January 2, 2025 • 42 mins
Are fake candidates on the rise in 2025?
The rise of AI has made fake job applications more sophisticated than ever. In this episode, I’m joined by former FAANG recruiter, Stefanie Fackrell to discuss the rising challenge of candidate catfishing. Discover how AI tools, fake profiles, and interview fraud are impacting hiring teams.
But instead of focusing on aggressive verification tactics that can harm diversity efforts, discover how to build genuine candidate relationships while protecting your hiring process. Learn why traditional screening methods are failing and get actionable strategies that work without compromising inclusive hiring practices.
What You'll Learn in This Episode:
- The "bot vs. bot" era of hiring: AI tools on both sides
- Real stories of sophisticated hiring scams and their consequences
- Impact on diversity, equity, and inclusion efforts
- Building fraud-resistant hiring processes
- Balancing verification with candidate privacy
Perfect for recruiters, hiring managers, and TA leaders who want to stay ahead of this growing challenge.
RESOURCES MENTIONED IN THIS EPISODE:
Greenhouse AI use policy: https://www.greenhouse.com/guidelines-for-using-ai-in-our-interviewing-process
Reddit Thread on Fake applicants: https://www.reddit.com/r/recruiting/comments/1gkl0u6/fake_applicants_are_out_of_control/
📬 Get the Newsletter: https://link.rhonapierce.com/YZEviw
//TIMESTAMPS:
00:00 INTRODUCTION
00:00 The Bot vs. Bot Era of Hiring
05:11 Candidate Deceit: The New Norm
09:53 Ethics and Creativity in Job Applications
15:08 AI in Interviews: Resourceful or Deceptive?
19:51 Building Relationships in Recruitment
25:07 Navigating the New Hiring Landscape
29:53 The Future of Recruitment: Community and Connection
RECOMMENDED NEXT EPISODE
→ #24: Building a Neuro-inclusive Hiring Strategy with Tameka Allen
****
🌟 CONNECT WITH STEFANIE
💼 LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/stefaniefackrell-hr-rebel/
🌐 Website: https://www.dysruptivehr.com/
🌟 CONNECT WITH ME
💼 LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/rhonabarnettpierce/
🦋 Bluesky: https://bsky.app/profile/rhonab.bsky.social
📸 Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/rhonabpierce/
🎵 TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@rhonabpierce
🌐 Website: https://www.rhonapierce.com/
💜 Leave a review on Apple Podcasts
https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/throw-out-the-playbook/id1740429498
🟢 Leave a rating on Spotify
https://open.spotify.com/show/4R6bJ4JZpqOlFdYelWwsBr
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Rhona Pierce (00:00):
I don't know who needs to hear this, but the
harder you make your hiringprocess, the more creative
candidates will get to game it.And now we're not just talking
about creative resumes orexaggerated skills. We're
talking about full blowncandidate catfishing. In 2024,
it's not just recruiters usingAI to screen applicants. It's
(00:21):
candidates using AI to outsmartrecruiters.
We've officially entered the botversus bot era of hiring, where
fake profiles, AI generatedresumes, and even stand ins for
interviews are becoming thenorm. The question is, how do we
protect our companies from thesescams without undoing years of
(00:42):
work towards fair, unbiasedhiring practices? Today, I'm
joined by my guest co host,Stephanie Fackrell, to help me
break it all down. Stephanie hasspent over a decade leading TA,
HR, and DI efforts at some ofthe biggest brands in tech,
Google, Apple, NVIDIA, Samsung.Now as the founder of Disruptive
(01:06):
HR, she advises startups on allthings HR and people.
Together, we're diving intowhat's happening in hiring
today, why it matters, and howwe can stay vigilant without
losing the fairness and equitywe've worked so hard to build.
Let's get into it. Hey,Stephanie. I'm so happy to have
(01:28):
you on the podcast today.
Stefanie Fackrell (01:30):
I'm so excited that it's been delayed,
but, yay, today's the day.
Rhona Pierce (01:36):
Today is in fact the day. So I wanted to talk
about this topic. Actually, youposted something a few months
back about it, and I loved theconcept of doing it like MTV
Catfish style. That was one
Stefanie Fackrell (01:53):
of my favorite shows or is. I think
it's still on. Right? It is on.It probably is like 15 years old
now.
I'm not sure.
Rhona Pierce (02:03):
Yeah. So before we dive in to what we found on the
Internet, I wanted to know kindof, like, what's the wildest
story you've heard about acandidate using AI or other
tricks to game the hiringprocess?
Stefanie Fackrell (02:20):
Yeah. So what prompted my post is I was in
peak HR, the amazing HR program,and I was chatting with a
recruiting leader, and we werejust talking about how to
identify fake candidates. Shewas dealing with a situation
where the LinkedIn profilelooked fake. It was somebody
(02:43):
else's picture, all theirinformation, and then the resume
seemed pretty sketchy. And theindividual had made it pretty
far into the interview process,but something felt pretty fishy.
And she started to sleuth, youknow, probably more in-depth
(03:04):
than a recruiter should. Asyou've said before, recruiters
are a little bit nosy. We'relike detectives, but it felt
like she almost needed to be adetective to really see if this
candidate was real andpotentially lived in the area
that they have listed on theirprofile and their resume. So
(03:24):
that prompted me to post becauseI just thought, oh my gosh,
everything is getting out ofcontrol. And the level of
candidate deceit to get noticed,and the level of detective work
that recruiters are gonna needto start doing is just crazy.
And how do we solve for that?
Rhona Pierce (03:46):
Yeah. And and I'm so excited that we're talking
about this. It's something thatI've worked in tech like you for
a long time, and it's beenhappening for years. I think now
it's easier for it to happen.Why do you think that we're
seeing, like, such an increasein these kinds of tactics?
(04:06):
Like, is it desperation? Is itcreativity? Or is it something
else?
Stefanie Fackrell (04:11):
Yeah. I had some thoughts on that because
when I was working at some ofthe bigger name brands, you
know, candidates would kind ofcheat on their interviews, they
would Google as they wereinterviewing. So it was a little
bit different now than AI beinghere. And I do think a lot of it
has to do with some market thatwe're in, the competitive
(04:33):
nature. Also, the salarydifferences between regions.
I so I think it's a multifacetedissue. I do think it's creative,
but is it ethical? Is it a wasteof time? There's a lot of
questions that linger.
Rhona Pierce (04:54):
Yes. Yes. There's a lot of questions. And I think
we should start with kind oflike what we found. I know after
your your post, both of us did alot of research online to see
what were people saying aboutthis.
And I found a thread on Redditthat is so full of so many
(05:17):
things. And I'll pop it on thescreen for those that are
watching this on video. But forthose that are listening, I'll
give a quick summary of thepost. So the person said, hey,
all. I'm an in house TA leaderhere at a tech startup.
Over the past few months, I'verun into issues that I hadn't
seen in a long time. Tons andtons of fake applications for
(05:40):
engineering roles. Apparently,there's a scam these days where
the scammed finds a willingparticipant in the US for their
bank account and an engineeroutside of the US, typically in
Southeast Asia, and the engineerpretends to be in the US. They
get paid for passing theinterviews and if they get the
(06:01):
job, then they actually do thework and get a cut of the US
elevated pay. This person goeson to say, I basically cannot
review applicants anymore.
Of the last 20 engineers I'veset up time with, I would say 2
were who they said they were. Somany of them are clearly in an
(06:22):
office doing these interviews.And they go on to say how you
can hear that it's in a callcenter and all of these things.
And they said that they've beenbashing post and pray recruiters
for years, but, at least theyhad a mix of it he had or she.
They had a mix of inbounder andoutbound applicants.
(06:43):
But at this point, they haveelected to no longer waste their
time entertaining, reviewingapplications, and only talk to
referrals or people that theysource. So, that's a lot. That
is a lot. What are your yourlike, when you hear a story like
this about someone interviewingin an office, pretending to work
(07:07):
remotely, what's your firstthought as a TA professional?
Stefanie Fackrell (07:10):
I mean, obviously, there's a market for
it. Right? Because, again, it'sso highly competitive right now.
I've never done a technicalinterview, but I can only
imagine how challenging it is.I've reviewed feedback.
