The short answer AI is good at mapping the executive market and poor at judging the executive. It can find who exists, classify careers, and surface passive leaders in hours instead of weeks. It cannot tell you whether a specific person will hold a specific mandate, inside a specific organization, at a specific moment. That limit is not a gap in today's models that a bigger model will close. It is a difference in kind between representing a person and assessing one. For a board or CHRO choosing between an "AI recruiting" platform and a retained search firm, the rule is simple: use AI to widen the field; keep a named human accountable for the hire. What AI does well: mapping the field The mapping case is real, and search firms that ignore it lose. AI now reads public career data at a scale no research team can match: it builds a longlist from the open market, models competitor org charts,
source https://kitalent.com/articles/what-ai-can-and-cannot-do-in-executive-search
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Interviewing for Skills and for Identity
A Practitioner's Guide to the Two Registers of Executive Assessment. KiTalent Practitioner Guides · MMXXVI — published by KiTalent Resea...
-
AI, Heidegger, and the De-Historicization of Meaning Volume 1 of KiTalent Annuals in Research on Executive Search — published by KiTalent Re...
-
Recruitment Trends in Milano 2025–2026: What Every Head Hunter and Recruiter Must Know Milano is not just Italy's financial capital — it...
-
By Alessio Montaruli , Founder & Group CEO, KiTalent --- Most senior hires that fail in the first six months do not fail on capability. ...
No comments:
Post a Comment