What are the latest trends and innovations in ATS for digital interview feedback?

Keeping up with the latest trends is crucial to stay ahead in your fields. Here are some new innovations that I think are worth sharing: 1) Real-time feedback notifications are a game-changer. They give you instant prompts to communicate with clients & candidates. 2) Integrating video interview tools with ATS makes the process seamless by letting you review and share candidate responses easily. 3) AI-driven insights can provide detailed analysis of interviews, highlighting key strengths and areas for improvement. 4) Lastly, using mobile-friendly platforms ensures that feedback can be given and received on the go, making the entire process more efficient.

pplicant Tracking Systems (ATS) are evolving, particularly in how they handle digital interview feedback. Here are some trends and innovations: 1. Collaborative Feedback: Modern ATSs enable simultaneous feedback from all interviewers, making the review process more efficient. 2. AI Assistance: Some ATS platforms incorporate AI to analyze responses and non-verbal cues, offering more data-driven feedback. 3. Structured Evaluation: ATS platforms are focusing on making feedback more standardized to reduce bias, using specific evaluation metrics. 4. Integration with Video Platforms: Many ATSs now integrate with video interviewing tools to offer feedback and evaluations in one place.

I don't provide free consultative advise / feedback..........................................................................

AI can do a lot of things, but I've yet to see it do anything well. I've seen some preliminary data on AI generated feedback, and it was so far from what I witnessed that it made me wonder who actually sees value in it.

AI is not (yet?) trustworthy in the recruiting process. It takes the biases of one person's response and applies it to the next, doubling-down on the biases with each successive candidate. It can be a powerful assistant to generating ideas but it is not informed of the company's obstacles, needs, nor the candidate's capabilities.

I don't provide free consultative advise / feedback..........................................................................

If the original feedback is less than relevant, there is no point in relaying that information to others. Real time collaboration is only as good as the information that is being shared.

Hiring Managers, vendors within staffing and recruiting as well as internal HR and talent acquistion should be able to all login, and have a user experience within the ATS to collaborate on the applications, candidates in the funnel and interview process ans leave proper feedback which quickens the hiring process overall.

Real time collaboration is one of the strongest value adds that I would recommend more ATS systems implement. Annotation notes specifically can offer the opportunity to clarify on points that otherwise might seem a bit vague during the short windows of the interview process.

Heavy training with the interviewers would be required if the candidate is seeing this real-time. Mistakes or comments misinterpreted are now available to the candidate to use in a lawsuit. Businesses need to be careful of how they implement technology if their current workforce is not fully prepared.

I don't provide free consultative advise / feedback..........................................................................

Again, until the data is meaningful and accurate, the analytics will be as off-kilter as the feedback. So again, what is the point until there is better AI on the feedback.

I can see this as being a positive to hold the interview stakeholders accountable. If a particular participant is always listing negatives without positives that is identifying an opportunity for training. Or if the interviewer 'prides themselves on being a harsh grader' and showing themselves as an outlier. Being able to track the metrics supports keeping the process moving and driving to keep TTF metrics low.

I don't provide free consultative advise / feedback..........................................................................

Again, until we know for sure that the feedback is accurate, there is very little point in personalizing it. For example, I have seen completely different feedback provided by AI simply because a person added a word to a statement. The word didn't change the meaning or the intent of their statement, but the AI feedback took it completely differently.

What ATS is collecting this candidate info to be able to personalize the AI generated feedback? These listed items are irrelevant in the application process, so from where is it being collected? How can it be trusted to be accurate without transparency of its source? Pulling info from any source not consented to by the candidate results in lawsuits for the business. Too many risks of inaccurate info being used to make hiring decisions that have not gone through an appropriate adjudication process.

I don't provide free consultative advise / feedback..........................................................................

Too many people are missing out on great candidates because of AI (a quick perusal of LinkedIn will tell you how people feel applying to companies who rely on AI for the recruiting process). It should be used as an add-on, and not be the primary tool. It's sad to see people so lazy these days.

Reminding the interview stakeholders to provide input is a good thing. It reduces time to fill by reducing forgetfulness due to business needs and not having candidate's wait 'at the speed of business'. Internally we always think we're making decisions quickly because we're busy all day, thinking about work off-hours, but in reality it takes days to weeks to get info back to a candidate. Not a positive! Also reduces the effort on the TA team from having to chase down information.

This is only useful if all the information that has been captured is accurate, and that's not always the case. Example, people who use acronyms to describe processes and vice-versa. If the AI/ATD isn't loaded with both pieces of jargon, the information becomes useless and irrelevant. I've seen candidates passed over because nobody read a resume and in one case the person was asked to apply by the bank CEO, but they didn't get an interview because they spelled everything out and didn't use acronyms, but the ATS was set up to look for keywords, all of which were acronyms). In the end the person got the job and the HR person was replaced because as per the CEO, ATS is to help you, not replace you, but if you let it do the work, so will I.

I don't provide free consultative advise / feedback..........................................................................

This is using AI to double-down on bad info or bias. Assessments in the hiring process are constantly found in lawsuits to be biased. References are biased because 1) the candidate is only giving you controlled contacts or 2) you are getting info on the candidate from someone not informed of the company's needs, role requirements, other candidates, interview responses, with a personal agenda, etc while also not allowing the candidate adjudication options in case of false information. Too much risk for the business.

I don't provide free consultative advise / feedback..........................................................................