 |
|
|
|||||
Fraudulent job applications have become a serious issue in the era of remote interviews and AI-generated content. Research firm Gartner predicts that by 2028, up to 25% of applications could be fake. In some cases, fraudsters in North Korea have managed to land Western tech jobs under false pretenses, according to recent reports.One client recently told Daniel Chait, cofounder and CEO of hiring software company Greenhouse, that more than 70% of applications for remote tech roles theyre receiving are fake. Others have reported increasing difficulty sorting through waves of irrelevant or fraudulent submissions.What were hearing from them is that theyre overrun with spam, unqualified applicants, cheating (people using various means to pass job interviews), and fraud. [Its] willful misrepresentation in the process, often by kind of nefarious groups, Chait says.To combat the problem, Greenhouse is developing a new platform called Greenhouse Real Talent. The goal is to filter out unqualified candidates submitting AI-generated applications, those using AI tools during interviews, and individuals applying under fake identities.To help with identity verification, Greenhouse is partnering with Clear, the company best known for its expedited airport security service. In recent years, Clear has expanded beyond travel with a platform called Clear1. While airports were the initial focus, the company always intended to move into broader identity verification, says Clear cofounder and CEO Caryn Seidman Becker in an exclusive interview with Fast Company.Clear1 really does reflect our day one vision to make experiences safer and easier, physically and digitally, she says. Its what we talked about and pitched 15 years ago when we went out to raise capital to start Clear, and its coming to fruition today.[Animation: Clear]Clear now provides ID checks for LinkedIn verification badges, tool rentals at Home Depot, and patient check-ins at certain medical facilities. In April, it announced a partnership with DocuSign to integrate identity verification into digital contract signings. T-Mobile also uses Clear1 to authenticate employees, the companies announced Wednesday, saying biometrics help the telecom provider confirm employees actual identities, not just that they know a password or are in possession of a particular device.The Clear1 platform enables businesses to add identity checks into their websites or apps, whether on users phones or company tablets in places like medical offices. First-time users are typically asked to provide an email address and phone number, photograph a government-issued ID, and take a selfie to confirm theyre real. Future verifications are usually quicker.The process is meant to feel similar to logging in with Google credentials or using Apple Pay, allowing users to see what information is shared with the requesting company.They can verify with Clear just like you can pay with Apple, Seidman Becker says.The stage at which applicants are asked to verify their identity through Clear will depend on each companys process. Chait expects that employers using Real Talent, which is set to launch in the third quarter of this year, will ask applicants to reverify at key stages such as before video interviews.Behind the scenes, Clear checks various factors to validate documents, confirm the user matches them, and detect suspicious device activity. Seidman Becker says this provides a seamless way for businesses to ensure users are who they claim to be, without relying on multiple tools.Verification is also faster after a user completes the process once. According to the company, initial verification takes about 90 seconds, and later sessions typically take less than 15 seconds. Clear also offers alternative verification methods for users who struggle with certain stepsa common issue during the COVID-era unemployment surgethough Seidman Becker declined to share details, citing proprietary technology.There are other ways that we can work to verify you, as opposed to some more traditional ID verification companies that just sort of have one trick, if you will, she says.Chait adds that Real Talent will offer an alternative path for applicants who are unable or unwilling to use Clears standard process.If you, for a variety of reasons, dont want to or cant be part of that online verification process, therell be an alternative path, he says. But I think most people will find its a lot more convenient and a lot more straightforward to do it the Clear way.Clear has occasionally faced criticism from lawmakers and travelers over its paid airport perks and from privacy advocates concerned about biometric data use. Seidman Becker argues that Clears visibility and track record actually build trust among businesses and consumers handling sensitive data. She also believes the use of Clear online may drive more sign-ups for its airport services.In May, the company reported that first-quarter revenue rose 18.1% year over year to $211.4 million, with Clear+ airport memberships up 9.1%. Last fall, Clear introduced new facial recognition technology in airports, which it claims is significantly faster than its previous systems.As Seidman Becker puts it, You barely break stride, and it captures your face, and it is joyful and beautiful, and literally five times faster.
