HR professionals who can't anticipate or prepare for AI-driven job hunting are the ones whose competence should be questioned.


 Read the original article (in Japanese):

「ガクチカは生成AIに作ってもらった」「自己分析はMBTIと診断ツールを活用」…“コスパ重視”のZ世代学生たちの就活事情 一方で「AI依存」に警鐘を鳴らす声も | マネーポストWEB


The Real Problem with AI Job Hunting: It's Not the Students—It's the Companies' Lack of Questions

More students are turning to generative AI like ChatGPT to craft their self-promotions and “gakuchika” (the key experiences they highlight in job applications). But this isn’t some shocking new trend—it’s a perfectly rational and predictable move. In a high-stakes process like job hunting, optimizing one's approach through AI isn’t “cheating”; it’s modern, strategic effort.

From data collection and writing assistance to self-analysis and mock interviews, every aspect of preparation can now be enhanced through AI. It's only natural that students are using every tool available to increase their odds.

The real issue lies not with the students, but with the companies that failed to prepare for this predictable shift.

Companies Walked Blindly into a Predictable Future

Despite all the signs, most companies haven’t changed a thing. Interviews still rely on questions like:

  • “What was your gakuchika?”

  • “What are your strengths and weaknesses?”

  • “Why do you want to work here?”

These template-style questions are exactly the kind AI can answer with ease. Yet, companies continue using them and then complain that “students lack originality” or “all their answers sound the same.”
That’s not the students’ fault—it’s a failure in question design.

“Lack of Individuality” Isn’t the Cause—It’s the Result

If companies can’t see individuality in students, it’s not because of AI—it’s because the questions are too shallow to reveal it.

The standard trio of:

  • Gakuchika

  • Motivation

  • Self-promotion

...doesn’t invite depth. It invites scripting. If everyone’s giving similar answers, that’s because they’re all answering the same generic questions.

Students and Companies: Both Are Chasing Efficiency

Both sides are simply optimizing for success in different ways. Let’s break it down:

AspectStudentsCompanies
ObjectiveGet hiredHire the right person
MethodUse AI, MBTI, diagnostic toolsUse templated questions for efficient screening
WeaknessSimilar answers, difficult to showcase selfSuperficial questions, unable to assess people
Needed ChangePractice adding personal depth to answersRedesign questions, emphasize dialogue

This is not a battle between ethics and laziness. It’s two sides applying logic. The core problem is that companies are failing to adapt their methods to match the new reality.

Are Interviews Becoming an “Acting Contest”?

Today's interviews reward:

  • Structuring answers in frameworks like PREP

  • Smiling and speaking clearly

  • Saying what the recruiter expects to hear

These traits don’t reveal a person’s values or critical thinking—they reflect performance skills, not human depth.
And if these shallow metrics determine who gets hired, then yes—an AI-written script is good enough.

Companies Must Ask What AI Can’t Answer

If you want real, personal responses, ask real, personal questions. For example:

  • “Tell me about a time you clashed with someone—and how you repaired the relationship.”

  • “What have you given up on, and how did that change you?”

  • “What does ‘work’ mean to you personally?”

These require reflection. AI can’t write them convincingly. They provoke original thinking and show character.

Most Recruiters Aren’t Trained to See People

Another critical flaw: recruiters themselves are not equipped to draw out depth.

  • Many receive no training in question design or evaluation

  • Criteria are vague or based on gut feeling

  • Interviews are often conducted by whoever’s available

How can companies expect to “see the real person” under these conditions?

Before Criticizing Students, Companies Must Reflect on Themselves

Using AI to prepare is not a shortcut—it’s a skill.
In business, we value the ability to gather tools and apply them effectively. Why should job seekers be penalized for doing the same?

The companies that complain about AI answers are often those that failed to evolve, despite knowing exactly where things were heading.

Final Judgment: It’s Not Students Who Lack Readiness—It’s Companies

If AI-generated answers are “passing,” it’s because the interview process is designed to accept them.
If companies truly want to assess authenticity, they need to:

  • Ask better questions

  • Train their interviewers

  • Rebuild the entire evaluation process

If they can’t do that, they have no business selecting people.

Students have already adapted. It’s time for companies to catch up—or be left behind.


Read in Japanese↓

AI就活で学生を批判する担当者に告ぐ。採用力のない企業こそが問題である（2025.6.30）

Read more articles (in Japanese)↓

「飲み会に出ない人は信頼されない」職場論など馬鹿げている（2025.6.27）

コメント

コメントを投稿

このブログの人気の投稿

Why Aren’t Wages Rising in Japan?

イメージ
  Why Aren’t Wages Rising in Japan? — How the Labor Share Ratio and Retained Earnings Are Stalling Economic Growth Read the original article (in Japanese): 生産性3割アップも「増えない給料」　原因は「貯めこむ大企業」にあった | TBS NEWS DIG Chapter 1: The Illusion of Wage Growth Despite government announcements of a “historic wage increase,” most workers in Japan feel no real difference in their paychecks. The reality is that real wages have barely moved in 25 years , even though labor productivity has risen by roughly 30% during the same period. This growth rate exceeds that of major European economies like France and Germany. The popular narrative — “wages haven’t increased because productivity is low” — is no longer credible. The real question is this: Why are companies making more money, yet not paying workers more? Chapter 2: Record Corporate Profits, Yet No Pay Raises The most glaring figure is Japan’s retained earnings , also known as corporate savings or internal reserves. In 1998: approximately...
続きを読む

Proposing the Radical Idea of a “Tenure-Based Retirement System”

イメージ
Read the original article (in Japanese): 「もう長すぎた…」宇宙飛行士・野口聡一氏が57歳でJAXAを辞めた納得のワケ( ダイヤモンド・オンライン ) The Reality Behind the 45-Year Retirement Debate The ongoing public debate around the “45-year retirement” and early retirement plans in Japan was initially intended to encourage self-directed career development. Yet, many workers interpret these initiatives as thinly veiled attempts to push them out. As astronaut Soichi Noguchi has noted, Japan’s work culture tends to reward compliance over skill-building or career ownership. If we want to change that, we need structural reform—not just slogans. The Proposal: A Tenure-Based Retirement System A better alternative is the Tenure-Based Retirement System . Rather than setting a fixed age for retirement, the idea is to define an employee’s career cycle within a company by tenure—say, a 20-year maximum. Such a system allows for natural career reflection without age-based discrimination. More importantly, it promotes a mindset where workers are exp...
続きを読む

How “Incompetent Seniors” Drive Young Employees Away Through Broken OJT Structures

イメージ
 Read the original article (in Japanese): なぜ「OJT」ばかりの企業に若者は定着しないのか？　上司が部下育成を勘違いする理由 「うちはOJTで育てる」と胸を張る企業がある。OJTとはOn-the-Job Trainingの略で、現場で実務を通じて部 www.itmedia.co.jp Introduction: Is “We Train Through OJT” a Cop-Out? “We develop people through OJT”—how many times have we heard this in Japanese workplaces? On-the-Job Training (OJT) is originally meant to be a practical learning method where skills are honed through real work. Yet in practice, many companies abuse this term as a way to justify throwing new employees into unfamiliar tasks without guidance. This leads to frustration, underperformance, and ultimately, resignation. This article explores why such “OJT in name only” is problematic and what structural improvements companies must make—drawing comparisons to the foundational training methods found in sports and the arts. 1. Without Form, Growth Can’t Begin Karate, Baseball, and Art: Why Mastery Begins with Form Karate has kata. Baseball has standard stances and pitching mechani...
続きを読む