transform CVs, résumés, cover letters and interview preparation. Despite this technological shift, our research, The AI-Enabled Applicant: How Candidates Are Really Using Gen AI in Recruitment, indicates a surprising adoption gap—only one in five UK job seekers currently leverage these AI capabilities. Nevertheless, employers remain concerned about candidates potentially using AI to embellish or misrepresent their qualifications and experience. 

This article marks the third installment in our series examining the implications of our research findings on Gen AI’s role in recruitment. As these technologies continue to reshape hiring practices, organisations must evolve their approaches to preserve assessment integrity while efficiently identifying exceptional talent. Drawing from our research, we’ve developed several actionable strategies for navigating this new reality: 

Set Clear Expectations on AI Usage 

Be transparent about your stance on Gen AI usage throughout the application process. Rather than implementing blanket bans that may be impossible to enforce, consider: 

  • Providing specific guidelines on acceptable AI use (e.g., “Gen AI may be used to help with formatting and improving your CV but not in a way that falsely represents your skills or experience”) 
  • Explaining the rationale behind restrictions to encourage candidate adherence 
  • Including explicit statements in job descriptions and application platforms about AI usage policies and potential consequences for use of Gen AI to create inauthentic applications or assessments 

Clear communication and transparency about how you expect candidates to use (or not use) Gen AI not only helps encourage appropriate candidate application approaches but also demonstrates organisational integrity in an increasingly AI-influenced world. 

Resist Abandoning Proven Methods 

Despite vendors claiming to offer “ChatGPT-proof” and “bias free” online assessments, our assessment psychology experts say caution is warranted: 

  • There is currently limited evidence supporting the effectiveness of many new “AI-proof” assessment methods.
  • Hastily implemented solutions may introduce new biases or inefficiencies—doing more harm than good. 
  • Completely abandoning traditional methods could disrupt established recruitment pipelines. 

Instead, maintain a balanced approach. Focus on strengthening existing processes with strategic modifications that address specific vulnerabilities to Gen AI manipulation. Regularly evaluate and update your processes to respond to emerging AI capabilities. 

Make Application Questions Personal 

Generic questions are particularly vulnerable to AI-generated answers. Design questions that elicit unique, authentic responses, like:  

  • Asking candidates to draw from own unique experience 
  • Requesting concrete examples of how they’ve demonstrated particular skills or values 
  • Incorporating questions about personal motivation and alignment with organisational culture that require genuine self-reflection 

Questions that require candidates to draw from their unique backgrounds and perspectives are inherently more difficult for Gen AI to generate strong and credible answers. 

Develop Unique Questions 

Create bespoke evaluation components. Standard questions are easily accessible online and therefore vulnerable to Gen AI assistance. Instead: 

  • Develop application questions specific to your organisation’s values, challenges and opportunities 
  • Design scenario-based questions that relate directly to the unique aspects of the role 
  • Request detailed responses that demonstrate depth of understanding rather than surface-level knowledge 

Questions that are specific to your organisation and the role push candidates to think beyond any scripted answers. Not only does this reduce the effectiveness of Gen AI, but it’s also better at uncovering candidates’ genuine interest and cultural fit.  

Implement Verification Strategies 

Consider validating CV and application content by: 

  • Referencing and discussing application content during face-to-face interviews
  • Asking candidates to elaborate on or defend specific points from their CV or written applications 
  • Implementing a verification process for all candidates or for a sample 

Informing candidates in advance that verification will occur can itself serve as a deterrent to Gen AI misuse. 

Prioritise In-Person Interviews and Assessments 

Maximise the value of human interaction. While resource-intensive, in-person interviews and assessments remain among the most reliable methods for evaluating candidates in the Gen AI era: 

  • Design high-quality, job-related interview questions with clear evaluation criteria. 
  • Train interviewers to probe for authenticity and consistent understanding of claimed experiences. 
  • Incorporate practical demonstrations or simulations that require candidates to apply skills in real-time. 

The combination of well-designed questions and simulations, and skilled interviewers and assessors, creates an environment where assistance from Gen AI provides minimal advantage. 

