Subscribe
Share
Share
Embed
AI is reshaping leadership, strategy, and the very role of HR. In each episode, the host Barb Bidan explores how AI drives innovation and leadership in HR with actionable insights for the future of work.
The Human Element is brought to you by Harper, Wisq’s always-on AI HR Generalist transforming how work gets done. Powered by deep HR intelligence, Harper delivers instant, accurate, and empathetic support—from policy questions to performance coaching—so your people get answers fast and your teams stay focused.
Learn more at Wisq.com.
Christine Aldrich & Barb Bidan | May 29
===
[00:00:00] Welcome to The Human Element, presented by Wisq. I'm your host, Barb Biden, and in each episode, I sit down with CHROs and senior HR leaders to explore how AI, innovation, and human insight are reshaping the future of HR. We'll explore how technology is reshaping leadership, strategy, and the role of HR by sharing candid stories, practical ideas, and strategic perspectives to help you shape the future.
The Human Element is brought to you by Wisq, the leader in agentic HR and creator of Harper, the world's first AI HR generalist. Learn how Harper can resolve up to eighty percent of routine HR tasks autonomously. Learn more about Wisq at wisq.com.
Speaker: My guest today is Christine Aldrich. Christine is the chief people officer at Pindrop. Christine has built her HR career at companies like Dunkin' Brands, where she became known for weaving people strategy directly [00:01:00] into business outcomes. Now she leads people at Pindrop, a company on the front lines of voice s-security and deepfake detection, which means that she sits in a uniquely strange seat.
She runs HR at a company building the technology to catch the very kind of fraud that her own recruiting team, and probably all of ours, has had to defend against, and that is exactly , what we're here to talk about today. Deepfakes, fake candidates, and what hiring really looks like when you can no longer assume that the person on the other end of the camera is who they say they are.
Christine, I am super excited to talk about this. Thank you for joining me on the show today.
Speaker 2: Thank you so much, Barb, and I can guarantee that I am a real person.
Speaker: Fantastic. Me too. I've also led recruiting teams and so I am genuinely and deeply very interested in the, the topic. And we'll cover a, a few other things too, but before we hop in, I really uh, think that, uh, our listeners appreciate understanding a little bit more deeply who we are talking [00:02:00] to.
And so I'm hoping you can tell me a little bit more about your background, your path to becoming a CPO, and how you ended up at the company that is building deep fake detection technology
Speaker 2: Sure. so I, I like to say that I am in the rare category that I've always known that HR and people operations is what I wanted to do my entire career. I didn't happen to fall into it and, or get pulled into it in another way. Both of my parents were entrepreneurs, and so growing up, I really saw how the relationship drove the business, and for me, that just really kind of equated to human resources. So that is what I went to my undergrad and my master's certificate for was human resources management, international business, and organizational design. right out of college just like every single person my very first job was HR director, and I totally believe I learned more in those first four weeks than I did in any four years of college that could have ever taught me. that is the world of [00:03:00] HR that we live in, right? No two days are the same.
I grew up in Michigan and, you know, kind of the joke is they do not let you out of the state until you work for one of the Big Three. So I worked at Ford Motor Company for a while and survived the automotive downturn and realized That industry is not where I wanted to stay. So I did a complete pivot and went into QSR, quick service restaurants, and that's where I was at Dunkin' Brands. I was at Dunkin' Brands when they went IPO. and then I got a call that said, "Here is a once in a career opportunity. Come work at this startup and it will be life-changing." Barb, I totally took that line hook and sinker, and sinker because I, I totally believed them, and now I'm at my fourth startup. So the first one was through education technology. The second one was through real estate technology. The third was through sales technology. And then when I was at my last company prior to this, I got the call for the opportunity at PinDrop. And making this shift to PinDrop was really about [00:04:00] being more intentional about being in a technology-focused environment. it's one that really closely ties with the HR challenges that we are facing today the company is really fundamentally addressing an issue of trust, trust in the digital interactions across banking, across you know, many other services and of course, across interviewing, recruiting, and human resources.
