Don’t Tell Me About Yourself

In this live episode, you’ll learn why AI isn’t just another tool for HR, it’s forcing a complete shift in how teams think and operate. Zach Parris shares why HR needs to move from program-based work to product-based thinking, how non-technical teams can build with AI, and why usage is now the most important metric. This is a practical look at how AI is changing HR from the inside out and what leaders need to do to keep up. Key Takeaways: AI requires a shift from programs to products HR teams need to think like product builders Usage is the strongest signal of value Non-technical teams can now build with AI “Vibe coding” makes building more accessible AI is an equalizer across organizations Leaders must use AI themselves to understand it Creativity and experimentation are now critical AI is changing how HR delivers impact First-principles thinking is essential right now Keywords: AI in HR, HR product mindset, AI in talent management, vibe coding HR, HR innovation strategy, AI adoption HR teams, HR technology transformation, talent leadership AI, HR metrics usage, future of HR Follow Zach at https://www.linkedin.com/in/zacharyparris/ Sponsored by @shakerrecruitmentmarketing

In this live episode, you’ll learn how to use AI in recruiting without making your process worse. Stef Nikitas shares how her team improved hiring speed, reduced interview no-shows, and kept human decision-making at the center while using AI tools. This is a practical look at what actually works, what to avoid, and how to think about AI in hiring the right way. Key Takeaways: Fix your hiring process before adding AI AI can reduce interview no-shows through better scheduling Candidates should control interview timing, not just managers AI should support decisions, not make them Legal and data privacy matter more than ever with AI Candidate experience directly impacts your brand and revenue Keywords: AI in recruiting, high volume hiring, reduce interview no shows, candidate experience, hiring process improvement, recruitment automation, talent acquisition strategy, hiring metrics time to fill, AI compliance hiring, candidate scheduling tools Follow Stef at https://www.linkedin.com/in/snikitas/ Sponsored by @shakerrecruitmentmarketing

In our last episode of Season 1, we break down one of the most common assumptions in hiring: that more interviews lead to better decisions. We explore how interview processes slowly expand over time, often without intention, and why that actually creates confusion, delays, and weaker hiring outcomes. We dig into what’s really driving long interview processes, from lack of clarity and alignment to low confidence in decision-making, and how adding more people and opinions often creates noise instead of better data. Through real examples and research, we highlight where interview processes start to lose value and how they impact both hiring teams and candidates. Finally, we share what to do instead, including how to structure a more effective interview process, define clear roles, and focus on better evaluation rather than more evaluation, as we wrap up the season and look ahead to what’s next. While this episode marks the end of Season 1 we will be releasing live episodes over the next few weeks, and Season 2 will return this fall. Key Takeaways More interviews do not equal better hiring decisions Lack of clarity and alignment causes interview processes to grow After four interviews, returns diminish significantly Too many interviewers create noise, not better data Long processes often signal low confidence in decision-making Candidates lose interest during slow, drawn-out hiring cycles Repeating the same questions adds no value Strong processes rely on clear roles and defined criteria Decision ownership prevents endless interview rounds Better interviews matter more than more interviews Timestamps 00:00 Why interview processes keep growing 00:40 When interviewing stops helping decisions 01:13 Real example of excessive interviews 03:19 The real problem is decision-making 05:08 Why more data creates more noise 07:49 Diminishing returns after four interviews 10:27 Hidden costs of over-interviewing 12:15 Candidate experience and drop-off 15:28 Signs your interview process is broken 23:51 Why better interviews matter more Keywords how many interviews is too many, interview process best practices, hiring process improvement, why hiring takes so long, reduce interview stages, candidate experience, structured interviews, recruiting efficiency, decision making hiring, interview process optimization Follow Us @expertinterviewers TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@expertinterviewers Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/expertinterviewers/ LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/lornaerickson/

