A Deeply Disappointing AI Interview Experience with Sagan Recruitment
I applied for two different positions through Sagan Recruitment: Installation Project Coordinator and Unit Turn Project Coordinator. Both applications advanced to the video introduction and AI interview stages. Unfortunately, both experiences were extremely disappointing. During my first interview, the AI interviewer interrupted me while I was trying to explain my professional experience. Instead of allowing me to develop my answers naturally, the interaction felt mechanical, frustrating, and poorly suited to evaluating someone with substantial professional experience. Despite that experience, I decided to give Sagan another opportunity through a different position. Unfortunately, the second interview was no better. The AI interview became an exhausting sequence of increasingly detailed questions, including how I use Excel and Procore together in construction project coordination. Those are legitimate tools used in project management. My objection is not that technical questions should be avoided, but that the way these questions were presented felt excessively granular and disconnected from a meaningful evaluation of my professional judgment, leadership, organizational abilities, and real project experience. I have worked in construction project coordination, procurement, technical operations, and international business, including experience with construction projects in the United States. I understand the value of technical evaluations. However, I believe a professional recruitment process should allow candidates to communicate their experience clearly and demonstrate how they think and solve problems. What makes this particularly disappointing is that I have completed other recruitment processes using prerecorded video interviews, where candidates can review their answers and present their experience without unnecessary interruptions. That approach is much more reasonable, in my opinion, than an extended conversational AI interview that feels mechanical and unproductive. Eventually, I decided to terminate both Sagan interviews before completion because I no longer considered the process constructive. My criticism is not directed at artificial intelligence as a technology. It is directed at what I consider a poorly designed application of that technology in professional recruitment. My recommendations to Sagan Recruitment are straightforward: 1. Allow candidates to finish their answers without unnecessary interruptions. 2. Improve the relevance, structure, and depth of the interview questions. 3. Focus more on professional experience, judgment, leadership, and problem-solving abilities. 4. Provide a clear alternative for candidates who prefer a human interviewer. 5. Reevaluate whether lengthy conversational AI interviews are the best way to assess experienced professionals. Based on my personal experience, I would not recommend Sagan Recruitment to professionals who expect a respectful, thoughtful, and meaningful interview process. Alejandro Arroyo de Anda Coronel Mexico — October 2026
By Alejandro Arroyo de A.