Speaker: Mm-hmm. Well, so can relate on the startup front. And I also can relate 'cause we grew up as neighbors probably. I was right across the border in Windsor, Ontario. So we love our friends from Michigan. So,
Speaker 3: 100%
Speaker: so I'm, I'm super excited to dive in actually. So something that you've been quoted as saying is that fraudsters are now using AI-generated resumes, fake online profiles and even deepfake faces.
I have heard the stories too and voices, deepfake voices too, to apply for remote jobs. Like it's wild out there. So how big has this problem actually gotten? And when did you first realize as like an HR professional that it [00:05:00] had crossed a line?
Speaker 2: Yeah. Yeah. It's a great question, Barb. So, we as a recruiting team came across our first fraudulent candidate in December of '24. And so we were sitting around a meeting, and I had a recruiter say, this actually what we think this is?" and that was proven to be true. So at that point, going into 2025, we were actively seeking out these deepfake candidates in our own recruiting pipeline. And I had gone to an HR conference in March of '25, went to the same HR conference this past year and when I first went, I was showing pictures of these deepfake candidates and videos of them, and they were like, "No way. That's crazy. Would never happen to me." Fast-forward a year later, everybody has a story. So the problem has grown so much faster than people realize. You know, what started to feel like this edge [00:06:00] case, maybe it was a suspicious resume, maybe it was a candidate that just didn't quite line up, has quickly become something that we're seeing with real frequency. You know, our data shows that nearly one in six applicants show some sign of data manipulation whether it's AI-generated content, synthetic identity signals, , faked LinkedIn profiles or fake applications. it's really become clear that this is a recruiting challenge that is a much broader trust issue. You know, when you can no longer trust that the person that is sitting across from you is a real person is they-- who they say they are, it forces you to change your mindset about hiring.
Speaker: 100%, and especially since we've all gone so so digital too. I mean, I've been through I've, you know, worked in companies where our processes have been fully digital,
Speaker 3: Mm-hmm.
Speaker: rethinking the role of an in-person interview , as a necessary stage in the [00:07:00] process, but also, obviously, the technology that helps prevent it.
So I am super curious since you, I don't know that we... We're not set up to have brought a picture today, but since you did bring a picture to when you went to the HR conferences recently, what does a deepfake candidate actually look like in a real interview? Like, what are you guys actually catching and seeing out there?
Speaker 2: Yeah, yeah. And it can look different in a lot of different ways depending on how advanced the technology is. So in some cases, it can be fairly obvious, right? Your-- the voice is not lining up with the lip movement. The-- there could be a lag. There could be like a digital background. You can see other things that are popping out of the screen. Those, those are very, very obvious. But more and more, these candidates are looking very strong with very strong resumes and well-prepared applicants. The technology has advanced so rapidly that these candidates show up, like, very, very polished. They have credible online profiles, which used to be [00:08:00] another flag and they communicate very clearly and confidently. So on the surface, this pattern really raises the concerns. but what we've also seen is that while everything might seem normal at first, don't quite line up over time. And that is something that we've never really had to face before in the hiring world, right? I mean, who used to verify that it was the same person at every single stage of a process, right?
I mean-
Speaker: Right. And they're meeting different people on your side too, so who is gonna do that actually?
Speaker 2: Barb. You're exactly right. And we never really would have to think about that. But now that is absolutely something that we have to ensure that the same person with the same credentials, with the same voice, mannerisms, and background all show up through every single stage of the hiring process.
So it's not just because it's become one red flag. It starts with this pattern of small inconsistencies, but as the technology gets better, like these inconsistencies get harder to detect for the human eye, and it's a lot [00:09:00] of pressure to put on a recruiter in order to assume that that person is not accurate.
Speaker: I mean, it is a lot of pressure to put on a recruiter who's moving very, very quickly. And I am you said something a minute ago that I am kind of extra curious about is what does-- So if, if the technology is detecting things like data - manipulation using AI, which, I guess , when the word manipulation is in there, maybe it, like, feels like a negative connotation, but it might not always be, right?