In this episode, we break down one of the most overused and least defined phrases in hiring: “not a culture fit.” We explore why it sounds thoughtful and professional, but often masks vague, subjective decision-making that isn’t tied to job performance. We dig into what hiring teams actually mean when they say “culture fit” (hint: it’s usually just a feeling), and how this creates space for bias, inconsistency, and missed opportunities. We also share a real story that highlights how relying on “fit” can lead to overlooking top performers who don’t match the existing mold. Finally, we talk about what companies should be focusing on instead from defining culture through behaviors and motivators, to using evidence-based interviewing  and how to shift from “culture fit” to a more intentional, measurable approach to hiring. Key Takeaways Culture fit is often a vague feeling, not a measurable criterion If you cannot define it, you are not evaluating it Culture fit decisions are commonly driven by similarity bias Hiring for fit can exclude high-performing and diverse candidates Candidates can easily fake culture fit in interviews Culture fit is not job-related or defensible in decision-making Many hiring mistakes come from prioritizing likability over performance Strong interviews focus on skills, motivation, and evidence Defining culture through behaviors creates better hiring outcomes Asking for evidence improves hiring decisions and consistency Timestamps 00:00 Why culture fit is misleading 01:30 What culture fit really means 03:00 The role of bias in hiring decisions 05:00 Real example of a missed high performer 07:00 Why culture fit is not job-related 09:00 How candidates game culture fit 11:00 The cost of hiring for similarity 13:00 Personality hires and performance risk 15:00 What to evaluate instead of culture fit 18:00 How to ask for better interview evidence Keywords: culture fit hiring, hiring bias, interview mistakes, structured interviews, candidate evaluation, hiring decisions, recruiting strategy, behavioral interviewing, talent acquisition, interview process improvement Follow Us @expertinterviewers TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@expertinterviewers Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/expertinterviewers/ LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/lornaerickson/

In this episode, we break down one of the most common — and least questioned — steps in the hiring process: reference checks. We explore why so many companies still rely on them, despite the lack of evidence that they actually predict job performance. We talk about how reference checks often act as a “security blanket” for hiring teams, why they rarely change hiring decisions, and what they’re actually measuring (hint: it’s not skill or performance). We also dig into how this step can create unfair disadvantages for candidates and what it signals about your interview process if you feel like you need them. Finally, we cover when references might make sense — and what hiring teams should be focusing on instead if they want to make confident, data-backed hiring decisions. Key Takeaways: Reference checks have low predictive value for job performance (around 13%).Most reference checks don’t change hiring decisions — offers are made anyway.References often act as a “security blanket” rather than a meaningful evaluation tool.They primarily measure a candidate’s network, not their ability to do the job.Candidates are unlikely to provide references who would speak negatively.Reference checks can disadvantage candidates with poor past managers or experiences.Lack of a reference can unfairly hurt a candidate’s chances.If you rely on references to make a decision, your interview process likely has gaps.Structured interviews and clear evaluation criteria are far stronger predictors of performance.References may be useful after hiring to understand how to best support a new employee. Timestamps: 00:00 Why reference checks may be a sign your process is broken01:30 Do reference checks actually add value?02:15 The data behind reference checks (and why it’s weak)03:15 References as a “security blanket” in hiring03:40 What reference checks are really measuring04:20 Why references are unreliable and subjective05:30 Are references transferable to a new role or environment?06:10 The disadvantage for candidates without strong advocates07:20 Why references don’t measure ability08:00 How reference checks impact candidate experience09:00 The bias built into reference checks09:35 When lack of a reference becomes a problem10:20 Why reference checks can feel unfair11:00 Fear and tradition as drivers of reference checks12:00 Do reference checks ever change hiring decisions?12:45 When references might make sense (fraud, verification)14:00 The real issue: lack of intention in hiring processes15:15 Why companies don’t question this step16:00 What actually predicts performance17:20 Structured interviews vs. reference checks18:00 The “culture fit” argument (and why it falls apart)19:00 “That one time it worked” — luck vs. reliability19:40 When references can actually add value (post-offer)21:00 A better way to use references to support employees22:00 What to focus on instead of references22:45 Are reference checks dead? reference checks, hiring process mistakes, structured interviewing, hiring bias, interview best practices, candidate experience, recruiting strategies, hiring managers, interview process improvement, talent acquisition Follow us: TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@expertinterviewersInstagram: https://www.instagram.com/expertinterviewers/LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/lornaerickson/

