As generative AI tools like ChatGPT become increasingly common in job applications, hiring professionals are struggling to assess the true capabilities of candidates. (Image created using Generative AI ChatGPT)
SEOUL, April 8 (Korea Bizwire) — As generative AI tools like ChatGPT become increasingly common in job applications, hiring professionals are struggling to assess the true capabilities of candidates, raising new questions about fairness, authenticity, and the future of recruitment.
A recent survey by U.S.-based career platform ResumeGenius, which polled 1,000 hiring managers, reveals that 76% of respondents found it more difficult to evaluate applicants’ authenticity due to AI-generated materials. Another 58% expressed concern that applicants were likely using AI tools to craft resumes, cover letters, or portfolios.
While many recruiters acknowledged the benefits of AI—78% said it improved efficiency, and 75% noted it helped identify stronger candidates—the influx of AI-generated documents is creating new challenges in distinguishing genuine talent from algorithmic polish.
Among the top red flags cited by hiring managers were AI-generated cover letters or recommendation letters (47%), AI-created portfolios or creative work (35%), and fabricated LinkedIn or social media profiles (33%). Alarmingly, 29% reported instances of cheating on online skills assessments using AI, and 17% said they had encountered deepfake technology during remote interviews.
South Korea, known for its rapid digital adoption, is facing similar trends. Local AI detection firm Muhayu analyzed 890,000 cover letters submitted to Korean companies and public agencies in 2024, finding that nearly half (48.5%) were likely generated with the aid of AI.
“In online coding tests, it’s increasingly common for applicants to rely on AI to produce answers or even generate entire project proposals,” said one industry insider. “Large corporations, which already use AI extensively for initial resume screenings, are expected to adopt more sophisticated tools to detect AI-generated content.”
Despite growing concerns, many experts argue that banning AI in job applications outright is neither practical nor desirable. As AI becomes embedded in day-to-day work—from translation and editing to data analysis and presentation development—the ability to effectively collaborate with AI may itself become a valued skill.
Instead of focusing solely on whether AI was used, some voices in the industry suggest evaluating whether applicants maintain intellectual authorship over the final product. For instance, submitting an unedited AI-generated project plan could warrant disqualification, while candidates who refine or build upon AI outputs may demonstrate deeper understanding and initiative.
Dr. Ban Ga-woon, senior researcher at the Korea Research Institute for Vocational Education and Training, emphasized the need for clear ethical standards and company-specific policies. “Using AI to fabricate achievements or spread false information must be strictly prohibited,” she said. “But when it comes to support tools like writing assistants or coding generators, companies must decide for themselves—based on their workforce goals—what skills matter most.”
As generative AI evolves into more autonomous “AI agents” handling tasks like interview assistance and skills training, human resources departments worldwide are being forced to reimagine how they identify, evaluate, and develop talent in the age of intelligent machines.
Lina Jang (linajang@koreabizwire.com)