Like, we actually know that candidates are rightfully and probably, uh, necessarily using AI in preparing applications. Is there a way to tell the difference between, oh, okay, well, this candidate used the help of AI, which might be good, right? It shows they're AI curious, et cetera, right? But versus, like, they've gone into, like, creating something that's a complete, like, fabrication.
Speaker 2: Mm-hmm. Another great question. So at PinDrop, we expect AI usage, right? So we are an AI company. We expect AI usage, but so much so [00:10:00] that we have AI fluency as one of our behavioral
Speaker: Yeah, we do too
Speaker 2: So exactly. So we, we fully expect and want people to be using AI as an adoption, right?
Speaker: Yep
Speaker 2: when they start to manipulate who they are, their background of work history. They have copied somebody else's LinkedIn profile. You can actually see that a lot of the deep fake candidates that we went and sought out have the exact same resume template that they just copy and paste and use over and over and over again. they're using that same resume template with different names to apply for your jobs multiple times. I mean, so it's, it's being able to be a little bit part detective when you're going through that in order to identify where AI has taken it and broken the level of trust versus ensuring the level of trust, which is what we expect through the hiring process.
Speaker: Totally. I've heard that, sort of fraudsters have, uh, kind [00:11:00] of ruined this old startup resume, I think originated from Andreessen Horowitz, and it's like they-- it's like the, it's like the perfect tech resume is now ruined because all the fraudsters, that's like the one, right?
That they're copying. I, I say this 'cause I also coach and do career coaching and, uh, used to be able to recommend that as a resume template, and I know not to do that anymore. So we're gonna find a new one of those. But I, we, you know, went a little bit into like, it's, you know, the tech industry, but I'm curious is this a tech industry problem, or is this a problem that's showing up elsewhere in, you know, other more traditional industries too?
Speaker 2: Yeah. I think early on, you know, it was more concentrated on the tech industry, especially in roles that were remote and, and maybe relatively easy to access from anywhere. But again, as I have seen in the past 12 months alone, that has absolutely changed over time. You know, we are increasingly seeing this play out across multiple industries. Any role that can be done remotely and any company that relies on [00:12:00] virtual hiring should be thinking about these risks. You know, it doesn't matter if it's finance or healthcare or customer support, really any organization that is hiring at scale. And a result is like, you know, this risk is the opportunity, and the opportunity is everywhere. And Barb, you mentioned something that was really interesting. You were saying that a lot of companies are thinking about going back to in-person hiring. we, as a fully remote organization, I think that that would be really challenging on our organization, our business, not just from a cost standpoint, but from a human capital standpoint. We don't have the leaders having the ability to take time to travel in, to hire their-- to interview their people in person. I mean, I think that that just detracts from the velocity of a business. Therefore, we have got to find out a way in order to ensure that we bring trust back to the hiring process.
Speaker: I fully agree. I mean, I, I actually hadn't even thought about the fact, , that in a remote company you're sending two people. You can tell how [00:13:00] f- how few in-person interviews I've been doing also, right? Or where I have, where, where it has been happening, it's like you're co-located in the same city or one- someone's in an office, so one person's traveling.
But in a remote company, not only would you go back to like pre-COVID times of like really expensive travel budgets associated with recruiting, you'd double it in a remote company. And also, where are you going if you're actually remote? I mean, where are you, where are you sending these, , the candidate and the manager to meet, right?
So it is, I mean, that's why I think we love, right, that there are companies like PinDrop that are coming up with technology-based solutions to help us with this stuff. Because I agree you know, just saying everyone will do an in-person interview is clearly not the answer. So I wanna dive in on recruiters a little bit more, right?
Because it is-- it makes the job of recruiter... I've led recruiting teams and, their job is hard and it's fast-paced and there's a lot of things from managing relationships to manage- managing technology and process and all of these things, and now this, right? So recruiters are trained to be unbiased also, [00:14:00] right?
We're training them to not be like noticing things about the features of someone in a video that might actually like call, call into question whether they're fake, right? we're taught to not , doubt things like accents, language or like a shady internet connection that's in and out, right?