In this episode, we break down what actually makes someone a great interviewer and why it matters more than most companies realize. We talk about the difference between “gut feeling” interviewing and structured interviewing, why preparation is the foundation of good hiring decisions, and how green flag interviewers create better candidate experiences and stronger hiring outcomes. This episode walks through the behaviors, questions, and preparation that separate strong interviewers from the ones who accidentally sabotage their hiring process. Key Takeaways Great interviewers prepare before the interview begins. Defining success in a role helps teams evaluate candidates objectively. Interviewers should identify both ability and motivation for the role. Interviews should be a two-way evaluation between candidate and employer. Green flag interviewers only ask job-related questions. Hypothetical and leading questions reduce interview accuracy. Behavioral questions reveal real past actions instead of guesses. Gathering information and evaluating candidates should be separate steps. Clear communication and timelines improve candidate experience. Structured interviews reduce bias and improve hiring decisions. Timestamps 00:00 Why great interviewers matter in hiring 01:20 What makes a green flag interviewer 03:00 The impact of candidate experience on hiring 05:10 Preparing before the interview starts 07:30 Defining success and candidate motivators 09:10 Why interviews must be a two-way evaluation 10:50 Avoiding illegal and non-job-related questions 12:20 Behavioral questions and better follow-ups 14:40 Examples of shockingly good interviews 18:00 Fixing common interview questions Keywords green flag interviewer, how to interview candidates, interview training for managers, structured interviewing, behavioral interview questions, hiring best practices, candidate experience, hiring manager training, interview preparation, recruitment interviewing techniques Follow us @expertinterviewers TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@expertinterviewers Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/expertinterviewers/ LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/lornaerickson/

In this episode, we break down why candidates today apply to dozens of jobs at once and why their behavior often looks chaotic to employers. We examine the reality of modern job searching, including long interview timelines, ghosting, unpredictable hiring processes, and the massive amount of unpaid work candidates do just to apply. When you look at the environment candidates are operating in, their behavior starts to make sense. Applying broadly is often risk management, not lack of commitment. We also explore how hiring teams unintentionally create defensive candidate behavior and what simple changes companies can make to rebuild trust in the hiring process. Key Takeaways Candidates apply to many jobs because hiring processes are unpredictable. Lack of communication from companies trains candidates to hedge their bets. Job searching requires significant unpaid work including resumes, research, and interviews. Ghosting is one of the fastest ways to break candidate trust. When companies stay silent, candidates fill the gap with negative assumptions. Defensive candidate behavior often mirrors poor hiring practices. Transparency about timelines and process builds candidate trust. Clear communication reduces ghosting, over-applying, and offer hedging. Recruiters are often blamed for delays caused by internal hiring teams. Trust in hiring improves candidate engagement and acceptance rates. Timestamps 00:00 Why candidates apply to dozens of jobs 01:08 Data on candidate communication gaps 02:08 Why application volume keeps increasing 03:22 The hidden work behind job applications 05:34 Emotional and psychological toll of job searching 07:22 How ghosting damages candidate trust 09:06 How negative hiring experiences spread publicly 10:07 Why candidates sometimes ghost employers 11:38 Why candidates are being told to lie 15:58 Simple ways companies can rebuild candidate trust Follow us @expertinterviewers TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@expertinterviewers Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/expertinterviewers/ LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/lornaerickson/ Keywords candidate experience, hiring process problems, why candidates apply to many jobs, candidate ghosting, hiring communication, job search frustration, hiring transparency, interview process delays, candidate trust, recruitment best practices

In this episode, we dig into one of the most debated questions in hiring right now: should employers consider a candidate’s public online behavior when making hiring decisions? We sit down with Ben Mones, founder and CEO of Fama, to talk about what digital behavior screening actually looks like, where the legal and ethical boundaries are, and why transparency matters for both employers and candidates. We explore how social media has changed workplace risk, what employers are often misunderstanding about online behavior, and how companies can evaluate behavior responsibly without turning hiring into surveillance. Learn more about Fama: https://hubs.ly/Q046ph7k0 Request a demo: https://hubs.ly/Q046pj_Y0 Follow Fama on LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/fama-tech/ Follow Fama on Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/famascreening Follow Fama on TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@famascreening Key takeaways: Employers must link online behavior to real workplace impact. Screening should focus on conduct like harassment, threats, or intolerance. Protected traits such as politics or religion cannot be part of hiring decisions. Transparency with candidates is essential when using screening tools. Candidates should be able to see and dispute screening results. Social media now plays a major role in workplace interactions and reputation. Employee-generated content can create legal and compliance risks. Digital behavior signals can help prevent misconduct before it happens. Screening tools should support judgment, not replace it. Safer hiring practices benefit both employers and employees. Timestamps: 00:00 Why online behavior can matter in hiring 01:21 Introducing digital behavior screening 05:45 What digital screening actually analyzes 06:58 Common misconceptions about social media screening 09:06 Legal guardrails and discrimination limits 11:00 Why privacy by design matters in hiring tech 14:21 Candidate transparency and consent 16:32 What companies underestimate about digital behavior risk 18:55 How social media changed workplace interaction 20:47 Risks tied to employee-generated content 24:18 How digital screening can benefit candidates 26:39 Fair criticism of digital behavior screening 30:57 Rapid-fire insights on hiring risk Keywords: digital behavior screening, social media hiring, online behavior in hiring, workplace misconduct risk, candidate transparency, hiring compliance, privacy by design, employment discrimination, employee generated content, workplace safety

