Artificial intelligence has quietly infiltrated our daily lives. It's in the recommendations we get on Netflix, the ads we see on social media, and increasingly, the hiring decisions companies make. At first glance, this seems like progress. Machines, after all, are unbiased and efficient—or so we like to believe. But as we entrust more of our decisions to algorithms, especially in something as consequential as hiring, we need to pause and ask: Do we really understand how these AI systems work?

Most companies adopting AI for hiring are using sophisticated models like ChatGPT with minimal customization. They treat these models as black boxes that magically produce the "best" candidates. But here's the problem: Without understanding what's inside that box, we're risking perpetuating biases and making unfair decisions. And unlike a Netflix recommendation gone wrong, the stakes here are people's livelihoods.

The illusion of objectivity

One of the most dangerous misconceptions about AI is that it's inherently objective. Machines don't have emotions or prejudices, so their decisions must be fair, right? Not quite. AI models learn from data, and data is a reflection of the real world—which is messy and biased.

Consider a company that has historically hired mostly men for engineering roles. If you train an AI model on that hiring data, it will "learn" that men are more suitable for these positions and continue to favor male candidates. The AI isn't biased because it wants to be; it's biased because it was trained on biased data. The objectivity is an illusion.

The black box problem

The complexity of modern AI models makes them opaque. Deep learning models, for instance, have millions of parameters interacting in non-linear ways. Even the engineers who build them can't always explain why they make certain decisions. In hiring, this opacity means we might reject or favor candidates without understanding why.

This isn't just a technical issue; it's a human one. If we can't explain why a candidate was rejected, how do we defend against claims of discrimination? How do we ensure that we're not inadvertently perpetuating biases?

Real-world implications

The lack of transparency in AI decision-making isn't just an ethical problem; it's a legal one. Regulations are starting to catch up. Laws like the GDPR in Europe give individuals the right to an explanation for automated decisions that affect them. In the U.S., the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission is paying close attention to AI in hiring.

Beyond legal risks, there's the issue of trust. Employees and candidates want to know that they're being treated fairly. If they suspect that a faceless algorithm is making unjust decisions, it erodes trust in the organization. And once trust is lost, it's hard to regain.

Why explainability matters

Explainable AI (XAI) is about making AI decisions understandable to humans. It's not enough for an AI model to be accurate; we need to know how it's making decisions. This transparency has several benefits:

1. Building trust: When people understand how decisions are made, they're more likely to trust the outcomes.
2. Ensuring fairness: Transparency allows us to detect and correct biases in the system.
3. Regulatory compliance: As laws demand more transparency, explainable AI helps companies stay on the right side of regulations.
4. Better decision-making: Combining AI insights with human judgment leads to better outcomes. Humans can question and override AI decisions when necessary.
5. Accountability: If something goes wrong, we can trace back and understand why, allowing us to fix the issue.

The Challenges Ahead

Achieving explainability isn't easy. Modern AI models are complex by nature. Simplifying them can lead to a loss of performance. There's also resistance within organizations. People might be reluctant to change systems that seem to be working fine, or they might lack the technical expertise to understand and implement explainable AI.

Moreover, many involved in hiring don't fully grasp how AI works. Just because someone has been doing hiring for years doesn't mean they understand the nuances of AI models. This gap between technology builders and domain experts can lead to problematic outcomes.

Bridging the Gap

So, what's the way forward? We shouldn't abandon AI in hiring; the potential benefits are too significant. Instead, we need to bridge the gap between technology and people.

• Invest in explainable AI: Companies should demand that their AI tools offer transparency. This might mean working closely with vendors or developing in-house expertise.
• Educate stakeholders: Hiring managers and HR teams need to understand the basics of how AI models work, including their limitations.
• Cultivate collaboration: Encourage collaboration between technical teams and domain experts. Each brings valuable perspectives that can improve the system.
• Prioritize ethics: Make ethical considerations a core part of AI implementation. This isn't just about avoiding legal trouble; it's about doing the right thing.

Conclusion

AI has the potential to revolutionize hiring, making it more efficient and possibly more fair. But only if we approach it thoughtfully. Blindly trusting algorithms without understanding them is a recipe for disaster.

We need to demand more from our technology—not just efficiency, but transparency and fairness. By taking the time to understand and explain our AI systems, we can build trust with stakeholders and create better outcomes for everyone involved.

In the end, technology should serve us, not the other way around. Let's make sure that as we build more advanced systems, we don't lose sight of the human element that's at the heart of hiring. After all, we're not just filling positions; we're building teams of people who will shape the future of our organizations.

‍