Apply Caution with Detection Technologies 

Evaluate AI detection tools critically. While numerous AI detection solutions have emerged, their effectiveness remains questionable. Our assessment psychology experts warn: 

  • We see little to no evidence that they work effectively. 
  • Implementation can be costly and complex. 
  • There are potential fairness concerns, particularly for candidates from diverse backgrounds. 

If considering detection tools, thoroughly evaluate their accuracy and review potential biases. Ensure there is a robust defence case in place to protect against any legal claim made by someone rejected due to assumed detection of Gen AI use.  If the decision is made to use them, consider them as just one element of a comprehensive strategy, in line with new restrictions emerging from the new EU laws around Gen AI use, rather than a standalone solution. 

Conclusion 

By implementing these practical strategies, organisations can navigate the evolving landscape of AI in recruitment while maintaining the integrity of their selection processes. The goal is not to eliminate Gen AI usage from the recruitment process entirely, but rather to ensure that human capabilities and potential remain at the centre of hiring decisions. 

To help organisations make more informed decisions, PeopleScout’s Assessment Design & Delivery team offers a Gen AI Opportunity & Risk Assessment Audit. This comprehensive review of the recruitment process identifies both vulnerabilities and opportunities related to generative AI throughout the candidate journey. Our assessment psychologists give you evidence-based recommendations to help you focus resources on critical vulnerability points, protecting your selection accuracy and diversity outcomes. 

For more Gen AI insights, download the full The AI-Enabled Applicant: How Candidates Are Really Using Gen AI in Recruitment report. 

You May Also Be Interested In:

Candidates & Gen AI: The Employer’s Dilemma 

Posted on by akessler

The use of generative AI (Gen AI) amongst job seekers has sparked significant interest in the media, with numerous tools now available to enhance résumés, CVs, cover letters and interview preparation. Yet, our recent research, The AI-Enabled Applicant: How Candidates Are Really Using Gen AI in Recruitment, reveals that only one in five UK job seekers currently utilizes Gen AI during their job search. 

Despite this relatively low adoption rate, organisations face a growing challenge: how to navigate a landscape where applications and interview responses may be AI-enhanced or even AI-created. How can employers ensure they’re selecting the best human talent rather than simply the candidates with the most effective AI assistance? 

This article, the second in our series exploring data from our report, examines how Gen AI could reshape recruitment outcomes both today and in the future. 

CV and Application Reliability 

CVs were already known to be relatively poor predictors of future job performance due to inconsistency and bias. With 55% of UK job seekers using Gen AI to help them prepare their CV, the use of Gen AI threatens to further weaken their predictive value, as they may increasingly reflect Gen AI capabilities rather than actual candidate suitability. Many CVs now appear perfectly tailored to match the keywords and skills specified in job descriptions, further complicating the selection process. Volume recruiters also report seeing identical responses across applications, suggesting common use of Gen AI to produce non-authentic answers. 

With CV sifting and standard application questions, both automated sifting tools that use word-matching and human reviewers face growing difficulty in identifying the strongest candidates. It’s difficult for both humans and AI to detect which candidates are using Gen AI to create dishonest content, versus those who are using it to enhance the presentation of original and authentic content.   

Several studies have also shown that using AI to detect AI use is fraught with risk of bias against non-native English speakers. And anyone who has used online detectors will know that original text is often misclassified as 100% Gen AI produced due to the inadvertent use of a certain keyword or phrase.  

This means that many candidates who are using Gen AI to produce a CV or answer typical application questions are effectively undetectable, leading to these stages quickly becoming even less reliable at establishing candidate quality. Some major employers have already begun reducing their reliance on CVs for initial candidate screening or eliminated them entirely from their processes. This trend is likely to accelerate as confidence in these documents continues to erode. 

Online Test & Assessment Vulnerability 

Under controlled lab conditions with well-crafted prompts, Gen AI tools have achieved passing scores on some standard online assessments including psychometric tests, producing correct or criteria-matching answers across various question types. Cognitive reasoning tests, situational judgement tests and even personality tests have been trialled to see how accurately Gen AI tools can generate correct or high scoring answers. With access to the role requirements and other company information, Gen AI tools can produce answers to some online tests that inflate the score a typical candidate might achieve.   