Personality assessments are used by nearly 80 percent of Fortune 500 companies and taken by over 100 million people each year. They are marketed as predictive, objective, and data driven. But do they actually predict job performance, or are they replacing interviewer judgment? In this episode, we break down what personality tests measure, what research says about their accuracy, and how hiring teams misuse them. You will learn when assessments help, when they harm, and what to use instead if you want to make better hiring decisions. Key Takeaways: Personality assessments are a multi billion dollar industry used widely in corporate hiring. Most hiring assessments measure traits like emotional stability, dominance, openness, and agreeableness. Many tests rely on self reported answers that candidates can easily game. When used as the deciding factor, personality tests fail to predict job performance up to 95 percent of the time. Hiring managers often use assessments as a security blanket to reduce decision risk. Over reliance on testing can weaken interviewer skill and accountability. Predicting performance requires evidence of past behavior, not personality labels. Structured behavioral interviews are more reliable than trait based screening. Assessments can damage candidate trust when results are not shared transparently. Personality tools work best for employee development, not hiring gatekeeping. Timestamps: 00:48 What personality tests claim to predict 01:27 What hiring assessments actually measure 04:21 How big the assessment industry is 06:40 Why companies rely on personality tests 09:19 How testing can break candidate trust 12:05 Are hiring assessments accurate 16:00 Why past behavior predicts performance 17:27 Better alternatives to personality screening 22:17 When assessments are useful 23:36 Final verdict on hiring tests Keywords: personality assessments in hiring do personality tests predict job performance predictive hiring tools are hiring assessments accurate structured behavioral interviews candidate experience and hiring tests how to predict job performance personality tests vs job performance hiring manager decision making employee development assessments

Most companies believe their employer brand is what they publish on their website, careers page, or mission statement. Candidates believe it is what they see, hear, and experience. In this episode, we break down the difference between the brand you think you are communicating and the brand candidates are actually experiencing. You will learn how job seekers research companies today, why interviews expose brand gaps instantly, and what leaders can do to align reputation with reality before it damages hiring outcomes. Key Takeaways: Over 86 percent of job seekers research company reviews before applying. Younger candidates increasingly use TikTok and AI tools as search engines. Every company has two brands: the intended brand and the experienced brand. Mission statements and employee value propositions rarely influence candidates. Negative interview experiences are the loudest form of employer branding. Interviews are where brand promises get tested in real time. Employees and former employees are more trusted than CEOs. Silence on social media still communicates something about your culture. Forcing employees to post scripted content reduces trust. Fixing reputation starts with auditing public feedback and improving candidate experience. Timestamps: 01:02 Why candidates research companies first 03:13 Intended brand vs experienced brand explained 04:30 Why mission statements do not influence applicants 06:43 The power of negative reviews and Glassdoor 09:43 How interviews expose brand gaps 11:48 Why bad interviews go viral 13:04 Why executives must care about employer brand 17:25 Why employees are more trusted than CEOs 20:35 How to audit and fix reputation issues 25:13 Why interviewing is a public conversation Keywords: employer branding strategy candidate experience Glassdoor reviews job seeker research behavior intended vs experienced brand employee generated content interview process mistakes company reputation management social media employer brand how candidates research companies

How do you compete in today’s job market, especially after a tech layoff? In this episode live from TalentSphere, Megan Dias a career coach shares practical strategies for navigating a competitive hiring landscape shaped by AI, resume overload, and changing recruiter behavior. You’ll learn how to customize your resume effectively, why networking is more important than ever, how to find the “human” in the hiring process, and what job seekers are getting wrong right now. Connect with Megan on LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/megandias/ Key Takeaways: AI is reshaping both recruiting and job searching. Job seekers must customize resumes for each role. A generic resume is far less effective in a competitive market. Finding a real human connection in the hiring process increases your odds. Networking on LinkedIn and in professional communities is critical. Many laid-off tech professionals need strategy, not just applications. Career coaching should be individualized, not one-size-fits-all. Understanding industry trends helps job seekers stay competitive. Leveraging existing connections can unlock hidden opportunities. Job searching today requires clarity, positioning, and persistence. Timestamps:00:00 Why Talent Sphere matters in 202601:52 Supporting laid-off tech professionals03:46 Practical strategies for job seekers04:30 Why resume customization matters05:15 Finding the human in hiring06:00 Networking in a digital-first world Keywords:Talent Sphere, career coaching, job market 2026, AI in recruiting, resume tips, networking strategies, job search strategies, candidate fraud concerns, talent acquisition trends, job seekers

