MW Why do companies make job applicants jump through so many hoops these days? Blame AI.

By Charles Passy

It's not unusual for a business to put job seekers through a multi-step hiring process - including several interviews and even take-home tests

How hard is it to land a good job these days? For Rebecca Collis, a British recruitment professional who's on the hunt herself for a new position, the answer to that question involved a prospective job with a particular catch. Or make that nine catches.

In order for the company to consider her, Collis needed to go through a nine-stage hiring process that included rounds of interviews and the completion of both a take-home test and case study before a final call with the CEO.

Collis passed on the opportunity because of the hoop-jumping regimen involved, but she recently shared her thoughts about the situation on LinkedIn. "[W]ould you apply to a 9 stage process, is it ever applicable?" she asked.

Clearly, that hit a nerve because more than 500 people from throughout the world, including in the U.S., responded to Collis on the social-media platform. Many said they've seen similar job listings or have gone through such a lengthy application process - in some cases with an equal number of steps or even more (think 11 stages).

And many said they gave up on applying as a result.

"I once got invited to a four-stage interview and declined," said one respondent. "Why? Because overly long interview processes often reflect poor decision-making, not high standards."

Another respondent made a humorous analogy to a recent - and very public - hiring process: "They picked a new pope in 3 days lol." Actually, it was only two, but who's counting?

Either way, it's perhaps no joke: To hear both recruitment professionals and job seekers alike tell it, the hiring process has become incredibly involved and time-consuming of late - to the point some argue it's often working against the goal of truly finding the best candidate.

That's despite a low unemployment rate - at least in the U.S., where it currently stands at 4.2%. In theory, that means job seekers would have more of an upper hand and companies would be streamlining the application process as a result, experts say.

So, what's behind all the hiring cumbersomeness?

Lots of factors, say recruitment professionals. But one of the biggest these days is the rise of artificial intelligence.

Companies are less likely to trust an applicant to be who they say they are, given the distinct possibility that ChatGPT or Google's $(GOOGL)$ $(GOOG)$ Gemini has helped those job seekers craft a résumé or has even coached them through an initial video interview or call. As a result, hiring professionals want to be extra cautious and careful.

On top of that, the AI tools make it easier for people to seek out countless jobs and customize their applications seamlessly. All this means companies are getting flooded with candidates, experts say, meaning companies have to do more work to identify the star candidate.

Another key factor: the economy. It's not that things are so bad right now - we're not in a recession in the U.S., after all. But the tariffs proposed by President Donald Trump have put companies in a hesitant mode, experts say. And that can make them all the more deliberate and plodding in their hiring.

Many companies also went on hiring sprees a few years ago when it was tough to find workers during and coming out of the COVID era. As a result, the job-filling process "moved at breakneck speed," said Kristen Kunath, director of hiring at myHR Partner, a company that provides a range of HR services.

Today, that's no longer the case, Kunath added, noting there's always a price to pay if you pick a less-than-suitable candidate.

"With limited opportunities to hire and the need to keep teams lean, making the wrong hiring decision has never been more costly, both financially and in terms of team morale," she said.

Of course, some recruitment professionals say this varies by profession. Hiring decisions in certain fields are much quicker because a candidate can't bluff their way through the process without certain bona fides.

Or as Michelle Whiffen, a senior vice president with the recruitment agency HireClix, put it: "You're either a registered nurse or you're not a registered nurse."

When the hiring process is protracted, who pays the price? Obviously, any candidate who goes through all the steps and doesn't get the job ends up on the losing side. But some argue that companies lose out, too, as evidenced by the aforementioned example of the candidate who wouldn't complete even a four-stage process.

The issue is that companies may be scaring off good candidates, either because those applicants don't want to devote the time involved, given the lack of any guarantees, or because the protracted process sends a less-than-inviting message about the company itself.

That has larger reverberations, argues Tia Katz, an expert in executive and organizational development who's the founder of HU-X, a startup company. It's especially the case in an era when job seekers share thoughts aplenty online about companies and how those businesses choose to hire, she explains.

"This is a reputational risk," Katz said.

Is there a way to mitigate this? At the very least, Katz said a company can pay job candidates for any heavy-lifting tasks they're required to complete.

"If a company expects candidates to produce deliverables that take over an hour, they should strongly consider compensating them for their time," Katz said. "Respect for a candidate's effort and expertise starts before they're even hired."

As for Collis, she's still in the job market. But as a recruitment expert herself, she wonders if companies really can't find the ideal candidate in fewer steps. Too often, she says, multiple rounds of interviews don't necessarily reveal anything more about the applicant, but simply result in the same questions being asked over and over again.

"You are wasting time," Collis said.

-Charles Passy

This content was created by MarketWatch, which is operated by Dow Jones & Co. MarketWatch is published independently from Dow Jones Newswires and The Wall Street Journal.

(END) Dow Jones Newswires

July 01, 2025 09:29 ET (13:29 GMT)

Copyright (c) 2025 Dow Jones & Company, Inc.