A vendor offers a free pilot of an AI résumé screener for city jobs. What should the CHRO lead before implementation?
Select an answer to reveal the explanation.
Short Explanation
A free AI screener is still a gatekeeper on who gets a city interview. Free does not mean fair, job-related, or decent for applicants. Run the governance check first; do not let the vendor's pilot become the hiring process.
Full Explanation
Emerging HR technology needs a governance evaluation—adverse-impact and bias risk, job-relatedness of the model, and applicant experience—before implementation. Leading that review against city hiring strategy before any free AI résumé-screener pilot prevents a complimentary vendor trial from becoming an untested control on public jobs. Evaluation precedes implementation.
Starting the vendor's pilot immediately so the city is not left behind substitutes FOMO for governance. Letting the vendor score applicants and send only the top names to HR outsources merit decisions without transparency. Using the tool first on sworn jobs because volume is highest scales an unvalidated model onto sensitive public-safety hiring.
Exam caveat: even after approval, human review and adverse-impact monitoring remain required; AI assist is not autopilot for civil-service hiring. Operational check: document bias, job-relatedness, and UX criteria; require vendor disclosures; and authorize only a monitored limited pilot with parallel human screening if criteria pass. Document ownership so auditors can see who maintains the control. Re-test the control after the next tabletop or hiring cycle. Keep the civic workforce impact visible in the evaluation notes.