I've scheduled these things. Ijust think it's a level of
insanity that we never knew waspossible. And I think obviously,
(07:36):
again, going back to the reallytough market that we're in right
now, 2023, 2024, candidates willdo anything to get past the
interview to be successful. Butlike you're saying, is this this
person is doing the interviewfrom a call center and they get
a cut of the pay. Are they gonnacontinue to work with the
(07:57):
individual once they get hired?
Like, is this just a neverending cycle of interviews and
then full time work behind thescenes? Like, what is this?
Rhona Pierce (08:08):
Yeah. Funny story. Well, I don't know if funny. It
wasn't funny for me at the time.I actually have two stories
where things like this havehappened in the past.
So I think now it's just morecommon because of how the market
is. And, obviously, when there'speople with a need, where
there's demand, there's alwaysgonna be the unethical, the I'll
(08:31):
leave it at unethical, peoplethat try to make money off of
them. And I have a specialdistaste, and that's as nice as
I can say it, for people whoprey off of the unemployed. I
remember it was probably 2013.Yeah.
2013 where I was interviewing. II live in Oklahoma, and I was
(08:55):
interviewing, I was hiring for arole, a technical role, at a
company that I worked at. Thiscompany was in a smaller town in
Oklahoma, so it was hard for usto get people because, of
course, they were focused on notremote work. They wanted the
people in house. So we moved.
We relocated a lot of peoplefrom various parts of the
(09:18):
country to this town for work.And one of the interviews I
remember, it came through anexternal agency. No shade or
anything to the agency. The thisrecruiter is one of my good
friends. But the the candidate,it just I remember talking to
them on the phone multiple timesfor interviews before flying
(09:41):
them in, and it just seemedlike, there's something off.
And then when they flew in, Igot emails, calls, and
everything from someone. Look,it was like a pimp situation
where I guess the person wasgoing against their handler per
se to come to this interview.And they were letting me know
(10:04):
that they were here, that theydidn't really do the job, that
it was a different person comingfor the interview. All of these
things as I'm getting ready inlike 30 minutes to meet this
person face to face. Needless tosay, when I met the person face
to face, I was confident thiswasn't the same person that I
was talking to.
(10:24):
So this call center situation,this, I wanna call it human
trafficking type of situation,has been happening for a long
time because 2013 was a longtime ago. That was one story.
And then another one was morerecently, this was 2019 maybe,
where I met an engineer who hadactually has a record now
(10:48):
because it is a felony to take ajob and have someone else do the
job for you. Mhmm. So thisperson is an well, is a US
citizen or is legally authorizedto work in the United States.
Let's put it that way. Theywould go on interviews. They're
a brilliant engineer. They madethe mistake of listening to
(11:09):
these people in other thesepredators who are like, look,
you just go get the job for us,and we'll do the work for you.
Well, the company realized whatwas happening as far as people
logging in from other countriesto do the work and this person
here in the US is obviously theperson liable because you are
the employee.
(11:30):
They now have a felony recordthat they have to explain to
every employer moving forwardabout this. So it's been
happening for a while. That iscrazy. But I wanna go back a
little to kind of like what thisperson on Reddit was saying. It
was really, I would say, a redflag for me of how they're like,
(11:50):
and again, it's natural.
Oh, my gosh. This is happening.I'm not gonna rely on inbound
applications. I'm only gonna doreferrals or sourcing. How does
that undo all of our hard workin TA and DEI for inclusion and
for for, like, just hiringpeople, not only based on
(12:13):
knowing who they know or whatschool they went to.
How do we handle this? I thinkwe're gonna have to put way more
parameters
Stefanie Fackrell (12:24):
around or trainings, I should say, train
recruiters better to sourcethrough the inbound
applications, to identify fakeapplications and fake
applicants. I think it reallydoes come down to training.
Right? Because with these bots,these AI appliers can apply to a
(12:46):
1,000 jobs. These AI bots canapply to thousands of roles.
Right? And I think withinclusive hiring, we don't wanna
just rely on referrals becauseeverybody typically looks the
same. As you said, everybodylooks the same. They went to the
same schools. That's notinclusive.
That is shutting a whole swathof talented people out that
(13:10):
didn't have access to get intowhatever school or into whatever
network. So I thinkorganizations are really going
to have to start trainingrecruiters to source effectively
from these inbound applications.AI is probably gonna have to be
implemented also to weed throughAI generated resumes. You know,
(13:34):
there's all these funky littlethings that you can train a
system to do to look forindicators. Right?
But, yeah, we don't wanna undoeverything that we have put in
place. Right? Because then we'regonna be back to the 19 fifties,
sixties, seventies, andeverything will be undone, and
that's just not where we wannago. And AI can do a lot of cool
(13:54):
things, but this is sort of thisis sort of the conundrum that
needs to be worked to with a newtechnology. Right?
Rhona Pierce (14:03):
Yeah. I I think, yes, we just like companies are
leveraging AI to do all of thethings that we don't want to do
or that take up too much of ourtime, candidates are just using
it to for the same purpose. Theydon't want to be applying to
(14:24):
jobs. They don't wanna befilling out these long
applications where you're asking20,000,000 questions that are
irrelevant and things like that.So I think the harder you make
your interview process, the moreof these things that you will
end up seeing.
Absolutely. And it sounds itsounds so weird because it's
(14:45):
like our natural reaction of ashumans is, Oh my gosh, I got
scammed. Let me make it harder.And my approach is, actually,
let's make it easier because theharder you make it, the more of
this we will end up seeing. Iwant to move on to something I
(15:08):
saw on TikTok, and I will playthe the video for those watching
on video.
But for those listening,basically, there is a company,
and I will not name them becausethey need absolutely no more
publicity than what they'regetting. But there is a company
(15:30):
who is an AI tool that basicallyyou open it during the
interview. Right? And it tellsyou the answers. So they have
multiple TikTok videos withgreat hooks about, like, oh, my
I can't believe how what mysister was doing for an
interview.
For some reason, it's alwaysyour sister or your brother. I
(15:50):
don't know. But I guess thatworks for them. And it's
basically an engineer during atechnical interview sitting
there and you see on the screenwhere their interviewer is
asking them the question andthen they're restating it and AI
is literally telling them whatto say and they can read off the
(16:11):
screen. What do you think aboutcandidates using AI to answer
technical questions?
Does it feel resourceful or isit deceptive?
Stefanie Fackrell (16:21):
I mean, it's both. But you're only doing
yourself a disservice if you aregaming the system to get a role
where you actually might noteven be qualified to do the job
(16:41):
because you can't answer thebasic questions. Right? And I
think whoever this well knowncompany is that I'm gonna now
have to go Google, I thinkthey're doing a disservice. They
are selling they are preying onunemployed, stressed out,
desperate job seekers andselling them a service that's
(17:03):
actually a disservice to theindividual and the company that
they're interviewing with.
Rhona Pierce (17:10):
Yeah. And there's so many ethical implications to
what they're selling. I don'tknow about legal. I don't think
this company is in the US, to behonest. So that's a whole other
level of, legally, you probablycan't do anything about it.
But if you were the recruiter onthe other side of this and,
(17:31):
really, I think this is gonnahappen way more to hiring
managers than to recruiters. Butif you were on the other side of
this, how would you address it?Or would you even address it
with the candidate? I'm verydirect.
Stefanie Fackrell (17:44):
So I probably would direct address it directly
because, you know, interviews,it's real time. Right? If
there's these long pauses, if Ilove repeating and reiterating a
question to clarify, but todeceive the individual that's
interviewing you, I wouldprobably call the candidate out
(18:05):
and disqualify them from theinterview process. But then
again, that could probably goback to bite, you know, the
company that I'm working forbecause we don't unless we have
a policy that says you cannotuse AI, it's gonna happen. So I
think that that's gonna besomething that companies are
(18:26):
gonna need to start implementingin their kind of candidate
outreach, maybe on theirwebsites, you know, FAQs for
interviewing, you're not allowedto use AI, your camera will have
to be on at all times.
Another colleague of mine in theHR space, she had this very
situation happened to her acouple of weeks ago. And she
(18:48):
rejected the candidateimmediately. And now she's
thinking through, which is veryinvasive, but do we have to put
something in place to VPN intothe individual's screen as
they're interviewing to makesure that they're not utilizing
AI? So that to me is a littleinvasive. I think it it should
(19:09):
be, you know, here are here'swhat we expect when you're
interviewing, like, code ofconduct while you're
interviewing, something likethat.