At this point, we’re not seeing score disruption at this stage of volume assessment processes. Every method will have a different level of vulnerability. Some may be sound, and the biggest threat to their accuracy may continue to come from candidates asking other people to take the tests for them.   

However, with 20% of job seekers in our survey saying they used Gen AI to complete an online test, it would be prudent for employers to periodically review and stress-test their online assessments to ensure that they are not easy to pass using Gen AI tools. If there are vulnerable areas, organisations can then introduce more robust tests and assessments to ensure their sift progresses the candidates with genuine potential for the role.   

Online Interview Problem 

It can be tempting to feel that abandoning online assessment methods in favour of pre-recorded or virtual live interviews would be a way of avoiding any risk of Gen AI use. Pre-recorded video interviews are likely to remain part of many volume assessment processes, valued for their efficiency and for creating opportunities to evaluate key criteria like motivation and verbal communication skills. And live virtual interviews over Zoom or Teams are common pre-assessment centre shortlisting tools, used to ensure that those invited to the assessment centre have sufficient the interpersonal skills to warrant a place in the final selection stage. 

However, pre-recorded or asynchronous interview are also not completely safeguarded from Gen AI disruption. While our current data reveals low usage of Gen AI for pre-recorded or live virtual interviews, as Gen AI tools become more sophisticated, it could create greater potential risk of disruption to the expected levels of authenticity in answers. 

New AI tools can ‘listen’ and provide natural responses in real-time, meaning that, if they choose, candidates can provide credible—yet made-up— answers to typical interview questions. Combined with advancements in gaze management technology, during interviews candidates can read from AI-generated responses while appearing to maintain direct eye contact with the web camera and delivering off-the-cuff answers.  

Research suggests that video interviewees who read or paraphrased AI-generated responses received much higher overall interview ratings than those who did not use AI. This presents a concerning catch-22: the very methods designed to efficiently screen candidates may no longer be reliable, while the alternative of conducting more in-depth interviews will stretch recruitment timelines and budgets. 

Navigating the New Recruitment Reality 

Many organisations are likely to need to review their assessment tools to adopt an approach that balances efficiency with integrity. As our research demonstrates, the tension between these priorities will only intensify as Gen AI capabilities continue to evolve. Some degree of AI assistance is likely unavoidable, so employers must concentrate instead on managing its use constructively and identifying the truly human qualities that drive success in a role. 

The good news is that our data indicates that it isn’t necessary to throw out everything that has helped us to find great new employees in the past. But it does show that the potential for disruption is present, and that the latest Gen AI capabilities are already being used in ways that can make it harder to tell who to hire—especially if we don’t review and evolve our assessment processes to protect the integrity of our recruitment outcomes.  

Identifying vulnerabilities in your assessment process is a crucial first step for organisations seeking to maintain integrity. That why PeopleScout’s Assessment Design & Delivery team has developed our Gen AI Opportunity & Risk Assessment Audit. This thorough review of your recruitment process will identify both vulnerabilities and opportunities related to Gen AI throughout the candidate journey. Our occupational psychologists prepare a report of evidence-based recommendations so you can focus your resources on critical vulnerability points, protecting the accuracy of your selection as well as diversity outcomes. 

For more Gen AI insights, download the full AI-Enabled Applicant: How Candidates Are Really Using Gen AI in Recruitment report. 

You may also be interested in: 

The Truth About Gen AI & Job Seekers: 3 Insights from Our Latest Research 

Posted on by akessler

The intersection of generative AI (Gen AI) and job seeking has garnered significant attention, with numerous tools available to help candidates with résumés, CVs, cover letters and interview preparation. Media coverage suggests widespread adoption, but actual prevalence isn’t that clear. 

