How Different Generations are Experiencing AI in Hiring 

Ask a 22- and 60-year-old jobseeker about their recent hiring experiences, and you’ll get two completely different answers. To find out why, we took the data from our global Inside the Candidate Experience 2026 research report—including a survey of more than 1,000 job seekers—and explored a cross-section of data not included in the report itself—by generation. 

Gen Z and Baby Boomers are navigating fundamentally different versions of the same hiring market, and the data suggests the industry is addressing neither particularly well.

Gen Z: The Most Ghosted, the Most Vocal

Gen Z candidates are bearing a disproportionate share of the disconnected hiring experience. Seventy-six percent of 18–24-year-olds were ghosted in more than half their applications, the highest ghosting rate of any generation in the study. Twenty percent reported a negative overall experience, also the highest. 

At the same time, this generation is the most conflicted about AI in recruitment. Fifty-nine percent used AI in their job search—consistent with higher digital fluency and lower barriers to adoption—but 33% of non-users avoided it because it felt dishonest or like cheating, the highest ethical concern rate of any generation and more than double the rate for Gen X (9%). This is a generation entering the workforce during the most significant shift in hiring technology in decades, and what’s consistent across its split perspective is their experience of what employers are not doing: 42% of Gen Z candidates heard nothing from employers about AI. 

The commercial consequence of this silence is worth noting. After a bad experience, 24% of Gen Z candidates shared it with their network—the highest sharing rate of any generation. Young candidates are the most likely to make bad experiences public, at scale, through channels that reach their peers. For any organization with an early careers pipeline, the candidate experience is a talent brand investment with a long return horizon.  

👉  Navigating the Gen Z Era: Insights for Effective Early Careers Recruitment 

Millennials: Commercially Consequential, Increasingly in the Dark

Millennials span two career stages in our data, and each comes with its own risk. 

Younger millennials (25-34) are the largest cohort in our study and, by one measure, the most commercially consequential after a bad experience. Among 25–34-year-olds who rated their experience negatively, 55% say they would tell others not to apply to that company, more than double the rate for Gen Z (21%) and significantly above the global average (36%). This group also has the highest AI adoption (61%) and sits at the peak of career mobility—large professional networks, active on LinkedIn, likely to influence hiring decisions both as candidates and as future hiring managers.  

Older millennials (35-44) occupy a specific and uncomfortable position in the data. This is the age group receiving the most employer silence about AI. Over three-quarters (77%) heard nothing from employers about AI, the highest of any generation. It's also the group with the lowest confidence that a human reviewed their application. Just 19% were very confident their application was looked at by a person, the lowest of any generation. These are professionals who entered the workforce before AI-mediated hiring existed at scale. They're navigating a significantly changed process with less guidance than any other group, and with the longest established expectation that hiring involves human judgment at its core.  

Gen X and Baby Boomers: Lowest Adoption, Not Lowest Impact

Older candidates have the lowest AI adoption in the study—just 24% of 55–64-year-olds used AI in their job search—and tend to generate less attention in hiring technology conversations.  

While they’re less vocal with their network—just a quarter (26%) would tell others not to apply, below the group averages—they had the lowest positive experience rate (34%) of any age group in the study.  

For organizations competing for experienced talent in senior roles, this matters. This cohort is often applying for roles with higher influence, higher compensation, and higher stakes on both sides. A poor candidate experience here is costly in ways that volume metrics do not capture. 

What Generational Variation Means for Your Candidate Experience 

The practical implication of this data isn't that organizations need separate hiring processes for different generations. It's that the communication failures driving poor experiences across them are felt differently and have varying impact. 

Gen Z candidates amplify bad experiences publicly. Millennials are the most commercially reactive after a bad experience. Gen X and Baby Boomer candidates are having a quietly poor experience that employers don’t seem to notice.  

All of these problems share the same underlying cause regardless of the generation: employers not communicating clearly about what their process involves, how AI fits in, and what candidates can expect to hear.  

To explore key findings from this research and get more actionable insights, download the  Inside the Candidate Experience 2026  report.