It’s astounding how flawed the recruiting processes are today. As a recent graduate eager to enter the recruitment field, I’ve found the reality of the industry to be shocking, especially given my background in evidence-based education. I’ve explored the research on the gap between theory and practice in personnel selection, and while I anticipated some differences, the extent has been surprising.

For instance, many recruiters are selected based on their sales experience, which is baffling. Candidates are often evaluated on their polished resumes or articulate cover letters, which makes them appear as the “new shiny object,” rather than on their actual qualifications. Hiring managers shy away from using tests—citing concerns about candidates faking results—yet they seem easily swayed by attractive resumes, completely overlooking essential content.

Why isn’t there a greater emphasis on valid and reliable performance predictors? Those that have undergone rigorous scientific testing, of course. It’s mind-boggling that people believe they can accurately assess personality, motivation, and other crucial traits merely by glancing at two documents that candidates sometimes pay “experts” to craft.

The entire system is fundamentally misaligned.