I think companies willdefinitely have to start putting
in place.
Rhona Pierce (19:21):
Yeah. And I agree with you. I think, really, the
solution and I saw one companydo it. I believe it's
Greenhouse. I will double checkon that and add the link in the
show notes.
But they have a full blownpolicy, and the policy is two
sided because it explains tocandidates how they are using
AI, and it explains tocandidates what they find
(19:43):
appropriate as far as using AI.Because I think it's not
realistic for companies to belike, you cannot use any type of
AI. That's not gonna happen.People are gonna use AI for
their resume. People are gonnause AI to practice interviews
and, like, prep and all of thesethings.
I think even, say, you have tohave your camera on is a way of
(20:05):
excluding especiallyneurodiverse candidates. And I
had a full episode with TamikaAllen where we spoke about this.
I think that's not the solution.I think the solution is to have
your policies in place and ask,like, get more creative with the
questions, but not in a, like nooffense. I know you used to work
(20:27):
at Google, but not in a,
Stefanie Fackrell (20:27):
like No offense. Google type of Done
there, done there.
Rhona Pierce (20:32):
Type of gotcha questions. It's more of, like,
let's ask, 1, the real questionsthat we need for this job, and
let's train our interviewers toreally know how to dive deeper.
And let's understand that thereis a possibility that someone
(20:53):
will use AI. Because if you VPNinto your comp your computers,
which, by the way, I wouldabsolutely never interview at a
place that asked me to VPN intomy computer. I actually left a
remote job because they saidthey were gonna start tracking
what we were doing.
And I'm like, guys, no. No. Thisis not where I wanna work. So I
(21:16):
would definitely not do it foran interview if I left a job
after 2 years because that'swhat they were trying to start
doing. And I suspect I'm not theonly person that thinks this
way.
So if you want top talent, whichis the word the buzzword
everyone likes to say, Toptalent has self respect, and
they're not going to let you tapinto their personal computer,
(21:40):
which you do not own for thepromise of a job. That is
unrealistic. What is morerealistic is that you train your
interviewers to be way betterinterviewers and ask better
questions and understand thatthere is a risk that someone
might use AI to answer thequestions. And that's just
(22:03):
something that we're gonna haveto deal with now.
Stefanie Fackrell (22:06):
You know, and I I am a big fan of AI for
preparing for things. Like, ifhere's the job description, what
might I be asked and come upwith my stories? Right? It it
allows for preparation upfront,but, yes, using it in an
interview gets a little moretricky, especially for technical
roles. Right?
(22:26):
Like that's just and that seemsto be where the issue really is.
Right? I don't think everythingI've heard is for kind of
engineering and IT type roles,nothing in human resources, you
know, nothing in marketing orsales. So but, you know,
interview training, which I'msure you know, is always sort
(22:51):
of, like, the last thing thatcompanies really focus on. But,
you know, maybe this isincentive, again, to get
interviewers trained up andcalibrated and really understand
the lay of the land now and howit's going to be impacting their
particular organization.
Rhona Pierce (23:08):
Yeah. I really think that's that's really the
path forward and how we move inthe new landscape of hiring and
the what I'm I'm loving the botversus bot era of hiring. That's
what I'm calling it. I'm lovingit. Maybe I'm loving it because
I'm not actively don't have a 20to 30 rec load.
(23:32):
Right. But I'm loving it becauseof the power is shifting.
Everyone is using the resourcesthat they have at their
disposal. But I think if wereally get back to basics, go
back to building relationships,go back to strong interview
training, and have policies inplace, understand and let people
(23:57):
know what is acceptable andwhat's not acceptable so that
when they do the things that arenot acceptable to you, you can
reject them with norepercussions. Well, you know
what I mean.
Like, no messy legal
Stefanie Fackrell (24:13):
Right.
Rhona Pierce (24:13):
Repercussions because if we leave it up to and
this is for the TA leaders, theHR leaders out there. If we
leave it up to every individualrecruiter, we're gonna see the
things that we're seeing onthese Reddit threads. I think
there was another there was areply to that thread where
someone was saying, 9 out of 10,they're an Asian male with a
(24:37):
very American first name andtypically a Hispanic last name.
Guys, we can't get into that.Like, just I won't even read the
rest.
Just that line right there tellsyou what path they were going
down, and that is absolutely meas a immigrant, as a woman, as a
black woman, as a Latino woman.Like, this is gonna make it
(25:00):
harder for us that are out herereally wanting to get a job. Now
you're gonna see people havingto change their names, and
there's people looking atLinkedIn profile photos to see
if they look Guys, you don'tknow any of this. Yes. And there
was we'll talk a little bit moreabout it later, about some of
(25:20):
the other implications of why,other than the obvious, this is
totally biased.
But going down this route of nowsaying, if they have this name
or if they look this way, thenthey're most likely fake, It's
not where we need to go. So weneed to have policies. This
needs to be a strategic approachto this that's happening because
(25:44):
out of frustration, people willdo the things that we're seeing.
Stefanie Fackrell (25:49):
I absolutely 1000000 percent agree.
Rhona Pierce (25:53):
So, of course, in the bot versus bot world, I
said, let me ask ChatGPT howthey would approach this
situation and what's theirsolution for dealing with
candidates that are catfishing.Like, as you can imagine, the
answers were interesting. Somewere good. I I won't dog on chat
(26:17):
gbt, but some of the thingswere, again, let's do one way
asynchronous video interviewswith identity verification. I
was like, what?
I even saw and I'm so sad Ididn't save this post, but I saw
someone now being requestrequired for a background check
before an interview.
Stefanie Fackrell (26:38):
I was reading some stuff like that myself when
it came to these the solutionsfor how to curb this.
Rhona Pierce (26:45):
Yeah. And chat gpt also said, ask unexpected
questions during the interviewand try to catch people and
stuff. And it's like also thethings that the people on Reddit
were saying, like not doing moreinbound, just relying on
referrals or outbound. Nowthey're doing detailed scrutiny
(27:08):
of anyone who's not Americanlooking or sounding. What does
that even mean?
I know.
Stefanie Fackrell (27:13):
What does that mean?
Rhona Pierce (27:16):
What's your gut reaction to this? How would you
approach the situation?
Stefanie Fackrell (27:21):
I mean, there has to be some sort of
identifying parameters put inplace. Not let me, you know, let
me see your legal ID and yourbirth certificate. None of these
like crazy things, but there hasto be some, I don't want to say
pre background check, becauseagain, that's too extreme, but
(27:42):
there has to be some way toidentify that this person is who
they say they are. I wish I hadthe solution to that. Obviously,
again, with names, locations, wedon't want to get into any
discriminatory behavior.
Because, again, that's justridiculous and wrong. I wish I
(28:05):
if I had all the answers, I'dprobably would be a millionaire
sitting on the beach and notdoing a podcast.
Rhona Pierce (28:15):
Same. Same. Yeah. I I've gone through as we've
prepared for this interview,I've gone through many
scenarios, and I I just go backto it's just something that
you're going to 1, it's case bycase. You're going to have to
have different processes maybefor the different types of
roles.
(28:35):
Because I've worked at companieswhere you have technical roles
and you have non technicalroles. Mhmm. Yeah. The bulk is
technical. And there's alwaysbeen a slightly different
process, but it's usually afterthe screening.
So maybe you need to change yourscreening. Maybe there needs to
be your application questionsneed to be a bit different. And,
(28:58):
yes, again, understand thatthere's this is always going to
happen. Your efforts can't bespent trying to catch the
scammers. Right.
Your efforts need to be you needto double down on who you're
looking for and ways to identifythe qualified people for your
(29:21):
company. Because if you try togo on this catch the scammer
crusade, you're wasting valuabletime and costing your company
tons and tons of money.
Stefanie Fackrell (29:33):
I absolutely agree. And back to what you said
that you love the spot versusspot, I do too because, again,
it's going to give companies theopportunity to level up and
train and figure out thesolution to this really unique
problem that we're facing rightnow. Right? There'll be
(29:54):
something, hopefully not thisbig, but with the advance of
technology, all of that, there'salways gonna be a new problem to
figure out the solution to. Butthis, yes, the bot versus bot is
really needing companies to comeup with a solution by leveling
(30:14):
up trainings, getting creative,and how they approach these
problems.
