In a recent LinkedIn post, Hung Lee explores the evolving landscape of candidate interviews, specifically questioning whether Artificial Intelligence (AI) might offer a preferable interviewing experience in certain contexts. Lee challenges the automatic assumption that human interaction is always superior, drawing on recent discussions and past research.
The conversation was sparked by a colleague’s discovery of an article suggesting that candidates might, in fact, prefer interacting with non-human interviewers under specific circumstances. This notion is further supported by insights from fellow industry professional Glen Cathey, who has written extensively on the conditions under which AI interaction might be favored over human recruiters. Lee highlights the significance of Cathey’s work, noting its potential inclusion in the upcoming Recruiting Brainfood newsletter.
“This should be last post on Glen’s profile, and likely will make it in Recruiting Brainfood newsletter tomorrow.”
The Case for AI in Candidate Interaction
Hung Lee delves into historical context, recalling the early days of JobPal. During this period, Lee was involved in research that indicated significant differences in the types of questions candidates asked when interacting with a chatbot compared to human recruiters. This early finding suggested that AI could possess a unique, and not necessarily negative, value as an interface.
As Lee elaborates on this point:
“Finally, I recall way back in the JobPal days with Luc Dudler Chris Raw and friends, who delivered what may have been first substantive piece of research which described how job candidates interacting with their chatbot technology asked different questions compared what was seen with human vs human interaction, suggesting that AI had hitherto unknown value as an interface – and one which should not presume as automatically worse than human!”
Challenging Conventional Wisdom
Lee’s post directly questions the prevailing sentiment that AI in recruitment is inherently less desirable than human engagement. By referencing these discussions and research, Lee prompts a broader consideration of AI’s role and potential benefits in the recruitment process. The core of Lee’s inquiry revolves around the candidate’s experience and potential preferences.
According to Hung Lee, the traditional view of AI as a lesser alternative needs re-evaluation:
“What do you think – have YOU been interviewed by AI interviewer…what did you think of the experience?”
This direct question to his network underscores Lee’s objective: to gather diverse perspectives on AI-driven interviews. He is not asserting that AI is definitively better, but rather that its value as an interface warrants serious consideration and empirical investigation, moving beyond a default negative perception.
The Future of Recruitment Interviews
The discussion initiated by Hung Lee on LinkedIn opens up critical questions for the future of talent acquisition. As AI technology becomes more sophisticated, its application in initial candidate screening and even in-depth interviews is likely to increase. Lee’s contribution serves as a vital prompt for recruiters, technologists, and candidates alike to reflect on the nuances of human-AI interaction in the professional sphere.
Lee concludes by inviting further dialogue:
“Poll for today folks…”
This call to action emphasizes the ongoing nature of this important conversation and the need for continued exploration into the effectiveness and acceptance of AI in recruitment.
📝 About This Content
This article is based on insights shared by Hung Lee on LinkedIn.
📅 Originally posted on February 7, 2026 | View original post on LinkedIn →