The marriage of behavioural science, data science and AI technology
The introduction of artificial intelligence (AI) technologies into the world of HR and recruitment is not just an idea anymore, it is a reality, specifically focusing on AI for HR. Neural networks, machine learning, and natural language processing are all being introduced into different areas of HR, marking a significant shift towards integrating AI for HR purposes.
These developments contribute to the function’s increased accessibility to data-driven insights and analytics, enabling better-informed people decisions.
In recruitment and talent acquisition, AI technologies have the potential to make a significant impact by identifying candidates who can perform well in individual business environments.
However, pre-hire assessment is a complex area, and without incorporating validated behavioural science we only end up with a 2D view – instead of the 3D view we actually wanted. This is why the marriage of data, computer and behavioural sciences is essential.
By bringing together organisational psychologists, data scientists and computer scientists we truly leverage the power of artificial intelligence – and change the way candidates are recruited. It takes the recruitment process beyond the technical excellence necessary to collect and report on data and insights.
By merging these scientific areas we get:
- Computer science expertise providing the critical ‘how’ for collecting quality data.
- Data science brilliance then revealing the ‘what’ of unseen connections within that data.
- Well-constructed behavioural science explaining the ‘why’ behind those connections.
Through the combination of all three disciplines, we can access a whole extra world of meaning, enabling us to get closer to the core of what’s happening in organisations.
Behavioural science is the key to success
A recent Industrial & Organisational Psychology article pointed to the disruption taking place in the talent identification industry through new digital technologies. The authors noted that although big data is attractive, the data is often thrown together and interrogated using data science until correlations are found. This has become known as ‘dustbowl empiricism’.
My favourite for this at the moment has to be the strong correlation between the number of people who have drowned by falling in a pool, and the number of films Nicolas Cage has appeared in any given year. Who knew how dangerous Nicolas Cage could really be?
Despite the evident danger of watching Nicolas Cage films (particularly near water), I believe there is more value in explaining behaviour than in just predicting it.
For example, is there a correlation between owning a certain type of car and being a high performer?
Perhaps, but I don’t think to look for the best candidates in car parks is very useful. After all, people change cars, and so might the correlations change between particular car models and performance. To cite another famous example, as often as people change their eating preferences, so goes the link between curly fries and intelligence.
Understanding why data is linked can suggest better ways to improve performance than just updating the carpool or changing the canteen menu.
Linking a vehicle preference to well-established behavioural science may suggest that a client considers how a candidate is innovative elsewhere in their lives, such as in their adoption of other new technologies. Or they may look for other ways the candidate demonstrates a penchant for reliability (perhaps through previous work choices).
The scientific approach
This is where organisational psychologists come in.
They have an intimate knowledge of the theories that can help interpret and explain the links between personal attributes and performance, or other variables that matter. They know how to use these theories to solve real problems and they know how to design studies and measurement tools to ensure that scientific knowledge is applied correctly in an organisational setting.
I learned a lot of organisational psychology models and theories during my Masters and PhD studies. We focused on these and the research behind them when I taught MBA and Master of Organisational Psychology programs – sometimes noting gaps in current models and theories – and designing studies to help extend or debunk what we knew.
While completing my MBA and later in a corporate role, I became skilled in applying that knowledge to the problems managers and executives face.
As an organisational psychologist I often find that it isn’t just knowing behavioural science that matters, it is knowing the behavioural science detail to understand what is most relevant for a role or business problem.
For example, consider sales performance.
Thanks to the popularity of some psychometric instruments, ‘extroverted’ or ‘introverted’ are understood as reliable ways to describe elements of a person’s personality, and many people are convinced that being extroverted is important in a sales role.
However, the research on sales performance says otherwise. An International Journal of Selection and Assessment article shows that across a range of studies there isn’t a strong link between ‘extraversion’ (broadly) and sales performance, despite this being such a common view.
Knowing the detail matters here.
A broad description of extraversion may not do a candidate justice, particularly when we’re focused on understanding performance in a particular role.