To move beyond the hype and establish a clearer picture of the use of Gen AI across the broad population of job seekers, PeopleScout commissioned YouGov to conduct a comprehensive survey of 1,000 members of the UK public who had changed jobs within the previous 12 months. Our new research report, The AI-Enabled Applicant: How Candidates Are Really Using Gen AI in Recruitment, aims to provide clarity on real usage patterns and to better understand the potential implications for recruitment—especially amongst concerns that candidates might use these technologies to misrepresent their skills and experiences. 

This article is the first in a series exploring the data and grappling with the implications of Gen AI use amongst candidates. Read on for three key findings from our report. 

1. Gen AI Usage Amongst Candidates Isn’t as Prevalent as You Might Think 

While media narratives often portray Gen AI usage as nearly universal among job seekers, our research indicates a more measured reality. Our study reveals that fewer than one in five people (18%) who changed jobs in the UK in the last year used Gen AI at any point in their job search.   

This is considerably lower than media reports have suggested, and it’s lower than we were expecting given Gen AI tools have been freely available since November 2022. This calls for a reality check on the hype.  

It’s easy to see how employers could see media content—alongside indicators of Gen AI use in their own candidate pools—and overestimate the frequency of Gen AI-enhanced applications. However, at this point the evidence suggests that the vast majority of job seekers from the general population are not using Gen AI to assist their job search or applications.   

2. Interviews Seem Safe…For Now 

Just 9% of those using Gen AI at any point in the recruitment process used it to support their pre-recorded interviews. This was unexpectedly low, given the number using it to help with résumés, CVs and applications. It may be that its value in helping to prepare and practice for interviews is less well understood or harder to achieve. For example, Gen AI tools may need more sophisticated prompting to get high quality support for interview preparation.   

For candidates who used Gen AI at some point and who had a live virtual interview as part of their selection process, only 8% used Gen AI to help with this but, significantly, almost half of this group disclosed that they had used it for live support during the interview. Live interviews were previously a protected space from Gen AI use, and although this is reported by just handful of job seekers, it clearly suggests that real-time assistance during live virtual interviews is happening—and we would assume this is likely to increase.    

It isn’t evident from our survey exactly what type of live Gen AI assistance candidates were using, but newer Gen AI capabilities of ‘listening’ and responding in real time with a conversational style could allow candidates to deliver inauthentic answers without detection. This is something employers are likely to want to keep under observation and consider acting on, redesigning interview questions to make it harder to use Gen AI for deceptive purposes. Despite this, our survey indicates that this kind of potentially disruptive use is low amongst job changers and not a major cause for alarm at this point.   

3. No One’s Talking About It 

Perhaps most revealing for employers is that of those applicants who used Gen AI, only 38% would be willing to disclose their use to employers. The remaining 62% either wouldn’t disclose or are uncertain about whether they would—a concerning reality check for employers attempting to protect the integrity of their recruitment process.  

It begs the question—could this behaviour be driven by employers? According to our survey, employers rarely mention Gen AI usage in their communications with candidates. Only 5% of all job changers said their future employers spoke to them about Gen AI during the recruitment process. And for the few who did hear about it during recruitment,, 35% were told not to use it.   

The number of employers failing to communicate about AI in recruiting may contribute to candidates’ reluctance to discuss their Gen AI usage with employers due to an assumption that employers’ silence on the matter indicates that Gen AI use is inappropriate or unacceptable, and to reveal use of it would negatively impact their chances of getting an offer. 

Gen AI Opportunities & Risks 

Navigating this complex landscape effectively often requires specialized expertise and support. Working with a talent partner with deep assessment expertise can provide crucial advantages in maintaining recruitment integrity while achieving business objectives.  

As leading providers of talent assessment solutions, PeopleScout’s Assessment Design & Delivery team offers a Gen AI Opportunity & Risk Assessment Audit to provide organizations with a comprehensive review of their recruitment processes, identifying both vulnerabilities and opportunities related to generative AI throughout the candidate journey. This independent audit, grounded in psychological expertise, stress-tests each assessment element within your specific recruitment context to determine how Gen AI might impact selection accuracy and diversity outcomes. The resulting evidence-based recommendations allow employers to strategically focus resources on critical vulnerability points while potentially leveraging beneficial AI uses, enabling informed decisions about whether to accept, prevent or adapt to candidates’ use of Gen AI tools based on your organizational values and objectives. 