Rhona Pierce (30:20):
And this might not be popular, but you need to
create a true community aroundyour pipeline. Let's stop
thinking about pipeline. It'strue community. It's nurturing
those candidates that haveapplied, that you've gone and
sourced. It's not a, like, nolonger, like, okay, have a rec,
(30:44):
open this role, and get thesepeople in.
You need to have relationshipswith these candidates, long
standing relationships so thatwhen you have roles, these
people are primed for yourroles. Because trust me, the
scammers are looking for thequick in and out. They're not
gonna be on your email list formonths months or years and going
(31:06):
back and forth with you and,like, you communicating with
them online and all of that fora job. They're gonna move on to
the people who think are are aremaking their process so hard
that no scammer can get into it,but it's a quick, quick, quick.
Those are the people that aregonna be flooded with this type
of candidate.
(31:27):
When you create authenticrelationships, those are the
people that are going to win.
Stefanie Fackrell (31:32):
Well, and I think I know you when you're
recruiting, I'm sure you pridedyourself in building
relationships with yourcandidates. And I did too. I
still have candidates that I didthat didn't get the job, but I
built the relationship with themfrom, like, 13 years ago. So
recruiting is, when it comesdown to it, it is about
(31:54):
relationships, and I think it'sbecome very transactional in the
recent in, you know, recentyears, maybe since COVID. But,
it has become verytransactional, so we do need to
get back to basics in that way.
And when I say this, peoplealways look
Rhona Pierce (32:09):
at me like, no. The reason why it's become this
transactional is because ofremote work and because we need
to do things at scale. Nope. Andone, I've been doing remote
hiring and remote work since2017, which isn't that long.
But, again, my entire career hasbeen working distributed teams
just because of the country thatI'm from and all of that.
(32:30):
But the way to buildrelationships at scale, and
again, people are gonna be like,oh, there goes Rona, is through
content creation. Whoo. That'show you build relationships at
scale. So we need to be smart asrecruiters, as TA leaders and
start living in the present. Theyes.
(32:52):
You need to build relationships.You're not gonna build
relationships like you used toin 1980 by going to all these
local groups and all of that.The way you build relationships
at scale in 2024 and beyond isthrough online communities,
content creation, and in person.It's a mix of both things.
(33:16):
Agreed.
Stefanie Fackrell (33:17):
Agreed.
Rhona Pierce (33:18):
So, something else I wanted to leave listeners and
viewers with is other reasonswhy going towards strict hiring
and, like, not doing inbound andchecking their LinkedIn. Because
I also saw people say like, oh,you need to check that they have
(33:38):
LinkedIn verification and stufflike that. We can't rely on that
for many reasons, and there wassomeone on Reddit that replied
to this. And I think it it'sit's a very good reminder, and
it reminded me of many things,but it says, I keep my LinkedIn
profile a job behind forpersonal safety reasons. My
(34:00):
abusive ex doesn't know where Imove to or where I work now,
thankfully, and I'm trying tokeep it that way.
Stefanie Fackrell (34:08):
Wow. Ouch.
Rhona Pierce (34:09):
That's true. Imagine us trying to go and
exclude people and just dopeople who have a verification
or have a photo on LinkedIn.There's a lot of people who
can't do this. I've met peoplewhose spouses work in law
enforcement and they are becauseof their spouse's job, they are
at risk, so they don't put theirphotos online or they don't have
(34:32):
a LinkedIn profile or likeonline presence. All of these
are things that we have toconsider.
Stefanie Fackrell (34:38):
Absolutely. I'm not even verified on
LinkedIn. So I probably could beconsidered a fake, a fake
entity. But I just, yeah, Ithink there's so many different
reasons why someone wouldn'tlike I've, I've worked with
candidates that, you know, whenI'm talking to them about their
LinkedIn, they've given me theseexact reasons like I am not into
(35:00):
social media. I'm doing it forsafety purposes.
I'm doing it because I've beendiscriminated against before.
Right? So everybody has a story.And we shouldn't put everyone in
a box that they have to oh,check LinkedIn. It's great.
Check, check, check.
Rhona Pierce (35:15):
And there's also a big thing. LinkedIn verification
as of as I know as of today,doesn't work for trans Right.
Folks. Right. Because if theirname on their ID doesn't match
the name that they're using, youcan't get verified.
I had to change my LinkedIn tomy full last name, which is
(35:36):
hyphenated, which I don't go bybecause that's the only way to
get verified because my ID saysBarnett Pierce. That's how I
have to use it. But anyone whoknows me knows I go by Rona
Pierce.
Stefanie Fackrell (35:48):
Right. Again, another so another problem that
we need to figure out a solutionin this new sort of landscape.
Rhona Pierce (35:57):
Yeah. Just go back to basics, build relationships,
focus on skills, and reallytrain your interviewers to
identify these skills and stopworrying about catching the
scammers because that's not howyou solve this problem. How do
you think that TA professionalscan stay ahead of these tactics
(36:21):
and, like, know what people aredoing out there?
Stefanie Fackrell (36:24):
Like we've been doing. Right? Reading on
Reddit, kind of putting your earto the ground if there's any
Discord communities lined.There's tons of candidate sort
of communication areas. Right?
They have everybody hascommunities now. So I would just
continue to put your ear to theground, do your sleuthing, being
(36:45):
nosy, and really understanding.Right? Because I think that's
what a good recruiter or TAprofessional does is they're on
the pulse of what's happeningout there with, you know,
compensation, benefits, all ofthose things. And this is
another essential piece of thepie that we're gonna need to
(37:06):
start focusing on.
Rhona Pierce (37:07):
Yeah. And if you're having trouble convincing
your leadership that as arecruiter, you need to be in
these communities, I call itinfiltrating. Yes. But you need
to be where your candidates are.This is a great reason to give
them because if you're wherethey're, where they're hanging
(37:29):
out, you will hear the thingsthat they're doing.
Because when someone finds aquote unquote cool way to beat
the system, they will share itwith others. So one, you'll
learn that, but also you will bepart of the community. You will
be a respected recruiter. Youwill know and have these
relationships with people thataren't in your immediate
(37:50):
network, but are still qualifiedcandidates. So I think that's
that's really the way forward.
Now we've been doing this for awhile, but there's always new
people entering our industry.What's one piece of advice you'd
give to a recruiter juststarting out who's navigating
(38:10):
these new challenges?
Stefanie Fackrell (38:12):
If I were just starting out again, because
when I started out again, I wasthrown in into it. Right? I I
looked for mentors, I looked forpeople that I worked with that I
knew were doing exceptionallywell, you know, just by
listening, I know we're remotenow, right? But I used to listen
(38:33):
on the phone to people on thephone, how they approach their
candidates, how they talked inthe cubicles, right? What they
knew was going on.
I would find someone that canmentor you and knows what
they're doing and has been whois a trusted resource. And I
would read everything that youcan about what's going on, you
(38:56):
know, on LinkedIn, on Reddit, onall these various sites and kind
of get the lay of the land,listen to how people listen to
the woes and complaints of jobseekers to understand how you
can be better and be anexceptional recruiter.
Rhona Pierce (39:15):
Amazing. After everything we've discussed,
what's one key takeaway you wantlisteners and viewers to
remember about this topic?
Stefanie Fackrell (39:25):
Well, with everything that's been going on,
again, like, it's bot versusbot, it's candidate versus
recruiter, there's so muchtension and everything going on
right now. I think everybody isdoing the best that they can
with the knowledge and resourcesthat they have. We are in a new
(39:45):
landscape, a new way of doingthings, bot versus bot, as we've
been talking about. So just, youknow, it's a learning curve.
Give people grace until we canfigure out the best path
forward.
Rhona Pierce (40:01):
Amazing. Anything that we didn't or that I didn't
cover or didn't ask that youthink people should know about
this topic or any questions forme?
Stefanie Fackrell (40:12):
Oh, I do also wanna say, I think we've we said
this, but just to reiterate, noteveryone is trying to deceive
you. I think we have to alwaysgo into building relationships
and, you know, recruiting forour companies and just trusting
that people are being authenticand not go in so skeptical. I
(40:35):
think, you know, there's a lotof great talent out there that's
really struggling and trying toget noticed. And so just always
be generous and think peoplehave the best intentions is what
I wanna say.