And how does that training need to evolve when , some of these signals might actually be the fraud that we're experiencing today?
Speaker 2: Yeah. This is one point that I, I love to talk about because I think that it is the fundamental aspect, the human element of hiring, and we don't want to lose that. But that is ab-- what you said was absolutely true, Barb, and that is, is that we have trained recruiters in order to be unbiased for so long. you know, we any- you mentioned accents and communication style or, you know, having a technical glitch. You know, we've asked them to reserve judgment and instead just put those things to the side and focus on the skill evaluation. What's changing is, is [00:15:00] that we cannot rely on those signals to be authentic anymore. You know, things like - laggy communication or an unusual speech pattern used to be easy to explain, but now they are really actually could be signs of manipulation. You know? So we absolutely need to actually introduce technology that verifies identity so that recruiters don't have to rely human judgment alone. It's actually somewhat ironic in my mind 'cause it's like you want to introduce technology that can verify identity in order to keep the human aspect of the process, right? So recruiters should still be able to evaluate candidates based on skills and experience, but it's the identity piece that has to become more reliable and, and provide some support to recruiters as they're going through this process. 'Cause otherwise, it's just not fair to ask recruiters to make those calls on their own and actually risk the business. What if they get it wrong? That's too much pressure [00:16:00] when, when they-- we are not providing them with the tools they need in order to accurately identify identity in candidates.
Speaker: Right. I mean, that, uh, the downside risk of, recruiters trying to catch this purely by, like, visual identification is . sure, will it catch some fraud? Yes. But what else is gonna get caught in that net that you don't want caught? And so, that deserves to get through.
It's actually scary to me to think about having to have recruiters be in that position. I'm sure it's scary to them. It's like, it's a lot of pressure, but it also like I think we've gotten recruiters to a place where they're trying, they really are the unbiased s- skill evaluators for us, right?
Trying to do the right thing. We can't go back to them and be like, "Oh, just kidding," right? Like, actually, please start,
Speaker 3: to be
Speaker: please start visually IDing a bunch of stuff that, that we just told you was like really not, not a, a fair and equitable way to hire, right? So again, love the technology solutions. Uh, uh, so outside of technology, right, there are probably [00:17:00] some practical solutions that a recruiting team could put into place So what is something small that a recruiting team that's maybe just starting to think about, oh, this could be happening to me. What, what's a small thing that a team could look at or consider like Monday morning?
Speaker 2: Yeah, yeah. I think that a simple add of a lightweight identity check earlier in the process could just be helpful, right? So for example, you know, confirming, you know, a basic-- a person's basic details are consistent across stages, as we talked about, or having a second level of verification outside of the main interview flow could be something that is simple and lightweight that you could add to the actual interview process. You know, I know I mentioned consistency checks, but that is something else that I think that is really important. In particular on technical roles, when you're asking a candidate to do an assessment, right? You wanna make sure that the same person shows up across every interaction. requires is a recruiter to join maybe the first, you know, three minutes of an interview when the candidate joins, along with the [00:18:00] hiring manager or whoever's at the next stage of the interview process, just for that quick verification. You know? I think that it takes some of the guesswork out of the authenticity of identification. And that way recruiters are just not relying on instinct.
Speaker: Well, and I think probably where you're, where you were going, right, with the recruiter joining, I think might lead into sort of my next question, like the recruiter being on for three minutes. Like, what are some ways that you can do this verification and do it in a way where it doesn't become a hostile experience, right?
Where it would like, you know, we're supposed to be providing an amazing candidate experience, not one that's like off-putting to candidates.
Speaker 3: Mm-hmm.
Speaker: how, how can you play that in terms of like the recruiter joining or doing that identity verification so that it feels like a positive part of the process?