How do recruiters keep up with 400+ AI tools without feeling overwhelmed or replaced? In this episode live at TalentSphere, Mabel Liang, a recruiting community founder shares how HR and talent acquisition professionals can learn AI together, compare ATS platforms effectively, and navigate the growing issue of identity fraud in hiring. You’ll learn how to create a safe space for experimentation, choose the right technology for your team size, and humanize AI instead of fearing it. Keep up with Mabel on LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/mabelliang/ Key Takeaways: There are hundreds of AI tools in recruiting, which creates overwhelm. Recruiters need community to evaluate and learn new technology safely. AI should support and humanize work, not replace recruiters. Teams must compare ATS platforms based on size and global needs. Overbuilt AI workflows can create unintended consequences. Identity fraud is becoming a major concern in talent acquisition. AI is now being used both by recruiters and by candidates. Safe learning spaces reduce fear around technology adoption. Wellness and professional growth can coexist at conferences. Forward-thinking TA leaders focus on leveraging AI responsibly. Timestamps:00:00 Why attend Talent Sphere 202600:47 Creating Talent AI Lounge01:52 Comparing ATS platforms and HR tech tools02:30 AI overwhelm in recruiting02:45 Identity fraud and AI misuse03:51 Blending wellness and learning at conferences04:25 Encouraging recruiters to embrace AI Keywords:Talent Sphere, AI in recruiting, humanizing AI, ATS comparison, Greenhouse vs Ashby, recruiting technology tools, identity fraud in hiring, HR tech community, talent acquisition trends, AI overwhelm

How do recruiters actually become strategic instead of just being told to “be more strategic”? In this episode live from TalentSphere, we talk with Preston Sharpston to break down what recruiter enablement really looks like, how talent acquisition leaders can level up their teams in 60 to 90 days, and how to use data before recruiting even starts. You’ll learn practical ways to run better intake meetings, prioritize roles using data, identify bottlenecks, and push back on unrealistic hiring expectations with confidence. Follow Preston on LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/prestonsharpston/ Key Takeaways: Recruiters are often told to be strategic but rarely trained how to do it. Strategic recruiting starts with better intake meetings, reframed as strategy sessions. Data should guide prioritization, not hiring manager opinions. Time-to-submit can reveal more than time-to-fill. Move beyond surface metrics to identify real bottlenecks. Use total addressable market data before opening a search. Compensation conversations should be backed by market data upfront. TA leaders must level-set recruiters at different skill levels. Structured coaching can elevate recruiter performance in 60–90 days. Recruiter enablement is about practical, step-by-step execution. Timestamps:00:00 Speaking at Talent Sphere 202601:16 Recruiter enablement and practical strategy01:47 Leading recruiting for a growing franchise02:16 Coaching recruiters and TA managers02:41 Why recruiters struggle with “being strategic”03:11 Scaling recruiter capability in 60–90 days03:58 Using data to prioritize roles05:00 Rethinking recruiting metrics05:31 Finding bottlenecks with better data06:24 Using market data before recruiting starts Keywords:recruiter enablement, strategic recruiting, talent acquisition leadership, recruiting metrics, time to submit metric, data-driven hiring, intake meeting strategy, hiring manager alignment, TA team development, recruiter coaching

Live from TalentSphere were talking about what fractional recruiting is, and when should a company use it? In this episode we talk with Brooke Wheeler, Founder of Restoration Talent Solutions and explore how fractional hiring gives companies executive-level recruiting expertise without the long-term commitment. You’ll learn how fractional talent acquisition leaders step into growing companies, build recruiting structure and process, and transition teams for long-term success. We also discuss how recruiters can build community, avoid AI overwhelm, and stay strategic in a fast-changing hiring landscape. Follow Brooke on LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/brookewheeler/ Timestamps:00:00 Why community matters in recruiting01:20 Building recruiting structure and process02:15 AI overwhelm in talent acquisition03:05 What fractional recruiting means03:40 From corporate VP to fractional founder04:10 How fractional hiring benefits companies04:48 Building the playbook and hiring full-time successors05:10 The future of fractional talent Keywords:fractional recruiting, fractional hiring, part-time executive recruiter, talent acquisition strategy, recruiting process improvement, interim head of talent, startup hiring support, recruiting consultant, AI in recruiting, talent acquisition leadership

