Employers across the globe are witnessing a rise in candidates who turn to artificial intelligence for assistance with résumés, cover letters and even online assessments. Graduates and recruiters report that many organisations now permit such tools, provided they are used within reasonable limits. This shift reflects a broader acceptance of AI in the early stages of hiring, even as concerns grow about its impact on fairness and authenticity.
Tom, a 22-year-old geography graduate from Maidstone, submitted more than 200 applications before securing a restaurant-manager position. He says the process was exhausting and demoralising, and he would not have succeeded without AI-generated cover letters and résumé wording. While he avoided using AI during assessments or video interviews, he relied on the technology to insert the buzzwords that early-stage screening algorithms favour, highlighting the tension between human effort and automated optimisation.
The Institute of Student Employers surveyed 155 of the United Kingdom’s largest graduate recruiters and found a growing tolerance for AI at specific recruitment stages. Writing cover letters and CVs received the highest acceptance, followed by answering online application questions. However, 92 percent of respondents said they had encountered or suspected AI misconduct, up from 85 percent a year earlier, with the most common breaches involving real-time AI assistance during video interviews and online assessments.
The ability of AI to generate multiple tailored applications has amplified the ‘spray and pray’ approach, intensifying competition for limited graduate slots. Stephen Isherwood, joint chief executive of the ISE, warned that this practice raises pressure on students in an already tight market. EDF’s early-career programme recently attracted 12,000 submissions, a ten-percent rise on the previous year, a surge that the recruiter attributes largely to the broader use of AI by candidates.
To counteract uneven AI usage, EDF now issues guidance outlining acceptable AI involvement and strives to make its hiring pipeline as ‘AI-proof’ as possible. The firm postpones CV review until later stages and relies on skills-based assessments and behaviour-focused video interviews to gauge candidates. Nevertheless, recruiters report instances of applicants pausing to receive AI-generated replies or reciting identical scripted answers, underscoring the difficulty of enforcing a level playing field.
An anonymous trainee accountant disclosed that he applied for 50 graduate positions and employed AI for role research, résumé polishing and generating mock interview questions, though he refrained from using it to cheat on assessments. He said peers sometimes resort to AI during tests, especially after submitting hundreds of applications and feeling desperate. This anecdote illustrates the moral dilemma candidates face when AI becomes a perceived necessity to remain competitive.
The ISE notes that graduate roles now receive an average of 141 applications, confirming a still-crowded market despite a recent stabilisation. While only 16 percent of surveyed employers currently use AI in recruitment, 29 percent intend to adopt it within the next year. Hollie Moody of EDF described AI’s role as a “moral dilemma”, emphasizing that authenticity, personality and diversity of thought remain essential criteria that technology cannot replace.