Speaker 2: Yeah. Yep. I think the first part is actually to be transparent. I think that we need to let candidates know upfront that we have a verification process, and the steps that we have in place are there to both protect [00:19:00] them and the company, right? I think a lot of people, if they understand why upfront, it becomes a lot less adversarial. And if you think about it, you know, Barb, we, we identify or we confirm our identification all the time. If you call your bank, if you're to, you know, doing a transaction online, if you're, you know, even you're calling your cell phone provider, you know, in some way, shape, or form, you have to verify who you are. And, and I think that that's just gonna become an organic part, part of the interview and the hiring process, you know? So the way that we think about it at PinDrop is the goal is to move the verification into the background as much as possible, you know. Instead of necessarily asking the candidate more questions, which to your point, could then just be adding friction to the interview process itself, right?
Speaker: Mm-hmm.
Speaker 2: technology runs seamlessly in the background of virtual calls, and it confirms identity without having to interrupt the flow of conversation. I always think a-about the candidate [00:20:00] experience so much because, you know, somebody is interviewing for a job. They're naturally nervous. They are, you know, could be anxious.
And so if I can remove that piece and continue to make it as comfortable and seamless as a process as possible, I think that, that we owe that actually to our candidates
Speaker: Yeah, and I think if you're using the recruiter example, right? with a recruiter joining a call for a few minutes, right? That friendly phase where the candidate's already met the recruiter, right? If they're in subsequent interviews and the recruiter being able to just be that calming factor, right?
Like welcoming the candidate, kind of what coordinators used to do when we did all the in-office interviews, Right? Like we could just go back to, you know, that whole welcoming experience that we had in interviews like back in, back in the olden days.
But I also think as you- as we've been talking, like to your point, like your ident-- your ideas checked all over the place. Like you're talking and I'm going, it is kind of odd, right? That we've been making such important decisions like even before AI, right? Like we were making [00:21:00] very important decisions with very like loose information about the person until the day that they show up and do like a nine-nine for like U- like in the US, right?
Where you do-- like that's the first time that you actually validate that the person you've talked to is who they say they are, and was that the same person who even interviewed? I mean, not to, not to scare everyone, but like it does make, it does make sense. It does make sense.
Speaker 2: You are
Speaker: Yeah
Speaker 2: leaving the front door open. And we in, in companies do so much security training after you're hired. And in this instance, you are literally leaving the front door open for a fraudster to gain access to your company. that is what-- another reason why having this, you know, technology that can verify your identity is so essential, in particular in this digital age
Speaker: Well, I feel like we've been talking about like a, a few different juxtapositions in this conversation. So there's another strange irony here, right? Like the AI is the threat, but it's also the defense,
Speaker 3: [00:22:00] Yes
Speaker: from a tech perspective. How are you thinking about where AI belongs on your side of the hiring table and where it crosses a line?
Speaker 2: Mm-hmm. Yeah. It, it's another great point. So, know, I like to think of AI as the support system, you know, that will help pick up on the signals that a human might miss, right? Especially when those signals, as we talked about, are so subtle or spread across multiple interactions. So that's where it adds the real value because it takes the burden off of the recruiter, you know? I would say that it crosses the line it starts to replace human judgment in evaluating candidates. You know, yes, we can use AI in order to help, you know, sort through resumes and, and pare down, you know, how many applications we are getting, 'cause I know every recruiter is now faced with triple, if not four times the amount of applicants in every single job application due to AI and fraudulent candidates. I always want hiring to come back to the [00:23:00] people, right?
Speaker: Mm-hmm.
Speaker 2: us as humans to be able to understand a person's potential, their fit, you know, building relationships, understanding if they are a culture match, you know? We don't want AI making those types of decisions or filtering candidates out in a way that is not transparent or fair, you know?
So I think the balance is using AI to verify the process while still keeping humans at the very center of the talent recruitment process, you know. One will help you trust who you're actually talking to, and then the other, the human, helps you decide if they are the right person for the role.
Speaker: Agreed. You need both completely.
Speaker: I'm curious where your to get a little bit more into even like AI use within your team, how is your team using AI to make the recruiting process faster and better for your candidates?
