The proliferation of AI-generated resumes is causing many employers to devalue or disregard them completely. Hiring managers are instead focusing on candidates' skills and enthusiasm, with some companies even eliminating resume requirements altogether, Business Insider reports. Research shows that traditional resumes are relatively poor predictors of long-term job success. In turn, some 70% of employers in a new survey report using skills-based hiring to prioritize practical abilities over traditional credentials like higher education and work experience.
The résumé is dead. No longer are the one-sheets seen as viable ways to determine if a person can actually do a job. Recruiters and hiring managers are taking new approaches to finding candidates — from work trials to scouring your social presence.
Résumé evaluation, especially by AI tools, was flawed and biased. Applicants felt like they were sending them off into the void; recruiters felt overwhelmed by the deluge of job seekers. But as the rules of the hiring game change, so may the losers and winners.
I’m learning AI.
I’m using AI.
And I genuinely see the value in it.
But when it comes to hiring… I’m still a little old school.
There’s something personal about reviewing a résumé. I like seeing the story. The progression. The effort. The way someone chooses to present their experience. A résumé tells me more than just skills — it shows intention.
AI can help streamline processes. It can summarize, sort, and screen. That’s powerful. But hiring, to me, is still about people. It’s about potential, growth, and reading between the lines.
Maybe that makes me traditional. Maybe it just makes me human.
Technology should enhance connection — not replace it.
I’m seeing a lot of commentary about how AI is “killing the resume.” But I think we’re asking the wrong question.
AI may be making resumes look more polished across the board. That means organizations will need better ways to evaluate real capability, not simply blame candidates for using the tools available to them.
If companies can use AI to justify layoffs, why can’t candidates use AI to improve their resumes?
Let’s be honest about the current hiring reality:
Only a small fraction of applications are ever reviewed by a human.
So, of course, candidates are using tools to improve their odds.
They’re learning the rules of the system.
That’s not gaming the process.
That’s adapting to it.
And to be clear: most recruiters care deeply about finding the right people.
The challenge isn’t effort.
It’s that the hiring system itself is often under-resourced and poorly designed.
If recruiters can’t review all the resumes, why are recruiting teams often the first to be reduced during layoffs?
If hiring is such a critical function, why have learning and development programs that train managers to hire effectively disappeared in many organizations?
And why is the conversation focused on “bad resumes” instead of improving how companies evaluate talent?
Hiring has always been about positioning yourself well.
The difference now is that more people understand the system and are using tools to navigate it.
That’s not a failure of candidates.
It’s a signal that the hiring process itself needs to evolve.
Better recruiting systems.
Better training for hiring managers.
Clearer ways to evaluate real skills.
When hiring fails, it’s not a resume problem.
It’s a system design problem.
Where does accountability for hiring outcomes actually belong?