Artificial intelligence (AI) is already making it easier for workers to put together a job application. The jury is still out on whether it is also making it easier for them to get the job.
Nearly half of recent hires used AI to apply, according to a survey by Resume Builder released in May. One in five Gen Zers looking for a job has used ChatGPT to create a resume or cover letter, a survey released the same month by Resume Templates showed.
I have discussed these findings with managers, professors and mid-career professionals. The reactions range from “That’s cheating!” to “That’s smart.”
Illustration: Constance Chou
“The rules around this are super-unclear to everybody,” said Monica Parker-James, the associate dean for industry relations and career services at Boston University’s Questrom School of Business. That leaves applicants and employers to use their own judgment — and weigh for themselves the pros and cons.
First, the cons. An AI-written cover letter would sound generic. That can be fatal to one’s chances of getting an interview. The output might sound like business-speak, but that does not mean it is good.
People say AI-generated cover letters sound eerily alike. Questrom clinical assistant professor Mohammad Soltanieh-Ha said he has gotten e-mails for open positions that were clearly written by ChatGPT — they were all “five paragraphs long and the language is very similar.” I know one editor who uses ChatGPT to assess article submissions; if the writing or ideas sound remotely similar to what the large language model (LLM) spits out after a similar prompt, it is an automatic rejection.
I know from experience that it can be quite challenging to edit turgid, jargon-filled prose into something zesty and original. So, rather than using ChatGPT to generate a draft, write your own, upload it to ChatGPT and ask for a critique, Soltanieh-Ha said. I tried this, using a couple of cover letters I had lying around, and was low-key astonished by the results. These letters by their nature are often formulaic and stilted; but still, it surprised me that the ChatGPT-ified versions sounded more natural than the original drafts.
That does not mean applicants should take every suggestion offered by the LLM. It can be a bit too enamored of “corporate-ese.” When I asked it to improve my resume, it changed a section saying I had “launched” and “hosted” podcasts to say I had “spearheaded” them, which tells a recruiter less about my specific skills.
Where generative AI might be strongest is in helping applicants prepare for the job interview. ChatGPT can generate a list of common interview questions based on the specific job description. It can also give advice on answering tricky ones like, “what’s your greatest weakness?” (The LLM’s recommendation: Acknowledge a weakness, show what steps you have taken to address it, highlight your progress and connect it to the role for which you are applying.)
The right way to use the tool is as a sparring partner to hone your own thinking, experts said.
As for employers, recruiters might want to emphasize interviews and projects — work the candidate has already completed, whether at a previous job or in school — more than application materials. In fact, recruiters might need to spend more time talking with candidates, as written applications start to sound more alike, University of Porto associate professor and LTPlabs cofounder Pedro Amorim said.
Additionally, any who oppose AI use by applicants should make that clear in the job posting. If you are planning to ask finalists for a writing sample and want to make absolutely sure ChatGPT is not involved, you could ask them to provide it in your office — with paper and pen. If that sounds silly (and I have to say it does), you would just have to accept that some candidates would get a little technological help.
However, I do not think it is cheating to use AI to apply for a job. People have long used templates to write resumes and cover letters, a laborious process that does not always produce great results. We have tools today that work better, and candidates who do not use them — or do not, at least, learn how to use them — might be left behind.
After all, many recruiters use technology to screen job applications. It seems only fair that the candidates, who might have to apply to dozens of jobs to get an offer, be able to use efficiency-enhancing technology, too.
However, candidates should only use AI if they are willing to be honest about it.
One in three candidates said a hiring manager has asked about their use of ChatGPT, the Resume Templates survey showed. It would be a bad idea to lie.
Moreover, the tools to be able to tell whether someone has used generative AI are coming, MIT Sloan Center for Information Systems Research research scientist Nick van der Meulen said.
Attitudes about new technology can shift quickly. I am old enough to remember when you had to ask Microsoft Word to run spell check (now it is automatic). It did not take long for my teachers to shift from “It’s cheating to use spell check” to “Always use spell check.”
We are not there yet with AI, but we are getting closer: According to a recent Korn Ferry survey, 80 percent of professionals say ChatGPT is a “legitimate, beneficial work tool.”
It is also a legitimate, beneficial tool for people searching for work.
Sarah Green Carmichael is a Bloomberg Opinion columnist and editor. Previously, she was an executive editor at Harvard Business Review.
The gutting of Voice of America (VOA) and Radio Free Asia (RFA) by US President Donald Trump’s administration poses a serious threat to the global voice of freedom, particularly for those living under authoritarian regimes such as China. The US — hailed as the model of liberal democracy — has the moral responsibility to uphold the values it champions. In undermining these institutions, the US risks diminishing its “soft power,” a pivotal pillar of its global influence. VOA Tibetan and RFA Tibetan played an enormous role in promoting the strong image of the US in and outside Tibet. On VOA Tibetan,
Sung Chien-liang (宋建樑), the leader of the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) efforts to recall Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Legislator Lee Kun-cheng (李坤城), caused a national outrage and drew diplomatic condemnation on Tuesday after he arrived at the New Taipei City District Prosecutors’ Office dressed in a Nazi uniform. Sung performed a Nazi salute and carried a copy of Adolf Hitler’s Mein Kampf as he arrived to be questioned over allegations of signature forgery in the recall petition. The KMT’s response to the incident has shown a striking lack of contrition and decency. Rather than apologizing and distancing itself from Sung’s actions,
US President Trump weighed into the state of America’s semiconductor manufacturing when he declared, “They [Taiwan] stole it from us. They took it from us, and I don’t blame them. I give them credit.” At a prior White House event President Trump hosted TSMC chairman C.C. Wei (魏哲家), head of the world’s largest and most advanced chip manufacturer, to announce a commitment to invest US$100 billion in America. The president then shifted his previously critical rhetoric on Taiwan and put off tariffs on its chips. Now we learn that the Trump Administration is conducting a “trade investigation” on semiconductors which
By now, most of Taiwan has heard Taipei Mayor Chiang Wan-an’s (蔣萬安) threats to initiate a vote of no confidence against the Cabinet. His rationale is that the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP)-led government’s investigation into alleged signature forgery in the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) recall campaign constitutes “political persecution.” I sincerely hope he goes through with it. The opposition currently holds a majority in the Legislative Yuan, so the initiation of a no-confidence motion and its passage should be entirely within reach. If Chiang truly believes that the government is overreaching, abusing its power and targeting political opponents — then
RSS