What does technical hiring look like in the age of AI? In this episode, we talk with Amanda Perry VP of Customer Success at CoderPad and break down how AI is reshaping engineering interviews, why banning AI is a losing strategy, how to prevent candidate fraud (including deepfakes), and how transparency builds trust in the hiring process. You’ll learn practical ways to design interviews that reflect real-world work, reduce confusion between recruiters and hiring managers, and improve candidate experience without sacrificing rigor. We're live from TalentSphere! Follow Amanda on LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/amanda-perry-96349ab1/ Check out CoderPad: https://coderpad.io/ Key Takeaways: AI is not making technical hiring harder, but it is making it different. Modern engineering interviews should assess how candidates use AI, not whether they use it. The focus is shifting from output to critical thinking and debugging skills. Clear AI guidelines prevent confusion and candidate drop-off. Misalignment between recruiters and hiring managers damages trust. Junior engineers with strong AI skills are increasingly competitive. Candidate fraud, including deepfakes, is a real concern in technical hiring. Short introductory video submissions can reduce fraud and save recruiter time. Transparency in the hiring process improves candidate experience. Bias exists in every stage of hiring, so systems must be intentional and repeatable. Timestamps:00:00 Why attend Talent Sphere Summit01:10 What a technical hiring platform does02:02 Is hiring engineers getting harder?03:28 Stop treating AI like a gotcha04:52 Align recruiters and hiring managers on AI rules06:14 Are junior engineers being replaced?07:12 Why transparency builds trust09:05 Deepfakes and candidate fraud in hiring10:15 Using video to verify real candidates12:17 Balancing fraud prevention and bias Keywords:AI in hiring, technical hiring process, engineering interviews, AI interview guidelines, candidate fraud, deepfake job applicants, junior engineer hiring trends, transparent hiring practices, AI skills assessment, candidate experience

We're live from TalenSphere! How do you show up authentically at work without hurting your credibility? In this episode, Bridgette Corridan, a talent leader AND sound healer shares how vulnerability and authenticity can become superpowers in recruiting and leadership. You will learn how to stop shrinking yourself to fit professional expectations, how to integrate personal purpose with business strategy, and how mindfulness practices like breathwork and sound healing can help leaders navigate a noisy, high-pressure world. This conversation explores identity, leadership, community, and how to create workplaces that support real human expansion. Key Takeaways: Vulnerability and authenticity create stronger recruiting conversations. Professionalism does not require shrinking who you are. Owning your full identity attracts the right opportunities and people. Sound healing and mindfulness can support leadership clarity. Breathwork and meditation help leaders reset in high-stress environments. Women-led communities create safe spaces for growth and connection. Leaders need compassion for themselves and others. Purpose-driven business models can combine profit and social impact. Expanding who you are professionally benefits teams and organizations. Clear self-awareness improves decision-making and leadership presence. Timestamps:00:00 Why authenticity matters in recruiting01:23 From talent leader to sound healer03:24 Bringing your full self to LinkedIn04:38 Redefining professionalism06:24 Why connection matters in talent07:45 The power of breath and mindfulness08:43 Blending consulting and healing work09:41 Building a social impact consulting company11:09 Leading with compassion and curiosity Keywords:Talent Sphere, authenticity at work, vulnerability in leadership, women in talent acquisition, sound healing in business, mindful leadership, breathwork for stress, purpose-driven business, social enterprise consulting, recruiting community Follow Bridgette on LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/bridgetteloydcorridan/

