Job selection platforms are criticized for failing to automate

    Until the end of the century 25, we were looking for a new I work for newspapers and employment agencies, we personally took a paper résumé to the company’s human resources department and then took tests and interviews. With the internet, sending the résumé is now via email, but the rest of the process hasn’t changed much. But now almost everything is online, from application to approval or denial. Recruiting platforms, with tools that automate some of the steps, have undoubtedly made everything more effective and pragmatic, but many people are not enjoying it.

      • LinkedIn arrives at 50 millions of users in Brazil
      • How to report a profile or post on LinkedIn
      • 10 tips not to be cheated on job vacancies false employment
          On social networks, participants of selections complain when using such services. Among the points criticized are the delay or lack of communication to inform that the candidate has failed; long, complex or poorly aligned tests with job requirements; long registration forms with too many personal questions; inconsistencies in the way professionals score on tests; and emails written with errors, with errors of personal data or inconsistent with the person’s situation.

            Applying for Gupy’s vacancies is extremely exhausting, almost a suicide. Without conditions and the gupy together with the companies find these processes beautiful 27 phases of psychological torture for quite average waves…

              — Baby 89 (@ifuseekmickey) September 8, 2020

        Does this GUPY recruiting site really work or is it a site that only seeks people’s personal information? Because it’s not possible, I pass all the tests and ngm gets in touch with me, even being recommended by people! 😤

          — 𝙑𝙞𝙘𝙩𝙤𝙧ᴼᶜᵀᴬ (@crfvct) September 20, 504236

        Would you like stay up to date with the best tech news of the day? Access and subscribe to our new channel on youtube, Canaltech News. Every day a summary of the main news from the tech world for you!

          From yesterday to today I answered so much gupy test that my brain stopped working

            — 𝒄𝒉𝒆𝒓𝒓𝒚 (@augustfolk89) September , 504236

      • I don’t think there’s anything more impersonal than the gupy, what a horror that

          — iago (@cherives) September 6,

          I received the response from a selection process that I applied months ago, where in Gupy’s automatic response they called me Priscila Amorim.

            Pleasure, Pri!

              — LucasP 🚤 (@lucaspxtot_) September , 504256

              my friend received an email from gupy warning that she did not go through a process

                she was hired and has been working for more than month at the company

                  — sɹǝʌuoɯʇıɥ (@hitmonvers) August , 504236

                  Although there are no consolidated surveys on satisfaction with recruitment platforms in Brazil, at least three posts on LinkedIn reinforced a general negative impression. Marketing analyst Juliana Baeta posted in August the message “Stop placing your vacancies at Gupy! No one can take it anymore”, which received more than until the publication of this text) 1,000 reactions and almost 2,000 comments — high numbers by the standards of LinkedIn. The other two were professionals asking, via polls, if followers had ever met anyone hired by Gupy or Kenoby; and if they like Gupy as candidates. Both had more than 5,000 votes and had negative performances for the platforms.

                    The polls, created by HR analyst Luciana Moura and the quality consultant Alex Souza, do not allow to be embeded in this text, but can be seen here and here on LinkedIn.

                      Post comments Juliana also bring other bad experiences. “I spent a year bitter with these tests. One of the tests was a GMAT (test used to take an MBA in the US), and another for Portuguese were questions based on the book ‘Dom Casmurro’. They were entrance exam questions for Fuvest (University of São Paulo ), and the vacancy in this last test was an attendance, to earn R$ 2.17 “, replied a professional. “I’ve been waiting anxiously for an answer for days and until today the vacancies are open with my application and no answer after the language tests”, stated another.

                        “It even hurts your heart when you go in to apply and see ‘Gupy’ or ‘Kenoby’. Profile test, Portuguese, English (…) 598 different cultural fit tests (…) And after about five months, when you even forgot about the vacancy, you spent more than three hours applying and taking the test… ‘We chose not to continue with your application’. Disheartening,” said one more person in the post’s comments.

                  O what are these platforms?

                Created in 2020 in São Paulo, Kenoby and Gupy are the platforms most cited in complaints, especially the second. According to its official website, Gupy was founded by Mariana Dias, Bruna Guimarães, Guilherme Dias and Robson Ventura. companies such as operator Vivo, beverage manufacturer Ambev, B2W ( retailer that owns Submarino and and the transport company Randon. It received some investment contributions; the last one earned it US$ 6.8 million (R$ , 4 million).

                  Kenoby, founded by Marcel Lotufo, has more than 450 customers such as McDonald’s, Renault, Leroy Merlin, Alelo and MDS Group, and managed to raise tar R$ 11 millions at the beginning of 2015. Other Brazilian platforms active in the online recruitment sector are Revelo,, Sólides, Pin People, Pandapé and Taqe, in addition to LinkedIn itself, which has its own tool.