Rhona Pierce (40:50):
And I think I hope that people are going to have
questions or comments about thisepisode, you can go to throw out
the playbook.com. And on theside, there's a way to leave a
voice mail. You can leave arecording with any questions
that you have. And who knows? Ifwe get enough, I might convince
(41:13):
Stephanie to come back on and doa q and a episode where we
answer some of your questions.
But I really wanna hear whatquestions you have. And most
importantly, I wanna hear whatyou've been doing out there on
the ground in the trenches thathas worked to solve this
problem. Stephanie, where canlisteners get in contact with
(41:34):
you?
Stefanie Fackrell (41:35):
So I'm on LinkedIn, and then I have my own
website where you can you canfind me on LinkedIn, but, the
website'swww.disruptivehrspelledwithay.com.
Rhona Pierce (41:49):
Amazing. And I'll add all of those links to the
show notes. Thank you so muchfor being on the show today and
for being so candid and open.
Stefanie Fackrell (41:58):
That's been great.
Rhona Pierce (42:00):
If you want more actionable advice, like the
advice shared in this episode, Iwrite a weekly newsletter for TA
professionals who want to take amore strategic approach to
recruiting. You can sign up atthrowouttheplaybook.com/newsletter.
That'sthrowouttheplaybook.com/newsletter.
(42:21):
The link is in the show notes.
I don't know who needs to hear this, but the
harder you make your hiringprocess, the more creative
candidates will get to game it.And now we're not just talking
about creative resumes orexaggerated skills. We're
talking about full blowncandidate catfishing. In 2024,
it's not just recruiters usingAI to screen applicants. It's
(00:21):
candidates using AI to outsmartrecruiters.
We've officially entered the botversus bot era of hiring, where
fake profiles, AI generatedresumes, and even stand ins for
interviews are becoming thenorm. The question is, how do we
protect our companies from thesescams without undoing years of
(00:42):
work towards fair, unbiasedhiring practices? Today, I'm
joined by my guest co host,Stephanie Fackrell, to help me
break it all down. Stephanie hasspent over a decade leading TA,
HR, and DI efforts at some ofthe biggest brands in tech,
Google, Apple, NVIDIA, Samsung.Now as the founder of Disruptive
(01:06):
HR, she advises startups on allthings HR and people.
Together, we're diving intowhat's happening in hiring
today, why it matters, and howwe can stay vigilant without
losing the fairness and equitywe've worked so hard to build.
Let's get into it. Hey,Stephanie. I'm so happy to have
(01:28):
you on the podcast today.
Stefanie Fackrell (01:30):
I'm so excited that it's been delayed,
but, yay, today's the day.
Rhona Pierce (01:36):
Today is in fact the day. So I wanted to talk
about this topic. Actually, youposted something a few months
back about it, and I loved theconcept of doing it like MTV
Catfish style. That was one
Stefanie Fackrell (01:53):
of my favorite shows or is. I think
it's still on. Right? It is on.It probably is like 15 years old
now.
I'm not sure.
Rhona Pierce (02:03):
Yeah. So before we dive in to what we found on the
Internet, I wanted to know kindof, like, what's the wildest
story you've heard about acandidate using AI or other
tricks to game the hiringprocess?
Stefanie Fackrell (02:20):
Yeah. So what prompted my post is I was in
peak HR, the amazing HR program,and I was chatting with a
recruiting leader, and we werejust talking about how to
identify fake candidates. Shewas dealing with a situation
where the LinkedIn profilelooked fake. It was somebody
(02:43):
else's picture, all theirinformation, and then the resume
seemed pretty sketchy. And theindividual had made it pretty
far into the interview process,but something felt pretty fishy.
And she started to sleuth, youknow, probably more in-depth
(03:04):
than a recruiter should. Asyou've said before, recruiters
are a little bit nosy. We'relike detectives, but it felt
like she almost needed to be adetective to really see if this
candidate was real andpotentially lived in the area
that they have listed on theirprofile and their resume. So
(03:24):
that prompted me to post becauseI just thought, oh my gosh,
everything is getting out ofcontrol. And the level of
candidate deceit to get noticed,and the level of detective work
that recruiters are gonna needto start doing is just crazy.
And how do we solve for that?
Rhona Pierce (03:46):
Yeah. And and I'm so excited that we're talking
about this. It's something thatI've worked in tech like you for
a long time, and it's beenhappening for years. I think now
it's easier for it to happen.Why do you think that we're
seeing, like, such an increasein these kinds of tactics?
(04:06):
Like, is it desperation? Is itcreativity? Or is it something
else?
Stefanie Fackrell (04:11):
Yeah. I had some thoughts on that because
when I was working at some ofthe bigger name brands, you
know, candidates would kind ofcheat on their interviews, they
would Google as they wereinterviewing. So it was a little
bit different now than AI beinghere. And I do think a lot of it
has to do with some market thatwe're in, the competitive
(04:33):
nature. Also, the salarydifferences between regions.
I so I think it's a multifacetedissue. I do think it's creative,
but is it ethical? Is it a wasteof time? There's a lot of
questions that linger.
Rhona Pierce (04:54):
Yes. Yes. There's a lot of questions. And I think
we should start with kind oflike what we found. I know after
your your post, both of us did alot of research online to see
what were people saying aboutthis.
And I found a thread on Redditthat is so full of so many
(05:17):
things. And I'll pop it on thescreen for those that are
watching this on video. But forthose that are listening, I'll
give a quick summary of thepost. So the person said, hey,
all. I'm an in house TA leaderhere at a tech startup.
Over the past few months, I'verun into issues that I hadn't
seen in a long time. Tons andtons of fake applications for
(05:40):
engineering roles. Apparently,there's a scam these days where
the scammed finds a willingparticipant in the US for their
bank account and an engineeroutside of the US, typically in
Southeast Asia, and the engineerpretends to be in the US. They
get paid for passing theinterviews and if they get the
(06:01):
job, then they actually do thework and get a cut of the US
elevated pay. This person goeson to say, I basically cannot
review applicants anymore.
Of the last 20 engineers I'veset up time with, I would say 2
were who they said they were. Somany of them are clearly in an
(06:22):
office doing these interviews.And they go on to say how you
can hear that it's in a callcenter and all of these things.
And they said that they've beenbashing post and pray recruiters
for years, but, at least theyhad a mix of it he had or she.
They had a mix of inbounder andoutbound applicants.
(06:43):
But at this point, they haveelected to no longer waste their
time entertaining, reviewingapplications, and only talk to
referrals or people that theysource. So, that's a lot. That
is a lot. What are your yourlike, when you hear a story like
this about someone interviewingin an office, pretending to work
(07:07):
remotely, what's your firstthought as a TA professional?
Stefanie Fackrell (07:10):
I mean, obviously, there's a market for
it. Right? Because, again, it'sso highly competitive right now.
I've never done a technicalinterview, but I can only
imagine how challenging it is.I've reviewed feedback.
I've scheduled these things. Ijust think it's a level of
insanity that we never knew waspossible. And I think obviously,
(07:36):
again, going back to the reallytough market that we're in right
now, 2023, 2024, candidates willdo anything to get past the
interview to be successful. Butlike you're saying, is this this
person is doing the interviewfrom a call center and they get
a cut of the pay. Are they gonnacontinue to work with the
(07:57):
individual once they get hired?
Like, is this just a neverending cycle of interviews and
then full time work behind thescenes? Like, what is this?
Rhona Pierce (08:08):
Yeah. Funny story. Well, I don't know if funny. It
wasn't funny for me at the time.I actually have two stories
where things like this havehappened in the past.
So I think now it's just morecommon because of how the market
is. And, obviously, when there'speople with a need, where
there's demand, there's alwaysgonna be the unethical, the I'll
(08:31):
leave it at unethical, peoplethat try to make money off of
them. And I have a specialdistaste, and that's as nice as
I can say it, for people whoprey off of the unemployed. I
remember it was probably 2013.Yeah.
2013 where I was interviewing. II live in Oklahoma, and I was
(08:55):
interviewing, I was hiring for arole, a technical role, at a
company that I worked at. Thiscompany was in a smaller town in
Oklahoma, so it was hard for usto get people because, of
course, they were focused on notremote work. They wanted the
people in house. So we moved.