In this episode live from TalentSphere, we talk with our guest Kyle Lagunas Founder of Kyle & Co about what AI interviewers are, how they are being used in real hiring processes, and what risks companies face if they deploy them without structure or governance. We break down independent research evaluating 12 AI interviewer platforms, explain why inconsistent implementation creates legal and ethical exposure, and outline how to use AI in interviews responsibly. If you are asking whether AI interviewers are worth it, compliant, or fair, or you like to listen to people who randomly break out in song this conversation is for you. Keep up with Kyle on LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/kylelagunas Link to Kyle & Co research report: https://resources.kyleandco.com/CategoryCompass_AIInterviewers Key TakeawaysAI interviewers are rapidly emerging across screening and technical interviews.Video avatar AI is less common and often disliked by candidates.Voice-based AI is generally perceived as more natural and acceptable.There is no single best AI interviewer; tools vary by use case.Some tools are built for high volume yes or no screening, others for advanced behavioral probing.Inconsistent deployment across teams increases legal and compliance risk.Automated candidate disposition based solely on AI can create liability if not tightly governed.Strong client success and implementation support differentiates vendors.AI interviewers can improve structure by preventing off-script or biased questioning.The teams that succeed with AI optimize their process before automating it. Timestamps00:00 Why AI interviewers are emerging now01:07 Researching 12 AI interviewer platforms02:33 Candidate reactions to video versus voice AI03:00 Different types of AI interviewer use cases04:00 Why there is no best in class tool04:41 Legal and liability concerns in AI interviews05:09 Using AI in a highly human centric process06:22 Inconsistent deployment and startup risk07:48 Automated disposition and governance issues08:44 Process optimization before automation KeywordsAI interviewersAI in hiringautomated interviewscandidate experiencehiring complianceHR technology researchstructured interviewsautomated candidate screeningAI governance in HRtalent acquisition technology

In this episode, we chat with our guest Natalie Stones Co-Founder of Talent Collective and creator of the Talent Sphere event about how to design a conference that people actually want to attend. We break down what makes a retreat-style conference different from traditional large industry events, how to build practitioner-led sessions that deliver real takeaways, and how to create an environment where talent acquisition leaders can learn, connect, and leave refreshed instead of burned out. Key TakeawaysThe concept was built around creating an event the founder wished already existed.A retreat-style conference can still deliver serious business value.Practitioner-led sessions create more relevant and current insights.Speakers are selected based on real, current experience in the role.First-time speakers can add fresh perspectives when given a safe space.Smaller, curated groups create deeper connections than large expos.Wellness elements can enhance learning without sacrificing business outcomes.Sponsors can lead solution-focused sessions without doing product demos.Bundling hotel and ticket pricing simplifies the business case for employers.Providing structured session notebooks increases practical implementation after the event. Follow Natalie on LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/nataliestones/ Check out Talent Collective: https://www.talentcollectiveco.com/ Timestamps00:00 Why create a retreat style conference02:11 How venue and environment shape the experience03:00 Why practitioner led sessions matter03:51 What makes a strong conference speaker05:31 Adding wellness without losing business value07:28 Why smaller conferences create stronger connections08:08 Key differences from the first year09:39 How to justify attendance to your employer11:19 Building real training and team learning12:02 Intentional swag and thoughtful attendee experience Keywordsretreat style conferencetalent acquisition conferencepractitioner led sessionsconference planning strategytalent collective communityconference business casesmall curated eventswellness at conferencessponsor integration strategyTA leader networking

Fake candidates are no longer rare headlines. They are a growing risk in remote hiring. In this episode, you will learn why hiring fraud is increasing, how AI is making it easier to fake qualifications, what whisper coaching and proxy interviews look like in real time, and how to protect your company without turning interviews into interrogations. You will walk away with practical guardrails, clear red flags to watch for, and a reminder that structured interviews and strong follow-up questions are still your best defense. Key Takeaways: Why one in three hiring managers report encountering fake candidates How remote hiring removes natural identity verification moments The difference between acceptable AI assistance and employment fraud What whisper coaching is and how it shows up in interviews How proxy interviews and identity swaps happen Early interview red flags such as polished but shallow answers Why organized hiring fraud can create serious system access risk How to use structured interviews to expose inconsistencies Why documentation and cross-interviewer visibility matter How to design hiring processes that make fraud harder without harming candidate experience Timestamps: 00:00 Why structured interviews still matter 01:10 Hiring fraud statistics and growth 02:00 How remote hiring changed verification 05:00 Who benefits from fake candidates 09:00 Organized fraud and system risk 12:30 What whisper coaching looks like 14:00 Application stage red flags 18:00 Early interview warning signs 23:00 Inconsistencies across interview rounds 29:00 Building guardrails that prevent fraud Keywords: Hiring fraud Fake candidates Deepfake interviews Whisper coaching Proxy interview AI in hiring Structured interviews Follow-up questions Identity verification Remote hiring