Instead, we might be interested in a candidate’s level of dominance, their sociability, what they would be like in a group setting, or presenting to a group to make a sale.
Perhaps we’d be interested in whether they are independent, adventurous, or ambitious, all of which (as potential elements of extroversion) may have different implications for sales performance.
We might also focus on the particular nature of the sales role – many roles are becoming more formalised and structured, with down-to-the-minute journey plans and call times. No wonder then that the Journal of Selection and Assessment article found another personality factor, conscientiousness, to be relevant for predicting sales performance.
The business focus of pre-employment assessments
It’s the acceptance of how important behavioural science is to the new world of AI that has led me to Sapia, where we believe all people decisions should be based on science, data and analytics – not just gut feeling.
Sapia focuses on the things that matter.
We use validated behavioural science to build predictive models, centred on the issues your business wishes to address and their corresponding KPIs. The predictive model is based on your workforce data so it’s unique to your organisation, maximising predictive accuracy while also prioritising the candidate experience.
We use various techniques, including training a neural network to identify what drives performance in the organisation, based on the data we collect. We build our algorithms to achieve accurate predictions from the start, and the model improves over time through machine learning.
We’re now at a point where we can use behavioural science, data science and computer technology to understand the intricate links between candidate information and performance data. With that we can help reduce bias and level the candidate playing field and give managers a 3D view of their candidates, to enable them to make the best people decisions.
Dr. Elliot Wood is a registered organisational psychologist with a bachelor’s degree, various master’s degrees and a PhD in the field. He spent 12 years in academia, teaching master’s-level organisational psychology; supervising post-graduate research; and working on research grants and consulting projects. He then moved into organisational development–focused consulting in Australia and Asia, followed by an internal talent role in a multinational brewer. He is now Chief Organisational Psychologist at Sapia.
References
Tomas Chamorro-Premuzic, Dave Winsborough, Ryne Sherman and Robert Hogan, Industrial & Organisational Psychology, ‘New Talent Signals: Shiny New Objects or a Brave New World?’
Murray R. Barrick, Michael K. Mount, Timothy A. Judge, International Journal of Selection and Assessment, ‘Personality and Performance at the Beginning of the New Millennium: What Do We Know and Where Do We Go Next?’
Related
Blog
Humanising hiring: the largest study of AI candidate experience ever
This is the state of hiring in 2025. Too often, candidates are ghosted, ignored, and reduced to a CV. Recruiters are forced to make decisions in data poverty, with scraps of information like grades, job titles, or where someone has worked before. Privilege gets rewarded; potential gets overlooked.
For the first time, we now have evidence that AI, when designed responsibly, brings humanity back to hiring.
The largest research study of its kind
Sapia.ai has released the Humanising Hiring report. The largest analysis ever conducted into candidate experience with AI interviews. The study draws on more than 1 million interviews and 11 million words of candidate feedback across 30+ countries.
Unlike surveys or anecdotal reviews, this research is grounded in what candidates themselves chose to share at one of the most stressful moments of their lives: applying for a job.
The findings are bold and unprecedented
- 9.05/10 average candidate satisfaction across all groups and industries
- 81.8% of candidates left written feedback — engagement at this scale has never been seen before in hiring research
- 8 in 10 candidates would recommend an employer just because of the interview
-
30% more women apply when told AI will assess them, resulting in a 36% closure of the gender gap
-
98% hiring equity for people with disabilities through a blind, untimed, mobile-first interview design
Candidate voices
Here’s what candidates themselves revealed:
“None of the other companies I’ve applied to do this sort of thing. It’s so unique and wonderful to give this sort of insight to people… whether we get the job or not, we can take away something very valuable out of the process.”
“That felt so personal, as if the person genuinely took the time to read my answers and send me a summary of myself… that was pretty amazing.”
Expert validation
“This study stands out as one of the most comprehensive examinations of candidate experience to date. Analysing over a million interviews and 11 million words of candidate feedback, the findings make clear that responsibly designed AI has the potential to fundamentally improve hiring — not just by increasing speed, but by advancing fairness, enhancing the human aspect, and leading to stronger job matches.”