Category:
E-Commerce
Making difficult decisions is an inevitable part of being a leader. And at times, those decisions are unpopular. Yet in instances when it requires the efforts and cooperation of their team members, leaders have to find a way to get buy-in from the people that oppose those decisions in the first place. This isn’t easy, and requires a delicate balance. Arrivee Vargas, executive coach and author of Your Time to Rise: Unlearn Limiting Beliefs, Unlock Your Power, and Unleash Your Truest Self, shares some of the considerations that you should think about when you need your team to get on board with your decision. The importance of context Sometimes, a decision is only unpopular due to lack of context. Employees have no idea how their boss came to the decision, and as a result, they might have their own narrative of what transpired. That’s why it’s up to the leader to explain why they have to make the decision in the first place and disclose any organizational constraints that apply. Vargas says, “explain the context, explain whats happening at play so you have a nice container for that decision, and employees know what the parameters are and what they expect.” The importance of seeking feedback with constraints Employees might also be reluctant to support a decision when they feel like their voice doesn’t matter. As a leader, seeking feedback or input before making a decision should be standard practice, yet Vargas believes this is one of the biggest challenges that leaders face. However, Vargas argues that it’s important to put some sort of constraint on the decision-making process. One mistake that leaders often make, says Vargas, is entering the process too open. “From the beginning, you need to be able to put the information in a container. What information do I need? Who do I need information from? And you have to decide in advance how much is enough.” This might look like limiting the number of focus groups or amount of survey responses. Picking the right way of communicating It’s also important to figure out the appropriate forum to communicate, both when it comes to announcing a decision and seeking feedback. If you have a small team of fewer than 10 people, says Vargas, you need to meet with them one-on-one. Many leaders might argue that they don’t have time for it, says Vargas. However, “if you really care about bringing your team along . . . you have to invest the time and energy to show that you care.” If it’s a big team, surveys and focus groups are great options for soliciting feedback. While town halls can be effective for giving announcements, they are not always the most appropriate forum for getting honest feedback. Vargas does note, however, that even with the right method of communication, honest feedback can only come from organizations that have built foundational culture where there is trust, respect, and psychological safety. Without the right foundation, Vargas says, the whole process becomes much more difficult. The difference between being liked and being respected Making unpopular decisions is a crucial part of leadership. Yet Vargas believes that many leaders struggle with it because they want people to like them. “For most people, it’s really difficult for them to have these challenging conversations because they’ve never really had to have them.” But leaders have to be prepared to make tough calls and understand that there is a difference between being linked and respected. “I would say especially for women of color, we’re conditioned to behave that way,” she acknowledges. “You don’t want to cause a fuss, you don’t want to be a bother. They’re very concerned about keeping the peace.” When you think like this, Vargas says, you’re “confusing the decision-making with you as a person.” She goes on to say that she knows plenty of leaders who people might not necessarily want to spend time with. However, they’re “very much respected for their expertise and the way they make decisions.” As a leader, it’s crucial that you don’t conflate your decisions with your character. “That’s where you can get into trouble,” she says. The importance of taking accountability Finally, leaders need to own their decisions and take accountability for them, even when hindsight shows that they’re not necessarily the best ones. Owning when you miscalculate and make the wrong judgment call, says Vargas, is “leadership 101.” This is where a company’s foundational culture plays a huge part. “You have to have an organization where making mistakes is actually okay,” Vargas says. “Because if you’re in an organization where as a leader, you punish people for mistakes for years, you’re not going to get any help when you admit that you’ve made a mistake.” Leaders need to create a culture where mistakes happen and people are allowed to move on when they’ve learned from them. Ultimately, everything comes down to showing respect for the employee. “Employees really just want to feel like they’re valued and appreciated,” says Vargas. When it comes to making hard decisions, “they want to feel like you’ve asked me, and you thought that my opinion meant something.” They want to feel like you’ve considered their perspectives, and that it matters.