AI is everywhere in hiring, but it’s not fixing broken processes — it’s accelerating them. In this episode, we break down how AI actually shows up in the hiring process, what it amplifies on both the candidate and company side, and why blaming the tool misses the real issue. You’ll learn where candidates unintentionally hurt themselves using AI, where companies break trust with automation, and how to use AI in ways that improve hiring without sacrificing judgment, fairness, or candidate experience. Key takeaways - AI is not good or bad; it amplifies the quality of your existing hiring process - Strong interview structure and trained interviewers make AI more effective - Candidates should use AI, but unedited, copy-paste outputs are easy to spot - If AI rewrites your experience so well you can’t explain it, you’re setting yourself up to fail - Using live AI during interviews can lead to poor hiring matches and distrust - Generic, AI-written job descriptions weaken employer brand and clarity - Automated rejections without human review damage trust and miss great talent - AI-generated interview questions often produce canned, low-signal answers - The safest, highest-value AI uses are scheduling and interview note-taking - Interview training and process design matter more than adding new tools Timestamps 00:48 — Why AI isn’t fixing hiring 01:26 — AI reveals strong vs broken processes 01:43 — Candidate AI panic and misconceptions 02:16 — Common mistakes candidates make with AI 04:03 — When resumes don’t match real experience 05:00 — Live AI use during interviews and risks 07:08 — How companies break trust with AI 08:59 — Automated rejections and candidate impact 13:16 — Why AI interview questions fail 18:54 — Where AI actually helps hiring teams Keywords AI in hiring interview process hiring automation AI interviews recruiting technology candidate experience interviewer training hiring bias AI recruiting tools structured interviews

In this episode, you’ll learn how common interview “icks” subtle phrases, behaviors, and broken processes quietly push great candidates away. We break down the most frequent red flags candidates notice instantly, why they happen, and how hiring teams can fix them using one simple principle: if it would feel weird for a candidate to do it, don’t do it as an interviewer. You’ll walk away with practical ways to create interviews that feel respectful, human, and effective for both sides. Key takeaways: Why certain interview phrases instantly signal bad culture How vague corporate language creates mistrust with candidates The most damaging interviewer behaviors candidates never forget Why treating interviews like therapy sessions backfires How body language and distractions change power dynamics The hidden process flaws that create anxiety and drop-off Why surprise panels and group interviews hurt performance The real impact of unpaid homework assignments How salary secrecy wastes time for everyone Candidate behaviors that unintentionally hurt their chances Timestamps: 00:00 What interview “icks” really mean 01:17 Why candidate experience affects offer acceptance 01:41 The four categories of interview icks 02:34 Phrase icks and verbal red flags 08:17 Behavior icks interviewers overlook 13:28 Process icks hiding in plain sight 15:08 Surprise interviews and group interviews 16:41 Homework assignments and free labor 19:31 Salary transparency and late-stage surprises 22:10 Candidate behaviors that give interviewers the ick Keywords: interview icks bad interview experiences hiring mistakes candidate experience interviewer behavior interview process problems salary transparency job interview red flags hiring best practices recruiting mistakes

Many hiring teams think interviews are just conversations, but poor interviewer behavior can actively push away top candidates and damage employer brand. In this episode, you’ll learn how common interviewer mistakes hurt hiring outcomes, how candidates actually interpret interview behavior, and what separates red flag interviewers from high-quality hiring managers who create strong candidate experiences and better hiring decisions. Key Takeaways Negative interview experiences directly impact acceptance rates and employer reputation Most bad interviewer behavior comes from lack of training, not bad intent Talking too much prevents real candidate evaluation Power dynamics and ego damage trust and candidate perception Rapid-fire questioning creates stress but doesn’t improve hiring accuracy Non-job-related or illegal questions create legal and brand risk Candidates share negative experiences far more often than positive ones The best interviews feel like two-way conversations, not interrogations Preparation and presence signal respect and professionalism Transparency about process and role increases candidate trust and acceptance Timestamps 00:00 Real example of inappropriate interview question 01:18 Why interviewer behavior impacts hiring outcomes 01:33 The four bad interviewer types overview 01:54 The Rambler explained 03:38 The Power Tripper explained 06:00 The Interrogator explained 08:39 The Walking Red Flag explained 11:33 What makes a green flag hiring manager 15:24 Why candidates remember interview experiences long term 18:24 Real candidate stories and interview mistakes Top Keywords interview mistakes bad interviewers candidate experience hiring manager training illegal interview questions how to interview candidates interview red flags interview best practices employer brand interviews improving hiring decisions

Welcome to to the pod - we're glad you're here!