We relocated a lot of peoplefrom various parts of the
(09:18):
country to this town for work.And one of the interviews I
remember, it came through anexternal agency. No shade or
anything to the agency. The thisrecruiter is one of my good
friends. But the the candidate,it just I remember talking to
them on the phone multiple timesfor interviews before flying
(09:41):
them in, and it just seemedlike, there's something off.
And then when they flew in, Igot emails, calls, and
everything from someone. Look,it was like a pimp situation
where I guess the person wasgoing against their handler per
se to come to this interview.And they were letting me know
(10:04):
that they were here, that theydidn't really do the job, that
it was a different person comingfor the interview. All of these
things as I'm getting ready inlike 30 minutes to meet this
person face to face. Needless tosay, when I met the person face
to face, I was confident thiswasn't the same person that I
was talking to.
(10:24):
So this call center situation,this, I wanna call it human
trafficking type of situation,has been happening for a long
time because 2013 was a longtime ago. That was one story.
And then another one was morerecently, this was 2019 maybe,
where I met an engineer who hadactually has a record now
(10:48):
because it is a felony to take ajob and have someone else do the
job for you. Mhmm. So thisperson is an well, is a US
citizen or is legally authorizedto work in the United States.
Let's put it that way. Theywould go on interviews. They're
a brilliant engineer. They madethe mistake of listening to
(11:09):
these people in other thesepredators who are like, look,
you just go get the job for us,and we'll do the work for you.
Well, the company realized whatwas happening as far as people
logging in from other countriesto do the work and this person
here in the US is obviously theperson liable because you are
the employee.
(11:30):
They now have a felony recordthat they have to explain to
every employer moving forwardabout this. So it's been
happening for a while. That iscrazy. But I wanna go back a
little to kind of like what thisperson on Reddit was saying. It
was really, I would say, a redflag for me of how they're like,
(11:50):
and again, it's natural.
Oh, my gosh. This is happening.I'm not gonna rely on inbound
applications. I'm only gonna doreferrals or sourcing. How does
that undo all of our hard workin TA and DEI for inclusion and
for for, like, just hiringpeople, not only based on
(12:13):
knowing who they know or whatschool they went to.
How do we handle this? I thinkwe're gonna have to put way more
parameters
Stefanie Fackrell (12:24):
around or trainings, I should say, train
recruiters better to sourcethrough the inbound
applications, to identify fakeapplications and fake
applicants. I think it reallydoes come down to training.
Right? Because with these bots,these AI appliers can apply to a
(12:46):
1,000 jobs. These AI bots canapply to thousands of roles.
Right? And I think withinclusive hiring, we don't wanna
just rely on referrals becauseeverybody typically looks the
same. As you said, everybodylooks the same. They went to the
same schools. That's notinclusive.
That is shutting a whole swathof talented people out that
(13:10):
didn't have access to get intowhatever school or into whatever
network. So I thinkorganizations are really going
to have to start trainingrecruiters to source effectively
from these inbound applications.AI is probably gonna have to be
implemented also to weed throughAI generated resumes. You know,
(13:34):
there's all these funky littlethings that you can train a
system to do to look forindicators. Right?
But, yeah, we don't wanna undoeverything that we have put in
place. Right? Because then we'regonna be back to the 19 fifties,
sixties, seventies, andeverything will be undone, and
that's just not where we wannago. And AI can do a lot of cool
(13:54):
things, but this is sort of thisis sort of the conundrum that
needs to be worked to with a newtechnology. Right?
Rhona Pierce (14:03):
Yeah. I I think, yes, we just like companies are
leveraging AI to do all of thethings that we don't want to do
or that take up too much of ourtime, candidates are just using
it to for the same purpose. Theydon't want to be applying to
(14:24):
jobs. They don't wanna befilling out these long
applications where you're asking20,000,000 questions that are
irrelevant and things like that.So I think the harder you make
your interview process, the moreof these things that you will
end up seeing.
Absolutely. And it sounds itsounds so weird because it's
(14:45):
like our natural reaction of ashumans is, Oh my gosh, I got
scammed. Let me make it harder.And my approach is, actually,
let's make it easier because theharder you make it, the more of
this we will end up seeing. Iwant to move on to something I
(15:08):
saw on TikTok, and I will playthe the video for those watching
on video.
But for those listening,basically, there is a company,
and I will not name them becausethey need absolutely no more
publicity than what they'regetting. But there is a company
(15:30):
who is an AI tool that basicallyyou open it during the
interview. Right? And it tellsyou the answers. So they have
multiple TikTok videos withgreat hooks about, like, oh, my
I can't believe how what mysister was doing for an
interview.
For some reason, it's alwaysyour sister or your brother. I
(15:50):
don't know. But I guess thatworks for them. And it's
basically an engineer during atechnical interview sitting
there and you see on the screenwhere their interviewer is
asking them the question andthen they're restating it and AI
is literally telling them whatto say and they can read off the
(16:11):
screen. What do you think aboutcandidates using AI to answer
technical questions?
Does it feel resourceful or isit deceptive?
Stefanie Fackrell (16:21):
I mean, it's both. But you're only doing
yourself a disservice if you aregaming the system to get a role
where you actually might noteven be qualified to do the job
(16:41):
because you can't answer thebasic questions. Right? And I
think whoever this well knowncompany is that I'm gonna now
have to go Google, I thinkthey're doing a disservice. They
are selling they are preying onunemployed, stressed out,
desperate job seekers andselling them a service that's
(17:03):
actually a disservice to theindividual and the company that
they're interviewing with.
Rhona Pierce (17:10):
Yeah. And there's so many ethical implications to
what they're selling. I don'tknow about legal. I don't think
this company is in the US, to behonest. So that's a whole other
level of, legally, you probablycan't do anything about it.
But if you were the recruiter onthe other side of this and,
(17:31):
really, I think this is gonnahappen way more to hiring
managers than to recruiters. Butif you were on the other side of
this, how would you address it?Or would you even address it
with the candidate? I'm verydirect.
Stefanie Fackrell (17:44):
So I probably would direct address it directly
because, you know, interviews,it's real time. Right? If
there's these long pauses, if Ilove repeating and reiterating a
question to clarify, but todeceive the individual that's
interviewing you, I wouldprobably call the candidate out
(18:05):
and disqualify them from theinterview process. But then
again, that could probably goback to bite, you know, the
company that I'm working forbecause we don't unless we have
a policy that says you cannotuse AI, it's gonna happen. So I
think that that's gonna besomething that companies are
(18:26):
gonna need to start implementingin their kind of candidate
outreach, maybe on theirwebsites, you know, FAQs for
interviewing, you're not allowedto use AI, your camera will have
to be on at all times.
Another colleague of mine in theHR space, she had this very
situation happened to her acouple of weeks ago. And she
(18:48):
rejected the candidateimmediately. And now she's
thinking through, which is veryinvasive, but do we have to put
something in place to VPN intothe individual's screen as
they're interviewing to makesure that they're not utilizing
AI? So that to me is a littleinvasive. I think it it should
(19:09):
be, you know, here are here'swhat we expect when you're
interviewing, like, code ofconduct while you're
interviewing, something likethat.
I think companies willdefinitely have to start putting
in place.
Rhona Pierce (19:21):
Yeah. And I agree with you. I think, really, the
solution and I saw one companydo it. I believe it's
Greenhouse. I will double checkon that and add the link in the
show notes.
But they have a full blownpolicy, and the policy is two
sided because it explains tocandidates how they are using
AI, and it explains tocandidates what they find
(19:43):
appropriate as far as using AI.Because I think it's not
realistic for companies to belike, you cannot use any type of
AI. That's not gonna happen.People are gonna use AI for
their resume. People are gonnause AI to practice interviews
and, like, prep and all of thesethings.
I think even, say, you have tohave your camera on is a way of
(20:05):
excluding especiallyneurodiverse candidates. And I
had a full episode with TamikaAllen where we spoke about this.
I think that's not the solution.I think the solution is to have
your policies in place and ask,like, get more creative with the
questions, but not in a, like nooffense. I know you used to work
(20:27):
at Google, but not in a,
Stefanie Fackrell (20:27):
like No offense. Google type of Done
there, done there.
Rhona Pierce (20:32):
Type of gotcha questions. It's more of, like,
let's ask, 1, the real questionsthat we need for this job, and
let's train our interviewers toreally know how to dive deeper.
