A new report from Greenhouse, the leading hiring platform, reveals candidates are caught in an AI catch-22. The 2026 Greenhouse Future of Hiring Candidate Report, which surveyed over 2,800 job seekers across the U.S., U.K., Ireland, Germany, and Australia, found that job seekers are tailoring their job search strategies for two audiences: the automated systems that screen them and the employers who might suspect them of using AI.

More than three in four U.S. job seekers (77%) used AI in their search in the past year, yet six in 10 (60%) have changed or considered changing how they write so their application isn't mistaken for AI-generated content. Stuck between the two, candidates want a better way to show employers who they are. Most are open to AI playing a role in hiring, even in interviews, as long as employers are upfront about how it's used and a human reviews the results.

The hidden hiring process
Job seekers are putting more work into their applications and often hearing nothing back. Four in five (81%) U.S. candidates were rejected from a job in the past year without ever speaking to anyone at the company, human or AI. Nearly a third (31%) say it happens often or almost always, rising to 38% of Gen Z saying they are regularly rejected without a conversation. To improve their odds, 71% took an extra step to get noticed, from seeking a referral (nearly half) to paying for a resume service (27%). Landing an interview doesn't end the frustration. Nearly all candidates who interviewed (96%) had at least one complaint, most often being ghosted by the employer (45%).

"For the first time I can remember, neither side thinks hiring is working. Candidates send applications into a black hole, while employers sift through AI-polished resumes that all look the same," says Sharawn Tipton, Chief People Officer at Greenhouse. "The application used to be a front door. Now, too often, it's a dead end. Candidates need a system that actually works and gives them a fair shot. Bolting bad AI on top only hurts them and employers."

Beat the bot, prove you're human
Job seekers are trying to get past the bots while making sure they don't sound like one. Almost two-thirds (62%) have tried tactics to get past automated screening, from using AI to figure out what the system is looking for (54%) to adding skills or keywords they don't have (40%). A third of those have added hidden text meant for an AI reviewer. Yet even as most use AI in their own search, 39% have rewritten an application so it wouldn't be mistaken for AI, and another 21% have considered it. That share rises sharply among younger workers: 63% of Gen Z, 42% of Millennials, 31% of Gen X, and 27% of Boomers.

Better applications, same gaps
After all that optimization, the application still leaves the most important questions unanswered. Nearly all job seekers (96%) wish they could show employers something more clearly than their job application allows, with more than half (52%) wanting to express their ability to learn and adapt. Interviews don't always close that gap. While three in four said their most recent human interview let them show their abilities well, nine in 10 still hit at least one problem, from repeating what was already in their application to an interviewer who seemed to decide on a first impression.

Candidates are open to another way in. Nearly half (48%) have taken an AI interview in the past year, and 70% of those who did say it let them demonstrate their skills well. Only 7% would refuse an AI-led interview outright, and candidates were 2.7x more likely to opt for an AI interview than to withdraw if a human interviewer weren't available. That openness depends on trust: nearly half (49%) want to know a human will review their responses, and 40% want to know how they'll be evaluated.

"AI can polish a resume or fire off hundreds of applications, but it can't show an employer how someone thinks or learns," says Ophir Samson, Head of Voice AI at Greenhouse. "A structured conversation early in the process could give the right candidates that chance. But it only works if candidates understand how they're being evaluated, and know a real person will review their responses. Trust must be built into the process from the start."

The new hiring era needs rules
Candidates want clear rules for AI in hiring, both for themselves and for employers. Most are open to AI help in their own search, and 69% would feel comfortable using an AI agent, but they want to stay in control: only 5% would let one apply to jobs on its own. Most also believe candidates should disclose when an agent applies on their behalf. They expect the same transparency from employers: 88% want at least one legal requirement compelling employers to be upfront and accountable when using AI in interviews, led by advance notice (55%).

To read the full report, visit the Greenhouse website here.