Speaker 2: Yeah. So as I mentioned, you know, I think a lot of teams now have some sort of AI in their ATS or as a bolt-on product in order to help to sort through resumes ba-based on, you know, skill match, et [00:24:00] cetera, et cetera. And yes, that is absolutely helping us to save time and create efficiencies. but I think that instead our re-- of our recruiters having to second-guess, we use our own technology through every single interaction and interview process in order to understand whether that candidate is real instead of spending time in order to identify inconsistencies, right? It helps our recruiters confirm that the -- person on the other end of the interaction is actually just who they say that they are, and so that they don't have to rely on instinct and spend additional time worrying about authenticity. And in my mind, I actually think that that actually makes the process go faster and in a different way because they're not spending time validating these things with the In-instead, they're actually spending more time having conversation and identifying if they are a right fit for the role. It, it-- I think it removes the fear from our candidate's mindset, that they are the ones that have to verify that that is an actual [00:25:00] person on the other end and can really concentrate on the job that they've been tasked with.
Speaker: Yeah, it's almost like as you were talking, I was thinking about a checklist, right? It's like using the AI to do the things that belong on a checklist, allowing the human to do the things that belong in the human space, like getting to build a relationship.
Speaker 2: Exactly.
Speaker: Yeah.
Speaker 2: Exactly right
Speaker: , so I mean, when the hiring process becomes a security perimeter, which we did talk about it as, as it, it needs to be, right?
It is the front door, right? but real candidates, right? If we do this wrong, real candidates are gonna sort of pay the price. And I'm, I'm thinking about what the human cost of this is on the candidate side and how we keep hiring from, uh, feeling like an interrogation versus a conversation.
And I'm, I'm curious if like how are like what are you hearing back about how candidates are experiencing the validation process? Like do-- is there feedback that you get from like a company and product standpoint or feedback that your own recruiting team is getting? How are, how are-- how's this landing with the [00:26:00] people we are interviewing?
Speaker 2: Yeah. I mean, on a scale we have very-- very, very few candidates, and, and trust me, we do interview a lot come back and question the verification process. And the other thing is, is that we give them a choice. It's not s-- you know, if you choose not to verify the process, we understand and we respect that. But that is part of our hiring process. And we can meet with that person and explain that process in more detail in order to get them more comfortable. And if they choose to opt out, we respect that fully, you know. Because the last thing that we want is for a candidate to feel like they're being interrogated instead of evaluated, you know? it should be this conversation that we have between these two humans, right? So we're trying to, again, separate the security process from the actual hiring process as much as possible. You know, we're trying to move it into the background and use technology so that it, it impacts the candidate less directly. because at the end of the day we just-- it, it should be about trust, and we really wanna preserve this trust on both sides. You know, the stronger the verification doesn't have to mean [00:27:00] that hiring has to be cold and impersonal, you know? It should just be making it about being safer and more consistent. And actually, I believe that it helps to have the candidate on the other receiving end understand that we're not taking time interviewing false candidates either, right? So that they can understand that we are only spending time and committing to interviewing the real candidates that verify their identity on the other end.
Speaker: Yeah. My-- I go back to if you're doing the right thing as a candidate, you should actually feel
Speaker 3: Yeah
Speaker: really good about this. It might just take a minute to stop and think about it, right? The first time you're asked to s- to submit to like some identification validation, right? Like it's just a new experience that at first you might be like, "Oh, this is new."
But if you think about it, if you're on the good side of this it is helpful to you, it is a good thing, right? It's keeping those that are being disingenuous, fraudulent, like out of the process so that , the good folks can get the jobs, right? So
Speaker 3: Exactly
Speaker: it's ultimately a good thing. I mean, I, I do love [00:28:00] hiring.
As I said, I've led recruiting teams, right? So I could talk about this actually all day. But I'm gonna bring us to, uh, the end of our time together and a quick lightning round, some quick hit questions. , So just sort of first thing that pops into mind for each of these. What is the first red flag that might tell you a candidate isn't real?
Speaker 2: Yeah, I think that the first red flag is the mismatch, right? So it's a mismatch between what you're seeing and what you're hearing, and you're seeing that they're just not lining up. Uh, That's usually the first sign that something's off
Speaker: Great. And so next question. One trick that every recruiter should be using and I wanna change the word trick. So what, like what is one tactic, let's say? It sounds more... I don't wanna, I don't wanna seem like we're tricking candidates. So what's one tactic that every recruiter could be using on every video interview starting tomorrow?