For more Gen AI insights, download the full The AI-Enabled Applicant: How Candidates Are Really Using Gen AI in Recruitment report. 

You may also be interested in: 

The AI-Enabled Applicant: How Candidates Are Really Using Gen AI in Recruitment

Posted on by akessler

The AI-Enabled Applicant

How Candidates Are Really Using Gen AI in Recruitment

Is generative AI (Gen AI) disrupting your recruitment process? Our exclusive research with YouGov unveils what’s actually happening right now—and the results might surprise you.

While headlines scream about AI taking over job applications, our fresh data shows the nuanced reality of how candidates in the UK are really using these tools in 2025.

In this comprehensive report, you’ll discover:

  • The true adoption rate of Gen AI by job seekers (spoiler: it’s not what most experts predicted)
  • Which specific recruiting touchpoints are most vulnerable to Gen AI impact
  • Unexpected findings about candidate attitudes toward disclosing Gen AI usage
  • Actionable strategies to protect assessment integrity without fighting technology

Don’t Base Critical Hiring Decisions on Outdated Information

As some organizations implement extreme measures like blanket AI bans, others are finding smarter, more sustainable approaches that embrace innovation while maintaining recruitment quality. Download the report now to get ahead of this rapidly evolving challenge and transform potential threats into competitive advantages for your recruitment strategy.

Wates: Reconstructing Industry Perceptions Through Vibrant Employer Branding

Posted on by akessler
Wates: Reconstructing Industry Perceptions Through Vibrant Employer Branding

Early Careers

Wates: Reconstructing Industry Perceptions Through Vibrant Employer Branding

PeopleScout helped Wates to attract and engage a wider range of candidates to the male-dominated construction industry through a vibrant and inclusive employer brand and assessment center.

7,918 applications generated (30% from women)
343 candidates assessed
1 / 3 of offers went to women despite being underrepresented in the industry

Situation

The construction industry’s image has remained virtually unchanged for years—dominated by hard-hats, high-vis, and steel beams rather than stories highlighting inclusion, innovation, collaboration or opportunity.

When Wates, a UK development, building and property maintenance company, needed to recruit 81 trainees across 21 roles and 28 locations, our priority was to stand out meaningfully in a crowded market. Despite its impressive 125-year legacy as an industry leader, Wates suffered from limited brand awareness.

Our objectives were clear:

  • Raise overall awareness of the Wates organization
  • Encourage a shift in industry perception
  • Attract a more diverse range of candidates

Solution

With these hard-to-fill roles distributed nationwide, we needed a targeted approach. Based on research, we developed four distinct audience personas that represented our target demographics, which then informed our channel strategy and creative approach.

Authentic Messaging

We crafted a new compelling, narrative that brought together everything Wates stands for:

Creating tomorrow together.

Headlines embodied Wates’ core values, speaking directly to the impact individuals would have on the company’s legacy while highlighting key benefits of joining the organization.

Distinctive Visual Identity

We developed bold, vibrant visuals that stood apart from industry norms. Our creative approach demonstrated how professional and personal lives intertwine, visually representing work-life balance and inclusivity. A dedicated photoshoot allowed us to not only capture images but also collect employee stories that inspired a bespoke set of illustrations.

Inclusive Assessment Process

We redesigned the video interview process to ensure accessibility for all candidates. While maintaining a standardized process to ensure fairness, each of the 21 roles required careful manual shortlisting based on performance metrics. With 343 candidates advancing to assessment, we conducted virtual assessment centers over three weeks, with each role getting a dedicated day.

Results

The campaign generated exceptional engagement:

  • 518,000 impressions (40% from TikTok)
  • 7,918 applications
  • 2,022 candidates invited to video interview
  • 343 candidates progressed to assessment centers
  • 30% female representation at application stage, increasing to 34% at offer stage
  • 117 offers extended

“We’re delighted with the quality of candidate applications and how much the collaborative work ethic stood out.”

