Using AI for CVs and application forms for local authority roles

[Curiouscase]

Have you successfully used AI to write CV and application forms/supporting statements?

in the middle of applying for a job that I really really desire - local authority. AI is helping me rewrite and tailor CV to the role, and I think I’m happy with it - it is clearer and I think it still retains enough of my specific examples.

1. will the screening process eject it as too AI?

for the application form it has suggested subheadings based on core duties within the role, for example. However job spec has (LENGTHY) list of criteria under generic headings of: skills, experience etc - I assume this is how they’d like candidates to answer?? But AI idea makes more sense as it’s easier for recruiter to see how my skills fit the role requirements?

1. do I listen to AI or follow the job spec criteria?

I have not used AI in an application before so I don’t want to scupper my chances for a job I really want, thank you’

I would be mindful, I know recently in a civil service role it was clear who had used AI as it came up with a specific phrase in relation to one of the competencies, and every who has used that phrase got automatically rejected

Job applications where I work specify no AI, & it does tend to be a bit obvious. I’d go with the skills, experience etc headings.

You can tell when AI has been all over a CV. We are sifting CVs at the moment for a role we have going.

Regardless of skills, AI CVs are sifted into the bin.

At my local authority applications are reviewed by hiring managers who IME would be unlikely to recognise AI written applications unless glaringly obvious. So use it for the basics but then make sure you rewrite with your human touch.

How can you tell if AI has been used? What makes it obvious?

I do a lot of Civil Service recruitment. AI is absolutely allowed. We want people who understand technology. It does make the sifting process harder as we can’t spot the ones who are naturally inarticulate and can’t write clearly. But we don’t screen using AI. Just pick through the text to spot the actual examples of achievements.
What does the job ad say about using AI?

Do they provide any guidance around the use of AI? Some employers might see it as cheating, others might see it as you demonstrating that you are familiar with using current tech.

Personally, from recent experience of sifting applications, I would suggest not to use AI, or to use it sparingly. We received hundreds of applications with an awful lot sounding essentially the same! Among all those AI generated statements/CVs those that didn’t use AI really stood out.

You can use things like Quillbot to scan a body of text for likely looking AI sections and then rewrite them.

Tbh, I'd be more amazed if someone didn't use AI to tailor a CV. It's their experience and knowledge I care about, not about their ability to write it down

I always use AI for some bullet point suggestion and then adapt ir into my own style.

I work for a LA. I wrote my own statement and used AI to check it met the competencies and to improve flow. I included its suggestions in my own words rather than copy and paste. I also made sure to include plenty of actual examples rather than generic descriptions of how I met each competency. This approach has worked twice for me.

Thank you all! Some mixed responses…
@EmpressaurusKitty @HelpMeGetThrough that’s interesting that all CVs using AI are binned, what is the reason? And how can you tell? This is what I’m worried about!
@FinanceLPlates - no guidance around using AI, whereas other jobs I have applied for have specified NOT to use it. It’s an internal role so there won’t be hundreds of applicants, I hope.
@coolcahuna that is what I think I have done but still worried it might read like an AI CV etc. have you had success in getting interviews using AI in applications?
@CatamaranViper that’s great, thanks, I’ve never heard of Quillbot. Using AI is helping me to emphasis certain skills/experiences and push those higher up the bullet points
@CatBusStop the people recruiting for this role are specialists in their field, but not recruitment, I don’t think, so hopefully they won’t notice the AI so much….

@DundeeNewcastle thank you. This is currently the stage I’m at - I’ve given it a supporting statement i’d written before and asked AI to check it matches the competencies. I can see that I need to add specific examples now to personalise it.

in terms of the structure, the list of competencies is about 3 pages long and if I answer them one by one, as I have done on all previous LA applications, it will be very very long. I liked AI’s suggestion of structuring it around the 4 main ‘roles’ of the job and detailing all my skills and experience under each one. This seems to flow better.