And let's understand that thereis a possibility that someone
(20:53):
will use AI. Because if you VPNinto your comp your computers,
which, by the way, I wouldabsolutely never interview at a
place that asked me to VPN intomy computer. I actually left a
remote job because they saidthey were gonna start tracking
what we were doing.
And I'm like, guys, no. No. Thisis not where I wanna work. So I
(21:16):
would definitely not do it foran interview if I left a job
after 2 years because that'swhat they were trying to start
doing. And I suspect I'm not theonly person that thinks this
way.
So if you want top talent, whichis the word the buzzword
everyone likes to say, Toptalent has self respect, and
they're not going to let you tapinto their personal computer,
(21:40):
which you do not own for thepromise of a job. That is
unrealistic. What is morerealistic is that you train your
interviewers to be way betterinterviewers and ask better
questions and understand thatthere is a risk that someone
might use AI to answer thequestions. And that's just
(22:03):
something that we're gonna haveto deal with now.
Stefanie Fackrell (22:06):
You know, and I I am a big fan of AI for
preparing for things. Like, ifhere's the job description, what
might I be asked and come upwith my stories? Right? It it
allows for preparation upfront,but, yes, using it in an
interview gets a little moretricky, especially for technical
roles. Right?
(22:26):
Like that's just and that seemsto be where the issue really is.
Right? I don't think everythingI've heard is for kind of
engineering and IT type roles,nothing in human resources, you
know, nothing in marketing orsales. So but, you know,
interview training, which I'msure you know, is always sort
(22:51):
of, like, the last thing thatcompanies really focus on. But,
you know, maybe this isincentive, again, to get
interviewers trained up andcalibrated and really understand
the lay of the land now and howit's going to be impacting their
particular organization.
Rhona Pierce (23:08):
Yeah. I really think that's that's really the
path forward and how we move inthe new landscape of hiring and
the what I'm I'm loving the botversus bot era of hiring. That's
what I'm calling it. I'm lovingit. Maybe I'm loving it because
I'm not actively don't have a 20to 30 rec load.
(23:32):
Right. But I'm loving it becauseof the power is shifting.
Everyone is using the resourcesthat they have at their
disposal. But I think if wereally get back to basics, go
back to building relationships,go back to strong interview
training, and have policies inplace, understand and let people
(23:57):
know what is acceptable andwhat's not acceptable so that
when they do the things that arenot acceptable to you, you can
reject them with norepercussions. Well, you know
what I mean.
Like, no messy legal
Stefanie Fackrell (24:13):
Right.
Rhona Pierce (24:13):
Repercussions because if we leave it up to and
this is for the TA leaders, theHR leaders out there. If we
leave it up to every individualrecruiter, we're gonna see the
things that we're seeing onthese Reddit threads. I think
there was another there was areply to that thread where
someone was saying, 9 out of 10,they're an Asian male with a
(24:37):
very American first name andtypically a Hispanic last name.
Guys, we can't get into that.Like, just I won't even read the
rest.
Just that line right there tellsyou what path they were going
down, and that is absolutely meas a immigrant, as a woman, as a
black woman, as a Latino woman.Like, this is gonna make it
(25:00):
harder for us that are out herereally wanting to get a job. Now
you're gonna see people havingto change their names, and
there's people looking atLinkedIn profile photos to see
if they look Guys, you don'tknow any of this. Yes. And there
was we'll talk a little bit moreabout it later, about some of
(25:20):
the other implications of why,other than the obvious, this is
totally biased.
But going down this route of nowsaying, if they have this name
or if they look this way, thenthey're most likely fake, It's
not where we need to go. So weneed to have policies. This
needs to be a strategic approachto this that's happening because
(25:44):
out of frustration, people willdo the things that we're seeing.
Stefanie Fackrell (25:49):
I absolutely 1000000 percent agree.
Rhona Pierce (25:53):
So, of course, in the bot versus bot world, I
said, let me ask ChatGPT howthey would approach this
situation and what's theirsolution for dealing with
candidates that are catfishing.Like, as you can imagine, the
answers were interesting. Somewere good. I I won't dog on chat
(26:17):
gbt, but some of the thingswere, again, let's do one way
asynchronous video interviewswith identity verification. I
was like, what?
I even saw and I'm so sad Ididn't save this post, but I saw
someone now being requestrequired for a background check
before an interview.
Stefanie Fackrell (26:38):
I was reading some stuff like that myself when
it came to these the solutionsfor how to curb this.
Rhona Pierce (26:45):
Yeah. And chat gpt also said, ask unexpected
questions during the interviewand try to catch people and
stuff. And it's like also thethings that the people on Reddit
were saying, like not doing moreinbound, just relying on
referrals or outbound. Nowthey're doing detailed scrutiny
(27:08):
of anyone who's not Americanlooking or sounding. What does
that even mean?
I know.
Stefanie Fackrell (27:13):
What does that mean?
Rhona Pierce (27:16):
What's your gut reaction to this? How would you
approach the situation?
Stefanie Fackrell (27:21):
I mean, there has to be some sort of
identifying parameters put inplace. Not let me, you know, let
me see your legal ID and yourbirth certificate. None of these
like crazy things, but there hasto be some, I don't want to say
pre background check, becauseagain, that's too extreme, but
(27:42):
there has to be some way toidentify that this person is who
they say they are. I wish I hadthe solution to that. Obviously,
again, with names, locations, wedon't want to get into any
discriminatory behavior.
Because, again, that's justridiculous and wrong. I wish I
(28:05):
if I had all the answers, I'dprobably would be a millionaire
sitting on the beach and notdoing a podcast.
Rhona Pierce (28:15):
Same. Same. Yeah. I I've gone through as we've
prepared for this interview,I've gone through many
scenarios, and I I just go backto it's just something that
you're going to 1, it's case bycase. You're going to have to
have different processes maybefor the different types of
roles.
(28:35):
Because I've worked at companieswhere you have technical roles
and you have non technicalroles. Mhmm. Yeah. The bulk is
technical. And there's alwaysbeen a slightly different
process, but it's usually afterthe screening.
So maybe you need to change yourscreening. Maybe there needs to
be your application questionsneed to be a bit different. And,
(28:58):
yes, again, understand thatthere's this is always going to
happen. Your efforts can't bespent trying to catch the
scammers. Right.
Your efforts need to be you needto double down on who you're
looking for and ways to identifythe qualified people for your
(29:21):
company. Because if you try togo on this catch the scammer
crusade, you're wasting valuabletime and costing your company
tons and tons of money.
Stefanie Fackrell (29:33):
I absolutely agree. And back to what you said
that you love the spot versusspot, I do too because, again,
it's going to give companies theopportunity to level up and
train and figure out thesolution to this really unique
problem that we're facing rightnow. Right? There'll be
(29:54):
something, hopefully not thisbig, but with the advance of
technology, all of that, there'salways gonna be a new problem to
figure out the solution to. Butthis, yes, the bot versus bot is
really needing companies to comeup with a solution by leveling
(30:14):
up trainings, getting creative,and how they approach these
problems.
Rhona Pierce (30:20):
And this might not be popular, but you need to
create a true community aroundyour pipeline. Let's stop
thinking about pipeline. It'strue community. It's nurturing
those candidates that haveapplied, that you've gone and
sourced. It's not a, like, nolonger, like, okay, have a rec,
(30:44):
open this role, and get thesepeople in.
You need to have relationshipswith these candidates, long
standing relationships so thatwhen you have roles, these
people are primed for yourroles. Because trust me, the
scammers are looking for thequick in and out. They're not
gonna be on your email list formonths months or years and going
(31:06):
back and forth with you and,like, you communicating with
them online and all of that fora job. They're gonna move on to
the people who think are are aremaking their process so hard
that no scammer can get into it,but it's a quick, quick, quick.
Those are the people that aregonna be flooded with this type
of candidate.
(31:27):
When you create authenticrelationships, those are the
people that are going to win.
Stefanie Fackrell (31:32):
Well, and I think I know you when you're
recruiting, I'm sure you pridedyourself in building
relationships with yourcandidates. And I did too. I
still have candidates that I didthat didn't get the job, but I
built the relationship with themfrom, like, 13 years ago. So
recruiting is, when it comesdown to it, it is about
(31:54):
relationships, and I think it'sbecome very transactional in the
recent in, you know, recentyears, maybe since COVID. But,
it has become verytransactional, so we do need to
get back to basics in that way.