– Annette, Wates

At a Glance

  • COMPANY
    Wates
  • INDUSTRY
    Building & Construction
  • PEOPLESCOUT SOLUTIONS
    Talent Advisory
  • ABOUT WATES
    The Wates Group was established in 1897 and is one of the leading privately-owned, construction, development and property services companies in the UK. They employ almost 6,000 people, working with a range of clients and partners from across the public and private sectors.
Let’s Connect

Gen AI & Interviews: Navigating the Impact in Volume Assessment

Posted on by akessler

By Amanda Callen, Psychol AFBPsS FRSA, Head of Assessment Design

Pre-recorded or asynchronous video interviews have long been a core feature in volume assessment processes, valued for their ability to evaluate key criteria like motivation and verbal communication skills. But the rapid increase in accessible Generative AI (Gen AI) tools has created a significant potential risk of disruption to the expected levels of authenticity in answers and to the predictive strength of online interviews as a sifting tool.

PeopleScout’s year-on-year volume assessment data has so far shown little evidence of disruption following the introduction of free Gen AI tools like ChatGPT, but the potential for manipulation is undeniable. Realistically, we must expect that when candidates are given time to prepare responses, some will choose to use the tools to enhance their own pre-recorded video interview answers.

So, what can you do to protect the integrity of video interviews?

Should Preparation Time Be Scrapped?

Although an understandable initial response might be to prevent candidates from using Gen AI by removing preparation time and requiring instant responses, this approach could introduce new problems. Interview processes where there is no chance for the candidate to gather their thoughts may disadvantage neurodivergent candidates or those who have had less social and educational support for their job search. This could create a negative impact on inclusion and diversity goals.

Introducing a Second Assessment Point

If you want to keep the pre-recorded interview stage, you could consider introducing a second assessment point for the same criteria evaluated in the pre-recorded interview at a later stage, such as during an in-person interview or an assessment centre. Comparing performance and content shared at the different stages, allows assessors to identify people whose answers indicate inconsistency across stages.

Are Only Live Interviews Both Safe and Fair?

Face-to-face live interviews seem protected from any interference from real-time use of Gen AI to produce inauthentic responses. However, new Gen AI capabilities mean that virtual live interviews, such as those conducted via Zoom or Teams, are not completely safeguarded from Gen AI use.

Whilst to date it is has been difficult for candidates to use Gen AI without detection, new AI tools can ‘listen’ and provide natural responses in real-time. This, combined with advancements in gaze management technology, means that during virtual live interviews, candidates can read off AI generated responses while appearing to still maintain eye contact—and assessors may be unable to tell anything is amiss. There are even new Gen AI tools specifically marketed to job seekers that claim success in helping interviewees.

The Need for a Systemic Approach

Dropping pre-recorded or virtual interviews completely isn’t always optimal—especially with high-volume hiring. Simply taking them out of the process could lead to less holistic and effective sifting and a greater number of candidates being manually assessed. A more systemic response to the challenges posed by candidates using Gen AI is needed.

A review of your end-to-end assessment process and the individual assessment methods within it will give you an opportunity to evolve and improve your assessment to ensure the quality and fairness of hiring decisions are maintained despite candidate use of Gen AI.

Redefining Success Criteria

For many roles it is essential to include the motivation and skills needed to work with new Gen AI tools as part of the assessment criteria. A strong assessment process that embraces innovation ensures that candidates are not only evaluated on established success criteria but also on their potential to develop the skills that will help them succeed in a workplace where the ability to leverage AI and other emerging and future technologies is a pivotal factor in organisational success.

While there are no easy answers to the challenges created by candidates using Gen AI, a managed and systemic approach to evolving your assessment processes will help you capitalise on opportunities and ensure a fair and effective hiring process. Want to explore more about the impact of Gen AI on interviews? Watch our webinar on-demand, Job Interviews & Gen AI: Pitfalls & Best Practices to Hire Top Talent.