Will this make it easier or harder for the recruiters to compare me to other candidates / jeopardise my chances as I’m not listing them bullet point by billet point?

I don’t think you need to formulate around the competencies but competencies should be very clear in whatever format you use. I’ve used AI for a couple of jobs in the last 12 months ( both successful ) and I worked for hours to hone the CV and the supplementary questions. One of the jobs was with a US tech company and AI was suggesting a format so different to what I was used to. ( I was asking “ are you sure about this “ 😂. I guess if anyone would know). Anyway I found it good on structuring but it does inflate some skills and flatten others so I went through point by point and amended them. For example it said I was an expert in verbal and non verbal communication. I’m a freelance trainer but in no lifetime am I an expert in non verbal communication. ( sign language ???). So it does spout bollox on occasion. So don’t accept the first version and obviously read everything carefully and as you have done run a comparison again the job spec to ensure the competencies are all being hit. Good luck.

Whether you use AI or not do make sure you cover the competencies in the person spec. It doesn’t need to be a bullet point list for each one - you’ll have examples that cover off a few at a time, but any job I’ve recruited to the application has been scored against the person spec.

The thing with AI is it adds in soo much bumf - you need to scale it back. Perhaps it could support the structure for you but AI CVs are so obvious and when you talk to candidates you can really tell as they’re not so au fait with their application.

The wording makes them look like a lunatic. No human writes like that.

We can tell that they’ve been generated by AI by the fact they are overly wordy, the structure and the phrases used. In the industry I am in, people who have written so something themselves just wouldn’t use certain phrases.

The structure is a dead giveaway, too many headings, different fonts for headings. The language is too impersonal and the jargon used is clunky even when it’s industry standard, the context is all wrong. Simply put AI doesn’t write like a person would.

I’m work for a LA and I’m currently recruiting. I look at the answers to the questions more than the cv. An AI helped CV wouldn’t bother me at all. The important thing is to hit the essential criteria. Where I am, this is done with specific points on the application form.

Phew.

I have applied for a few CS jobs recently and it specified in the application details that ai was fine to use so long as it was truthful.

I used it to help make my wording clearer and also to help suggest ways of tailoring emphasis on certain skill sets that were specific to the role.

I went over it several times, reworded it in areas that I didn’t feel sounded authentic to me, and pushed back at the suggestions when I felt they could be better. I certainly didn’t C+P a load of churned out crap.

The applications took several hours - I had to use my brain a lot - and without ai they would have taken even longer.

As a manager I would not hire anyone who relies on AI to write their application/cover letter/CV.

Because it just tells me the person is unable to think for themselves.

Also, you are removing your chance to stand out from the crowd by using AI.

It is better to personalise your application, tell the employer why you really want the job and let your individuality show rather than have some generic content.

Is the job description in two parts, first part describing the job and then a list of specifications? I always structure my application to match the list of specifications but making sure to include anything covered in the description that isn't in the specification.

Public sector recruitment used to be very structured and methodical with the staff shortlisting the applications against the list of criteria, literally a matrix of the criteria and ticking off yes/no for each candidate. So I try to make it easy for the shortlisters to match my application against the list of criteria.

But that was when it was more paper based - now they're probably shortlisting on-screen rather than ticking off a matrix, so they might form an overall idea of whether the application matches the JD. But I would still structure the application to make it easy for them to match against the job description and selection criteria.

Just make sure you mainly write it yourself, and that you give actual examples.
Someone sent me their application form to review and they had clearly just got AI to write it and it was basically just regurgitating the job description and saying they met it. It was totally devoid of substance or personality

I applied for a job in the public sector recently and as usual wrote the application criteria by criteria. With an actual example for each. AI was very helpful in giving me tips for making it more succinct/clearer, although I rejected some of its suggestions as I preferred my style

Bland waffle. I want to know the actual person and their experiences . AI just repeats the job description and says they have met it.