Abhishek Vijayvergiya

Abhishek VijayvergiyaSep 11, 2026

Divyanshu had a perfect resume but 100+ companies rejected him because of a career gap. In most cases, he never even got an interview. He had been severely sick and bedridden for a few months, which left a gap on his resume. That gap became enough for many companies to filter him out before anyone actually spoke to him. He even had one company ask for his hospital discharge certificate to prove that he had been sick. I think a lot of hiring bias starts this way. Teams have limited bandwidth. They cannot interview 100 people for every role, so they create shortcuts to reduce the funnel. No career gaps. No services background. Only candidates from certain colleges. Some of these filters probably started as reasonable heuristics. Over time, they become hard rules and good people suffer because of this. We don't make those tradeoffs. We use Fabric to screen the resumes and run the first interview for us. So when Divyanshu applied, we evaluated what mattered: can he do the job? He scored 10/10 on the resume screen and 8.5/10 in his AI interview. We were blown away by how good he was. Probably one of the strongest candidates we have seen for this role. This Monday, he joined us as an Account Executive. A lot of people talk about human touch in hiring. Well, with AI we were able to run a more humane and sensible hiring process than 100+ companies who didn't use it. Anyway. Divyanshu - welcome to the team! We are super stoked to have you on board 🚀

Abhishek VijayvergiyaSep 9, 2026

A year ago, Perplexity’s CEO said recruiters could be replaced by AI within 6 months. His argument was that a week of recruiter work could become one prompt. Six months came and went. And today, Anthropic is hiring technical recruiters at $240K-$295K a year. OpenAI has recruiting roles paying up to $240K + equity. So if the flag bearer AI companies desperately need recruiters, then I guess the rest of the world does too. But I don’t think the prediction was completely wrong. AI has changed recruiting pretty dramatically. Here's some data from the last one year of Fabric. More than 2,000 recruiters now use our AI interviews. Many of them used to speak to ~50 candidates to make one hire. Now AI handles the first round and they are making one hire after talking to only 15 candidates. The same thing is starting to happen with sourcing. Recruiters are using Fabric’s sourcing agents to build candidate pipelines while they work on everything else. Some staffing teams are now closing 2x as many roles without doubling the size of their recruiting team. So recruiting is absolutely being automated. But the recruiter is still there. They’re spending less time going through hundreds of applications or repeatedly asking the same screening questions. Instead, they are spending more time understanding what the hiring manager actually wants, convincing good candidates and getting hires over the line. I think that’s what the last year has actually shown us. AI is making each recruiter capable of doing a lot more. And a recruiter who can run twice the hiring volume with the same amount of time becomes more valuable, not less.

Abhishek VijayvergiyaSep 14, 2026

A company put a candidate through 4 interviews and an 8-hour assignment, then rejected them because they didn’t feel a connection. This role had been open for 6 months. The candidate was explicitly told they had the skills the team was looking for. After all that time, the deciding factor was still something this vague. I think this is where long interview processes can fool companies. You keep adding rounds because you assume more interviews will eventually make the answer obvious. But if 4 interviews and an 8-hour assignment still end with “we didn’t feel a connection,” the team probably never agreed on what it was trying to evaluate. Before the first interview, the hiring manager should be able to answer: 1. What does this person need to be good at? 2. What evidence would convince us? 3. What would make us reject someone? We spend a lot of time on this when setting up AI interviews on Fabric. The recruiter and hiring manager define what should actually be tested and what good looks like. The interview then collects evidence against those criteria, instead of leaving everyone with a general impression. Human interviews should work the same way. If a role has already been open for 6 months, another interview round probably won’t fix an unclear hiring bar.