— Kathi Enderes, SVP Research & Global Industry Analyst, The Josh Bersin Company
Proof that AI can be human
The research challenges the idea that AI dehumanises the hiring process. In fact, it proves the opposite: when thoughtfully designed, AI can restore dignity to candidates by giving them a real interview from the very first interaction, giving them space to share their story, and giving them timely feedback.
With Sapia.ai’s Chat Interview:
-
Every candidate gets the same structured, role-relevant questions.
-
Interviews are untimed, so candidates can answer at their own pace.
-
Bias is monitored continuously under our FAIR™ framework.
-
Every candidate receives personalised feedback.
This isn’t automation for the sake of speed. It’s intelligence that puts people first, and it works. Leading global brands, including Qantas, Joe & the Juice, BT Group, Holland & Barrett, and Woolworths, have all transformed their hiring outcomes while enhancing the candidate experience.
Why it matters now
Applicant volumes are exploding. Boards are demanding ROI on people decisions. And candidates expect fairness and agency. Sticking with the status quo — ghosting, inconsistent interviews, CV screening — comes at a real cost in brand equity, lost talent, and wasted time.
It’s time to move from data poverty to data richness, from broken processes to brilliant hiring.
Download the report
This is the first time candidate feedback on AI interviews has been analysed at such scale. The insights are clear: hiring can be brilliant.
👉 Download the Humanising Hiring report now to see the full findings.
Blog
What’s More Ethical: Measuring Skills or Guessing Them?
Barb Hyman, CEO & Founder, Sapia.ai
Why skills data matters for HR and CHROs
Every CHRO I speak to wants clarity on skills:
-
What skills do we have today?
-
What skills do we need tomorrow?
-
How do we close the gap?
The skills-based organisation has become HR’s holy grail. But not all skills data is created equal. The way you capture it has ethical consequences.
Two very different approaches to skills analysis
1. Skills inference from digital traces
Some vendors mine employees’ “digital exhaust” by scanning emails, CRM activity, project tickets and Slack messages to guess what skills someone has.
It is broad and fast, but fairness is a real concern.
2. Skills measurement through structured conversations
The alternative is to measure skills directly. Structured, science-backed conversations reveal behaviours, competencies and potential. This data is transparent, explainable and given with consent.
It takes longer to build, but it is grounded in reality.
The risks of skills inference HR leaders must confront
-
Surveillance and trust: Do your people know their digital trails are being mined? What happens when they find out?
-
Bias: Who writes more Slack updates, introverts or extroverts? Who logs more Jira tickets, engineers or managers? Behaviour is not the same as skills.
-
Explainability: If an algorithm says, “You are good at negotiation” because you sent lots of emails, how can you validate that?
-
Agency: If a system builds a skills profile without consent, do employees have control over their own career data?
A more human approach: skills measurement
Skills define careers. They shape mobility, pay and opportunity. That makes how you measure them an ethical choice as well as a technical one.
At Sapia.ai, we have shown that structured, untimed, conversational AI interviews restore dignity in hiring and skills measurement. Over 8 million interviews across 50+ languages prove that candidates prefer transparent and fair processes that let them share who they are, in their own words.
Skills measurement is about trust, fairness and people’s futures.
Questions every HR and CHRO should ask
When evaluating skills solutions, ask:
-
Is this system measuring real skills, or only inferring them from proxies?
-
Would I be comfortable if employees knew exactly how their skills profile was created?
-
Does this process give people agency over their data, or take it away?
The real test of ethics in the skills-based organisation
The choice is between skills data that is guessed from digital traces and skills data that is earned through evidence, reflection and dialogue.
If you want trust in your people decisions, choose measurement over inference.
To see how candidates really feel about ethical skills measurement, check out our latest research report: Humanising Hiring, the largest scale analysis of candidate experience of AI interviews – ever.
FAQs
What is the most ethical way to measure skills?
The most ethical method is to use structured, science-backed conversations that assess behaviours, competencies and potential with consent and transparency.