                    The differential of these services in relation to previous modes of recruitment and selection can be summarized in two words: artificial intelligence. The term, overused nowadays, can mean many things, but in this case it is an algorithm designed to automate some processes, mainly the screening of resumes and ranking of the best candidates. The goal is to create a “match” between candidate and recruiting company in a similar way to the Tinder dating app: if the company would like to see professionals with certain characteristics, the program will make a megafilter to present only those who meet these requirements.

                    In the following phases, the pre-selected undergo tests that may vary according to the company’s preferences, but usually include a psychological profile , open position general and/or specific knowledge tests and questions about logic, cultural fit — that is, whether you have the desired behavior and culture for the position — and situational test on day-to-day work decisions. The last phase is usually an interview with a company director with the highest ranked from the previous phases, to then choose the winner.

                      Image: Reproduction/Headway/Unsplash

                      The use of artificial intelligence leads to some issues. What are the criteria that guide the selection? How do we know that the algorithm actually picks the best candidates and doesn’t make mistakes? How are we sure there are no biases in this judgment? From the criticisms pointed out in social networks, to what extent is the responsibility of the platforms or recruiting companies? Do they have followed the General Data Protection Law (LGPD) and properly handle the candidates’ personal data under their consent?

                        According to a recent study by the Harvard Business School, there are currently about 30 millions of workers who cannot find a full-time job. The automated recruitment of HR platforms is pointed out as one of the reasons for this situation, because curricular criteria such as time gaps without full-time employment turn into a ptretext to reject candidates with adequate experience for the position.

                          At least in speech, startups claim to care for both their customers and candidates and try to avoid the chance of skewing recruitment. “We want the candidate’s experience to be amazing throughout the process as well. Because when a person has a negative contact with a company, they become a detractor, they won’t recommend that brand to friends in the future,” said the CEO from Gupy, Mariana Dias, to the Marie Curie News website. “If you know the characteristics of the people you are looking for, it is possible to ignore data such as the college at which the candidates studied and make a more assertive decision”, said the head of Kenoby, Marcel Lotufo, to the Exame website.

                          Different points of view

                          Aerospace engineer Daniele Dias Sousa disagrees. “In all these years of trying, I’ve never gotten a job on these platforms. I’ve tried courses that teach you how to prepare for these processes, but I can count on my fingers how many times I’ve been called in for an interview. My last experience was taking two English tests, on the same day, on the same platform [a Gupy] and be evaluated with two levels of English by the European framework: B1 [intermediário] and C1 [avançado]”, described to the


                          . When contacting the platform, she was informed that the results were correct and that she should speak with the company that developed the test.

                            Currently employed by Nuvolax, technology consultant Richard Isecke decided to “hack” his latest selection. “Some platforms had more pranks and extremely poorly prepared questions that basically didn’t measure anything. There was this Gupy process along the same lines, so I contacted Nuvolax HR directly through a recruiter, who helped me a lot in the process, and we did all the interviews remotely. On the same day I already received an answer regarding approval”, he said. Despite the trickery, he exempts the platform from blame. “I support and encourage the use of technology! Who I blame are the companies and recruiters who don’t know how to make good use of it.”

                                Bruno Estevão Guerra, a sales professional, also thinks that the outcry against HR statuses is unfair. “I consider an excellent method, which allows people from all over Brazil or the world to work remotely. As the range of candidates is broader, sometimes the process is apparently more time-consuming. In most cases, I had a return. On the other hand, I didn’t have it. a feedback of what caused my disapproval, but apparently it’s a business rule in the recruiting world nt”, he defends. For him, it is much more practical to take tests online than to ask the candidate to travel to the company, compare himself to other candidates and still delay or not receive the answer.

                                What the experts say

                                Adriana Caldana, professor of administration at FEA-RP/USP, says that many of the complaints are discussed long before the platforms exist. analog processes had the same problems,” she says. She argues that the supposed absurdity of psychological testing is desirable, so that professionals don’t mold their own personality and become more “desirable” to the job. But automation has also kept old vices, like the lack of feedback. “HRs have a very instrumental concept of people. Only a few companies are concerned with providing answers to lower people’s anxiety. But they need an answer, because [a seleção] it’s about their lives.”

                                  “In theory, use the complex identification of patterns and indicators to predict a person’s suitability for the company is an effective objective. But technology cannot consider factors of organizational culture, machismo, racism and empowerment that affect people on a daily basis. So reproducing large databases is usually not a good idea when we talk about human beings”, defends Tarcízio Silva, Society Fellow of the Mozilla Foundation and researcher in defense against algorithmic damage.

