6 minute read
Posted by Emily Hill on 17 October 2025
Over half of candidates now use AI at some point in their job search.
That’s not a threat — it’s a signal that hiring needs to evolve.
As Chris Platts, CEO of ThriveMap, puts it:
“It’s not about beating AI. Companies use AI too. The real question is: how do we design hiring processes that still measure human judgement, motivation, and fit?”
Because pretending AI isn’t reshaping recruitment is like ignoring a wave that’s already broken. The goal isn’t to eliminate AI from hiring — it’s to build assessments that reward genuine human capability.
Candidates today can use generative AI to do far more than polish a cover letter.
They can produce digital clones that mimic their tone of voice, generate entire portfolios, and even deepfake video interviews. AI can now:
That means most generic assessments don’t measure ability — they measure who’s best at using AI tools.
As Chris said at the UK Hiring Taskforce launch, the industry faces two routes:
Route 1: a pointless, unwinnable AI arms race, where bots apply to jobs, and other bots screen them out.
Route 2: a return to realism, where hiring is built on human truth, fairness, and job fit.
ThriveMap’s approach follows Route 2 — using Realistic Job Assessments to show candidates exactly what a role involves, so both sides make informed decisions.
AI-proof assessments are designed to keep measuring genuine human capability — judgement, creativity, adaptability, and context-based decision-making — even as generative AI tools become increasingly skilled at mimicking human answers. In other words, they focus on how people think and act, not just what they can produce with a prompt.
Most pre-screening tests are easy for AI to game. A candidate can drop your questions into ChatGPT and instantly generate answers that sound smart but reveal nothing about how they’d actually perform. The result? You’re screening for who’s good at using AI, not who’s right for the job.
Candidates are using AI to apply for more jobs than ever,” notes Chris Platts, CEO of ThriveMap, meaning your next great hire might just be an AI-crafted cover letter.
The question isn’t how to beat AI— but how to design assessments so that using AI isn’t enough. The goal: job realism that forces candidates to think like someone in the role, not mimic role-like answers.
ThriveMap assessments do just that. Because they’re built around real, role-specific scenarios, there’s nothing for AI to “hack.”
Candidates don’t answer abstract questions. They experience a realistic simulation of the job and make decisions just as they would in real life.
That means your data reflects genuine behaviour, not AI-generated words. You see how people think, problem-solve, and prioritise in your environment, giving you confidence that those who progress are the ones most likely to thrive.
Avoid: Questions that require written open-text responses can easily be answered by generative AI. These responses often lack the nuance and personal touch that reflect true candidate capabilities.
Avoid: Relying on generic questions that are already available on the internet can make it easier for AI to provide pre-prepared answers. These questions may not accurately assess the candidate’s fit for your specific role.
Avoid: Questions that are straightforward and can be answered with basic knowledge, such as standard maths problems, do not provide insight into a candidate’s actual abilities or fit.
Avoid: Questions that have been generated by AI can often be recognised and answered by other AI systems, which reduces their effectiveness as a screening tool.
Avoid: Assessments that focus purely on recalling facts, trivia, or definitions may not gauge a candidate’s practical skills or critical thinking abilities.
Do: Design assessments that involve multiple-choice questions or situational tasks. These formats make it more difficult for AI to generate suitable responses, as they require deeper engagement with the material.
Do: Create unique questions that reflect real-world scenarios relevant to your organisation. Tailoring questions to your specific needs makes it harder for candidates to rely on generic AI-generated responses.
Do: Implement context-rich questions or situational judgement scenarios. These types of assessments require human judgement and a thorough understanding of the role, making them less predictable for AI.
Do: Design questions that require creative problem-solving or critical thinking. These assessments should reflect the unique challenges faced by your company, providing better insight into a candidate’s abilities.
Do: Consider assessments that focus on problem-solving exercises tied to real-world tasks. This not only assesses candidates’ knowledge but also their ability to apply it in practical situations.
Do: Incorporate job simulations that allow candidates to demonstrate practical skills in scenarios that mimic actual job responsibilities. This approach helps ensure that you are evaluating their capabilities in a relevant context.
Whether you’re ready or not, AI is shaking up recruitment like never before. That’s why it’s essential to ensure your pre-screening assessments effectively identify candidates with the right skills, fit, and commitment.
With ThriveMap’s realistic job assessments, our questions are job-realistic, so can’t be gamed by AI. This not only makes your recruitment process faster and more effective but also fairer and future-proof.
Create an account or book your demo here: https://thrivemap.io/get-started-now/
Related articles
Subscribe for insights, debunks and what amounts to a free, up-to-date recruitment toolkit.
ThriveMap creates customised assessments for high volume roles, which take candidates through an online “day in the life” experience of work in your company. Our assessments have been proven to reduce staff turnover, reduce time to hire, and improve quality of hire.
Not sure what type of assessment is right for your business? Read our guide.
Hiring teams using Eploy can now improve the accuracy of their candidate selection by adding ThriveMap’s Realistic Job Assessments into their workflow. In entry level roles, first week attrition can exceed 50 percent, usually because the reality of the job doesn’t match what the candidate expected. This integration gives Eploy users something they cannot get […]
Continue reading
A guide to fair, consistent, and predictive selection methods for entry-level hiring. Every week another Reddit post goes viral, exposing the strange, improvised “tests” candidates face. And this week, one Reddit post summed up the whole problem in a single screenshot. A hiring manager proudly described their “punctuality test”: They join a Zoom call 15 […]
Continue reading
Personality tests can be useful tools in the right context. They offer structure, they give teams a shared language, and they can help people understand how they prefer to work. But when recruiters start using personality tests for hiring — especially as part of high-volume or frontline recruitment — things often go wrong. Misinterpretation, overconfidence […]
Continue reading