But to which level? Basic automation, i.e. sorting by proficency is not really done better by a human than machine. The problem doesn't lie in automation but how we apply it. Don't blame the tool, blame the user.
I think there is a lot of room for removing overautomation and creating transparency. Though just outright abandoning automation would hurt even more since human routines are even harder to evaluate/ make transparent.
If you have too many CV’s to look at, you can simply trash a random set (or automatically send a rejection email), then look at the remainder. You should still have roughly the same ratio of skilled candidates.
To still have the same ratio of skilled candidates would mean the automatic rejection has zero merit. For example, what about filtering for a minimum of x years of work experience for a senior position? Surely your ratio of skilled and appropriate candidates will increase.
What kind of proficiency do you mean, exactly? To me, the concept sounds too nebulous for a machine to analyse, as it needs precise instructions/criteria.
I think there is a lot of room for removing overautomation and creating transparency. Though just outright abandoning automation would hurt even more since human routines are even harder to evaluate/ make transparent.