                                    Monique Evelle, founder of the platform for training Inventivos entrepreneurs, calls for more transparency on the selection criteria, so that there is a debate about a possible social exclusion. “Technology is not neutral. You have to see who creates and who monitors it so there is no discrimination. There must be plurality in the people who develop this algorithm, in addition to feeding this artificial intelligence with more talent references”, he says.

                                        Para Alex Fernandes Magalhães, professor of administration at the Federal University of Minas Gerais (UFMG), the platforms have their advantages, such as reaching more candidates for a vacancy, allowing more control of professionals’ information and producing quick responses to hiring decisions. , is at the service of a more neoliberal logic. “The ‘platformization’ is a way of eliminating or transferring the costs of the work process to the users themselves, using technologies intended to favor the system’s status quo. But prioritizing processes over the person is contradictory, when it comes to management practices of/with people”, she explains.

                                            Eliane Aere , director of the digital area of ​​the Brazilian Association of Human Resources (ABRH), believes that technology is welcome, but warns against the unconscious bias, that is, the beliefs and cultural issues of recruiters. solutions have more control over the selection. “Usually the client defines how their process is, most platforms allow this,” she says. She advocates a more “blind” recruitment, where HR would not have immediate access to so much personal data that may bias the choice, such as the college attended by the candidate.

                                                On privacy compliance and LGPD, the member lawyer of the National Association of Data Privacy Professionals (ANPPD) Helen Caroline Pinto suggests that the recruiting company should “clearly define the criteria of processing the information, informing in the vacancy that the personal data of the candidates will be collected and shared internally and with partners”. Another tip is for the company or platform to develop a specific service channel for candidates to request access, correction, deletion of personal data, information on sharing, revocation of consent and other aspects.

                                                “As long as companies prioritize this type of platform, people will feel compelled to join them. However, there are forms of resistance, yes. Part of a collaboration between programmers concerned with design justice [abordagem que pensa o design de forma favorável a comunidades marginalizadas], data protection and inclusion of peripheral people”, says Fabricio Barili, researcher of worker monitoring platforms at the University of Vale do Rio dos Sinos (Unisinos).

                                Image: Reproduction/Amy Hirschi/Unsplash

                                Other side

                              • In an interview with Canaltech

                                , Guilherme Dias, head of marketing and co-founder of Gupy, says that his platform brings benefits such as cost savings to companies (“We help to save on average % in the operational effort of HR”), agility (“our AI tria 1 million of resumes per second”), assertiveness (the company’s AI, he says, “is able to rank candidates according to their affinity with the job”) and diversity (“Gupy’s AI does not analyze gender, age, ethnicity, city ​​of origin or any such feature, and was trained to avoid unconscious biases in hiring”).

                                    About criticism seen on social networks, Dias says that on HR platforms like Gupy “there is still a lot to improve” and that they are working to “improve the education of our users and improve the experience of people applying with our products”. Commenting on the role of client companies in Gupy’s selection processes, he informed that they undergo an adaptation period of at least four weeks. “One of the points we talk about the most is about the difference between digital transformation and digitization. It’s no use for the company to copy and paste your old selection process into a platform. If it wasn’t humanized offline and you want to transpose it online , it will remain non-humanized, but in a much larger volume of participants”, he argues.

                                      Some functions offered by Gupy for companies, says Dias, they are sending feedback “using models that she can build herself, stating her reasons for disapproval”; view percentage of candidates without feedback by recruiter; possibility to customize the message sent to candidates at each new stage; in addition to the customization of the steps. “She may or may not include tests in the selection process, and if so, she needs to choose which tests she wants to use in the process.” Asked if Gupy follows the LGPD and allows candidates to delete their information from the platform, Dias also says that “people who are candidates can delete their data from our platform at any time. We even have DPOs (data privacy officers), specialized professionals in this”.

                                          Kenoby was contacted, but did not respond to the request for an interview until the publication of this text. Renato Dias, CEO of recruitment startup Taqe, says he thinks the issue of returning candidates is relevant, but says there are ways to do it without any problems. “I understand that platforms offer the mechanisms for companies to provide returns. If they don’t, it’s because the company didn’t take action to make this happen. It’s important for HR professionals to take this for themselves, even because it affects the brand employer”, he says.

                                              Searched by the article, Gupy and Taqe client companies mentioned in this article, such as Vivo, B2W, Ambev, Picpay , Randon and Hospital Albert Einstein refused to give an interview.

                                                Did you like this article?

                                                    Subscribe your email at Canaltech to receive daily updates with the latest news from the world of technology.

Related Articles

Check Also
Back to top button