[code51]

I'm curious how you're addressing any legal aspects about this:

> No black-box AI. Every candidate gets a detailed match receipt explaining exactly why they scored an 85%, complete with contextual evidence from their CV.

HR teams like to play dead when they actually have a file with detailed feedback on a candidate. Yet, they choose to keep that to themselves out of baseless legal fear. I wonder how that works out when somebody proves a company's filter consistently proves a specific bias gets rejected systematically.

and

> Automated assignment validation

which is particularly troubling for devs: companies scaling assignments as first screen. How do you get around "AI evaluating AI" loops especially about assignments ?

[genekrapivin]

Recruiters aren’t afraid to give feedback, and there are often no legal grounds for withholding it in Europe (I’m not counting FAANG companies or certain sectors like fintech). Usually, they simply don’t have the time (and enough motivation) to provide individual feedback to every applicant. This leads to ghosting and transitively to the brand reputational damage. Hiring Method allows you to send feedback to almost everyone!

In our software, the candidate being assessed does not know all the assessment criteria. Furthermore, this assessment is merely a starting point for discussion during the technical round. I need to update the description of this feature.

Thanks for the valid points!

[CalRobert]

For EU residents at least the HR data should be accessible via subject access request (though enforcement is poor)

[genekrapivin]

We are GDPR compliant. We are striving for EU AI Act compliance as well (once the final version is accepted).

[CalRobert]

How do I object to automated decision making?

[genekrapivin]

Hiring Method helps recruiters take decisions backed by numbers and transparent analysis, we do not take human out of the loop.