Category:
E-Commerce
Agentic AI is the buzzword of 2025. Although technically an “emerging technology,” it feels like companies of all sizes are quickly developing and acquiring AI agents to stay ahead of the curve and competition. Just last week, OpenAI launched a research preview of Codex, the companys cloud-based software engineering agent or its most capable AI coding agent yet. And its fair that people are interested and excited. Transforming industries From customer service to supply chain management and the legal profession, AI agents are set to transform industries across the board and are already showing us that they can be pervasive across both consumer and enterprise environments, bringing AI fully into the mainstream. Unlike chatbots and image generators, which provide answers, but require prompts, AI agents execute multistep tasks on behalf of users. In 2025, these autonomous software programs will dramatically change how people interact with technology and how businesses operate. This aligns with Forresters latest findings, which had agentic AI at the top of its recent Top 10 Emerging Technologies for 2025, highlighting the power and potential of this emerging trend. However, as the report also points out, the rewards come with big risks and challenges. Lets dive into these as well as why companies must prioritize governance before development and implementation in order to stay ahead of, not behind, the curve and their competition. A Governance-First Approach In just three years, at least 15% of day-to-day work decisions will be made autonomously by AI agentsup from virtually 0% in 2024. This prediction by Gartner, while promising, sits alongside another key stat: 25% of enterprise breaches will be linked to AI agent abuse. As mentioned above, the rapid and widespread adoption of AI agents, while exciting, comes with complex challenges, such as shadow AI, which is why companies must prioritize a governance-first approach here. So what is it about AI agents that makes them particularly challenging to control? Short answer: their ability to operate autonomously. Long answer: this technology makes it difficult for organizations to have visibility over four things: Who owns which agent What department oversees them What data they have access to What actions the agent can take How do you effectively govern them A comprehensive approach This is where unified governance can step in. With a comprehensive governance framework, companies can ensure that AI agents operate responsibly and are aligned with organizational standards and policies. The alternative: a lack of governance framework for AI agents can mishandle sensitive data, violate compliance regulations, and make decisions misaligned with business objectives. Lets use a real-world example: you are a CEO for a major organization. Your company builds and introduces an AI-powered assistant to help automate workflows and save you time. Now imagine that the assistant gains access to your confidential files. Without guidance or governance, the assistant summarizes sensitive financial projections and closed-door board discussions and shares them with third-party vendors or unauthorized employees. This is definitely a worst-case scenario, but it highlights the importance for a solid governance framework.Heres a helpful governance checklist: Establish guidelines that clearly define acceptable use and assign accountability. Carry out regular reviews to help identify and mitigate potential risks and threats. Appoint the right stakeholder to foster transparency and build trust in how AI agents are used internally and externally. Blurred lines According to Sunil Soares, Founder of YDC, Agentic AI will drive the need for new governance approaches. As more applications include embedded AI and AI agents, the line between applications and AI use cases will become increasingly blurred. I couldnt agree more. Whether you develop AI agents internally or partner with a third-party vendor, this technology will unlock significant value. But the challenges are not one-size-fits-all and will not go away. And while the human element remains important, manual oversight on its own is not sufficient or realistic when it comes to scale and size. Therefore, when you build out your governance framework, ensure that you have automated monitoring tools in place that detect and correct violations of policies, record decisions for greater transparency, and escalate the complex cases that require additional oversight, such as a human-in-the-loop. A centralized governance framework ensures accountability, risk assessment, and ethical compliance. Like everything else in life, you need to create and establish boundaries. And dont worryimplementing a governance framework first wont slow innovation down. When you find the right balance between innovation and risk management, you stay ahead of the curve and competition, leaving room for more cutting-edge AI agents and fewer headaches. For a perfect pill, deploy a unified governance platform for data and AI, as it will be the key to managing and ensuring AI agents dont become the next shadow IT.
Category:
E-Commerce
All news |
||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||