And when I say this, peoplealways look
Rhona Pierce (32:09):
at me like, no. The reason why it's become this
transactional is because ofremote work and because we need
to do things at scale. Nope. Andone, I've been doing remote
hiring and remote work since2017, which isn't that long.
But, again, my entire career hasbeen working distributed teams
just because of the country thatI'm from and all of that.
(32:30):
But the way to buildrelationships at scale, and
again, people are gonna be like,oh, there goes Rona, is through
content creation. Whoo. That'show you build relationships at
scale. So we need to be smart asrecruiters, as TA leaders and
start living in the present. Theyes.
(32:52):
You need to build relationships.You're not gonna build
relationships like you used toin 1980 by going to all these
local groups and all of that.The way you build relationships
at scale in 2024 and beyond isthrough online communities,
content creation, and in person.It's a mix of both things.
(33:16):
Agreed.
Stefanie Fackrell (33:17):
Agreed.
Rhona Pierce (33:18):
So, something else I wanted to leave listeners and
viewers with is other reasonswhy going towards strict hiring
and, like, not doing inbound andchecking their LinkedIn. Because
I also saw people say like, oh,you need to check that they have
(33:38):
LinkedIn verification and stufflike that. We can't rely on that
for many reasons, and there wassomeone on Reddit that replied
to this. And I think it it'sit's a very good reminder, and
it reminded me of many things,but it says, I keep my LinkedIn
profile a job behind forpersonal safety reasons. My
(34:00):
abusive ex doesn't know where Imove to or where I work now,
thankfully, and I'm trying tokeep it that way.
Stefanie Fackrell (34:08):
Wow. Ouch.
Rhona Pierce (34:09):
That's true. Imagine us trying to go and
exclude people and just dopeople who have a verification
or have a photo on LinkedIn.There's a lot of people who
can't do this. I've met peoplewhose spouses work in law
enforcement and they are becauseof their spouse's job, they are
at risk, so they don't put theirphotos online or they don't have
(34:32):
a LinkedIn profile or likeonline presence. All of these
are things that we have toconsider.
Stefanie Fackrell (34:38):
Absolutely. I'm not even verified on
LinkedIn. So I probably could beconsidered a fake, a fake
entity. But I just, yeah, Ithink there's so many different
reasons why someone wouldn'tlike I've, I've worked with
candidates that, you know, whenI'm talking to them about their
LinkedIn, they've given me theseexact reasons like I am not into
(35:00):
social media. I'm doing it forsafety purposes.
I'm doing it because I've beendiscriminated against before.
Right? So everybody has a story.And we shouldn't put everyone in
a box that they have to oh,check LinkedIn. It's great.
Check, check, check.
Rhona Pierce (35:15):
And there's also a big thing. LinkedIn verification
as of as I know as of today,doesn't work for trans Right.
Folks. Right. Because if theirname on their ID doesn't match
the name that they're using, youcan't get verified.
I had to change my LinkedIn tomy full last name, which is
(35:36):
hyphenated, which I don't go bybecause that's the only way to
get verified because my ID saysBarnett Pierce. That's how I
have to use it. But anyone whoknows me knows I go by Rona
Pierce.
Stefanie Fackrell (35:48):
Right. Again, another so another problem that
we need to figure out a solutionin this new sort of landscape.
Rhona Pierce (35:57):
Yeah. Just go back to basics, build relationships,
focus on skills, and reallytrain your interviewers to
identify these skills and stopworrying about catching the
scammers because that's not howyou solve this problem. How do
you think that TA professionalscan stay ahead of these tactics
(36:21):
and, like, know what people aredoing out there?
Stefanie Fackrell (36:24):
Like we've been doing. Right? Reading on
Reddit, kind of putting your earto the ground if there's any
Discord communities lined.There's tons of candidate sort
of communication areas. Right?
They have everybody hascommunities now. So I would just
continue to put your ear to theground, do your sleuthing, being
(36:45):
nosy, and really understanding.Right? Because I think that's
what a good recruiter or TAprofessional does is they're on
the pulse of what's happeningout there with, you know,
compensation, benefits, all ofthose things. And this is
another essential piece of thepie that we're gonna need to
(37:06):
start focusing on.
Rhona Pierce (37:07):
Yeah. And if you're having trouble convincing
your leadership that as arecruiter, you need to be in
these communities, I call itinfiltrating. Yes. But you need
to be where your candidates are.This is a great reason to give
them because if you're wherethey're, where they're hanging
(37:29):
out, you will hear the thingsthat they're doing.
Because when someone finds aquote unquote cool way to beat
the system, they will share itwith others. So one, you'll
learn that, but also you will bepart of the community. You will
be a respected recruiter. Youwill know and have these
relationships with people thataren't in your immediate
(37:50):
network, but are still qualifiedcandidates. So I think that's
that's really the way forward.
Now we've been doing this for awhile, but there's always new
people entering our industry.What's one piece of advice you'd
give to a recruiter juststarting out who's navigating
(38:10):
these new challenges?
Stefanie Fackrell (38:12):
If I were just starting out again, because
when I started out again, I wasthrown in into it. Right? I I
looked for mentors, I looked forpeople that I worked with that I
knew were doing exceptionallywell, you know, just by
listening, I know we're remotenow, right? But I used to listen
(38:33):
on the phone to people on thephone, how they approach their
candidates, how they talked inthe cubicles, right? What they
knew was going on.
I would find someone that canmentor you and knows what
they're doing and has been whois a trusted resource. And I
would read everything that youcan about what's going on, you
(38:56):
know, on LinkedIn, on Reddit, onall these various sites and kind
of get the lay of the land,listen to how people listen to
the woes and complaints of jobseekers to understand how you
can be better and be anexceptional recruiter.
Rhona Pierce (39:15):
Amazing. After everything we've discussed,
what's one key takeaway you wantlisteners and viewers to
remember about this topic?
Stefanie Fackrell (39:25):
Well, with everything that's been going on,
again, like, it's bot versusbot, it's candidate versus
recruiter, there's so muchtension and everything going on
right now. I think everybody isdoing the best that they can
with the knowledge and resourcesthat they have. We are in a new
(39:45):
landscape, a new way of doingthings, bot versus bot, as we've
been talking about. So just, youknow, it's a learning curve.
Give people grace until we canfigure out the best path
forward.
Rhona Pierce (40:01):
Amazing. Anything that we didn't or that I didn't
cover or didn't ask that youthink people should know about
this topic or any questions forme?
Stefanie Fackrell (40:12):
Oh, I do also wanna say, I think we've we said
this, but just to reiterate, noteveryone is trying to deceive
you. I think we have to alwaysgo into building relationships
and, you know, recruiting forour companies and just trusting
that people are being authenticand not go in so skeptical. I
(40:35):
think, you know, there's a lotof great talent out there that's
really struggling and trying toget noticed. And so just always
be generous and think peoplehave the best intentions is what
I wanna say.
Rhona Pierce (40:50):
And I think I hope that people are going to have
questions or comments about thisepisode, you can go to throw out
the playbook.com. And on theside, there's a way to leave a
voice mail. You can leave arecording with any questions
that you have. And who knows? Ifwe get enough, I might convince
(41:13):
Stephanie to come back on and doa q and a episode where we
answer some of your questions.
But I really wanna hear whatquestions you have. And most
importantly, I wanna hear whatyou've been doing out there on
the ground in the trenches thathas worked to solve this
problem. Stephanie, where canlisteners get in contact with
(41:34):
you?
Stefanie Fackrell (41:35):
So I'm on LinkedIn, and then I have my own
website where you can you canfind me on LinkedIn, but, the
website'swww.disruptivehrspelledwithay.com.
Rhona Pierce (41:49):
Amazing. And I'll add all of those links to the
show notes. Thank you so muchfor being on the show today and
for being so candid and open.
Stefanie Fackrell (41:58):
That's been great.
Rhona Pierce (42:00):
If you want more actionable advice, like the
advice shared in this episode, Iwrite a weekly newsletter for TA
professionals who want to take amore strategic approach to
recruiting. You can sign up atthrowouttheplaybook.com/newsletter.
That'sthrowouttheplaybook.com/newsletter.
(42:21):
The link is in the show notes.
Popular Podcasts
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com