Speaker 2: I go back to the consistency process, and I actually loved your comparison of the coordinator back in the day. I actually think that if we are verifying it is the same person through every single [00:29:00] step of the process, that is something that is low lift, that will help us identify that that is a real person through every single stage of the interview process. to your point, I think actually helps to make the candidate feel a little bit more confident as they're going through the process themselves.
Speaker: And we could if we don't have technology in place that's doing the detection for us, this is something we could start on Monday and start doing until we can get, like, really great tech in place to also help us from that perspective too. So what would you say is the, , most overrated tool in fighting candidate fraud?
Speaker 2: LinkedIn profiles.
Speaker: I mean, there, there are, there are some fake LinkedIn profiles out there
Speaker 2: It is,
Speaker: for sure. It is-- That-- I mean, yeah.
Speaker 2: be a big issue
Speaker: , that's been a problem before AI and we'll leave it at, we'll leave it at that. But, ne-next question is what is a real human skill that no deep fake will ever be able to get right?
Speaker 2: Yeah. you know, AI is great and it can replace, you know, a face, a [00:30:00] voice, you know, b- create an amazing resume. but I just think that it cannot replace humanity. And I think that curiosity, empathy, spontaneity, the conversation that you have which with a candidate, , it's just so hard to replace that I like to say, you know, like could be able to fake identity, it just cannot fake humanity.
Speaker: Like it a lot.
Speaker 2: Yeah.
Speaker: this sentence for me. The recruiters who survive the deepfake era are the ones who blank
Speaker 2: Build trust and don't rely on instinct
Speaker: Awesome. And so as we were talking, I tried to do a, a half-decent job of, of capturing some of the very best things that I, I caught and I'm taking away, so I'll, I'll give that a whirl to kind of bring us home. So the first thing that I got is that there is a place for human judgment in detecting fraudulent behavior.
So the thing that felt safest in what you described is watching for small clues. So it's when little things don't add up, right? It's not [00:31:00] just obvious fraud, but it's manipulation and so forth. So when there are-- when there is a pattern of things that just seems off, that might be a, a reason to create question in your mind.
So that was first. But then second, it's that you can't really do this properly, well, equitably without technology because otherwise how would what's happening affect what we've been teaching recruiters about not being biased and being the, the ones who bring fairness and e- and equity to the process?
So the tech helps recruiters to maintain that unbiased viewpoint while the tech actually detects the things that might be indicative of fraud happening. And then tying those two things together was kind of the third, is that ultimately you do need both together that the answer is a combination of AI plus human judgment.
So I have really, really enjoyed our conversation today, but I always leave guests with the final word so I'm gonna do that here. Um, What is something that you want every HR leader who just listened to us [00:32:00] chat to continue to think about on the rest of their drive home?
Speaker 2: Yeah. Thank you, Barb. I have enjoyed this conversation so much as well. the, the thing that I want, you know, HR leaders and, and recruiters and those that hire for organizations is to, just to really think about that, you know, for so long, hiring has been designated, like, about giving the candidates the benefit of the doubt, you know?
Speaker: Mm-hmm.
Speaker 2: and I love that about us, and I love that about our profession. But it's really changing about the signals that we've historically relied on, like what someone says, how they sound, how they present, are actually no longer reliable on their own. And it's not about, you know, wanting to, again, introduce, like, so much scrutiny and security into the process. how do we build processes that let us stay fair and human while still being confident about who we're interacting with? So I would just say that if HR leaders can, like, really start to reframe their hiring mindset that way, then they'll be in a better position to navigate you know, what's coming next in technology and [00:33:00] AI is, in particular, as it continues to evolve at the rapid pace that it is, and help to change the way that we do things.
Speaker: Such great advice. It was a pleasure having you on the show, Christine. Thank you so much for taking time to talk to me today
Speaker 2: Thanks so much, Barb. Appreciate it