Why is skills inference problematic?
Skills inference relies on digital traces such as emails or Slack activity, which can introduce bias, raise privacy concerns and reduce employee trust.
How does ethical AI help with skills measurement?
Ethical AI, such as structured conversational interviews, ensures fairness by using consistent data, removing demographic bias and giving every candidate or employee a voice.
What should HR leaders look for in a skills platform?
Look for transparency, explainability, inclusivity and evidence that the platform measures skills directly rather than guessing from digital behaviour.
How does Sapia.ai support ethical skills measurement?
Sapia.ai uses structured, untimed chat interviews in over 50 languages. Every candidate receives
Blog
Mirrored diversity: why retail teams should look like their customers
Walk into any store this festive season and you’ll see it instantly. The lights, the displays, the products are all crafted to draw people in. Retailers spend millions on campaigns to bring customers through the door.
But the real moment of truth isn’t the emotional TV ad, or the shimmering window display. It’s the human standing behind the counter. That person is the brand.
The missing link in retail hiring
Most retailers know this, yet their hiring processes tell a different story. Candidates are often screened by rigid CV reviews or psychometric tests that force them into boxes. Neurodiverse candidates, career changers, and people from different cultural or educational backgrounds are often the ones who fall through the cracks.
And yet, these are the very people who may best understand your customers. If your store colleagues don’t reflect the diversity of the communities you serve, you create distance where there should be connection. You lose loyalty. You lose growth.
We call this gap the diversity mirror.
What mirrored diversity looks like
When retailers achieve mirrored diversity, their teams look like their customers:
- A grocery store team that reflects the cultural mix of its neighbourhood.
- A fashion store with colleagues who understand both style and accessibility.
- A beauty retailer whose teams reflect every skin tone, gender, and background that walks through the door.
Customers buy where they feel seen – making this a commercial imperative.
How to recruit seasonal employees with mirrored diversity
The challenge for HR leaders is that most hiring systems are biased by design. CVs privilege pedigree over potential. Multiple-choice tests reduce people to stereotypes. And rushed festive hiring campaigns only compound the problem.
That’s where Sapia.ai changes the equation: Every candidate is interviewed automatically, fairly, and in their own words.
- Bias is measured and monitored using Sapia.ai’s FAIR™ framework.
- Outcomes are validated at scale: 7+ million candidates, 52 countries, average candidate satisfaction 9.2/10.
- Diversity can be measured: with the Diversity Dashboard, you can track DEI capture rates, candidate engagement, and diversity hiring outcomes across every stage of the funnel.
With the right HR hiring tools, mirrored diversity becomes a data point you can track, prove, and deliver on. It’s no longer just a slogan.
Retail recruiting strategies in action: the David Jones example
David Jones, Australia’s premium department store, put this into practice:
- 40,000 festive applicants screened automatically
- 80% of final hires recommended by Sapia.ai
- Recruiters freed up 4,000 hours in screening time
- Candidate experience rated 9.1/10
The result? Store teams that belong with the brand and reflect the customers they serve.
Read the David Jones Case Study here 👇
Recruiting ideas for retail leaders this festive season
As you prepare for festive hiring in the UK and Europe, ask yourself:
- How much will you spend on marketing this Christmas?
- And how much will you invest in ensuring the colleagues who deliver that brand promise reflect the people you want in your stores?
Because when your colleagues mirror your customers, you achieve growth, and by design, you’ll achieve inclusion.
See how Sapia.ai can help you achieve mirrored diversity this festive season. Book a demo with our team here.
FAQs on retail recruitment and mirrored diversity
What is mirrored diversity in retail?
Mirrored diversity means that store teams reflect the diversity of their customer base, helping create stronger connections and loyalty.
Why is diversity important in seasonal retail hiring?
Seasonal employees often provide the first impression of a brand. Inclusive teams make customers feel seen, improving both experience and sales.
How can retailers improve their hiring strategies?
Adopting tools like AI structured interviews, bias monitoring, and data dashboards helps retailers hire fairly, reduce screening time, and build more diverse teams.