Civil Service Careers has set out red lines on how large language model-based assistance such as ChatGPT should be used by Whitehall jobseekers. PublicTechnology finds out more and gathers reaction.
New guidance has been published on acceptable – and unacceptable – ways artificial intelligence can be used to support applications for civil service jobs. It positively encourages candidates to get AI help for some parts of the process, but sets clear red lines about areas where ChatGPT and other large language model-assistance should be shunned.
The rules follow a plethora of surveys highlighting growing use of AI in the jobs market – and the government’s own broader projection that AI’s successful deployment has the potential to save the public sector in the region of £45bn a year, principally through the automation of routine tasks.
Earlier this year, research from insurance group Hiscox found 53% of job candidates had used AI tools to help write their CVs over the past 12 months. Some 29% of its study group had used AI to support remote interviews and 45% had used AI to complete online assessments.
“We want tech-skilled and AI savvy people to apply to the civil service, so we can modernise services for the British public. Our guidance is clear that applications should not use AI to generate full or false responses”
Cabinet Office
Perhaps most concerningly for recruiters, Hiscox said 37% of its sample of job-hunters indicated they would not correct inaccuracies proposed by AI to assist their application, such as overstated skills or experience.
A separate survey, conducted by Oxford University Careers Service in May this year, found that views vary “greatly” between employers on candidates’ use of AI. It said that only 15% of recruiters it questioned said they encouraged the use of AI tools in the application or assessment process. Half, meanwhile, said they did not want graduates to use AI in their applications.
The new civil service guidance, which went live over the summer, attempts to give a clear steer on the parts of application processes for departmental and agency jobs where AI is considered appropriate, and where it is not.
Candidates are most likely find the guidance through a link in advertisements for individual roles posted on Civil Service Jobs. The link is part of a brief advice section that describes AI as “a useful tool” to support applications but also stresses the need for applicants to provide statements and examples that are “truthful, factually accurate and taken directly from your own experience”.
Civil Service Careers, on whose website the full guidance is posted, essentially says it considers AI can reasonably be used to help applicants organise and present their work experience, and to hone their interview technique.
“The goal of using AI in your job application is to help you show us who you are and what you are good at. It’s not about creating a persona that isn’t you,” the guidance states.
In terms of writing applications, the guidance says there are several ways AI can help candidates “improve the clarity and quality” of their written application at the same time as still being an “honest reflection” of their skills and experience.
It suggests applicants could ask AI to help them improve the way their personal leadership experience is presented, such as by making sure sought-after skills have been “demonstrated” in previous roles.
The guidance is clear that it is acceptable for candidates to use AI to help them “refine and clarify” their ideas; research information about the organisation they are seeking to work for; and research trends in industries and professions that personal experiences can be related to.
In relation to interviews, Civil Service Careers seemingly encourages job applicants to use AI to generate mock questions from an advertised job description to help them prepare responses based on their own experiences.
Unacceptable uses of AI include inventing or ramping up skills and experience; creating generic responses to copy into an application; and using the technology to complete assessments of personality, situational judgment, and numeracy.
Unsurprisingly, using AI to create answers to questions during a live or recorded interview is also described as “unacceptable”.
‘We want tech-skilled and AI savvy people’
The Cabinet Office, which has an overarching responsibility for HR in the civil service, confirmed that the guidance is applicable to all civil service roles across government.
It said the government is already taking steps to harness the benefits AI can bring, both inside and outside of government, and added that the recruiting people with AI skills into the civil service is a core aim.
“The legacy state has been left behind by other parts of the economy. Innovation is critical,” a Cabinet Office spokesperson said. “We want tech-skilled and AI savvy people to apply to the civil service, so we can modernise services for the British public. Our guidance is clear that applications should not use AI to generate full or false responses.”
Pam Parkes, president of professional body the Public Services People Managers Association, said the Cabinet Office guidance “strikes a sensible balance” in a changing recruitment landscape.
“It recognises that while AI can streamline processes, it cannot replace the human qualities that are fundamental to effective public service,” she said. “As a sector, we need to harness the efficiency and accessibility gains AI can bring but always in ways that protect integrity, fairness, and the human connection that sits at the heart of what we do.”
Parkes said AI had “undoubtedly” changed the way applicants present themselves as part of the recruitment process.
“We’re seeing more candidates use generative tools to help with applications, sometimes to refine their language or structure their answers, but increasingly to produce whole responses,” she said. “This raises challenges around authenticity, assessment fairness, and the ability to gauge a candidate’s true skills and motivation.”
Nevertheless, Parkes said there were positives for the sector from the widespread use of AI.
“When used responsibly, AI can help candidates express themselves more clearly and overcome barriers such as neurodiversity, language confidence or digital exclusion,” she said. “In that sense, it can actually promote inclusion and accessibility which are core public service values. The emerging best practice seems to centre on transparency and proportionality: being clear in guidance to applicants about what is and isn’t acceptable use of AI, and designing recruitment processes that still test for originality, judgement, and interpersonal capability. Some councils are experimenting with practical checks for example, asking for reflective follow-up questions in interviews or using work-based assessments where AI has limited utility.”
James Barrett, managing director for technology and transformation at global recruitment firm Michael Page, agreed that the increased use of AI in job applications comes with both benefits and drawbacks.
“The technology can act as a tool to help candidates adequately convey their experience and prepare for interviews, which in turn can broaden and diversify the candidate pool,” he said. “However, improper use of the technology can also result in a high number of generic, impersonal applications that don’t authentically showcase the candidate’s unique skillset.”
He added: “Nationally, job applications rose by 17% year-on-year in the first half of 2025; while this is influenced by a number of factors, AI also plays a part.”
Barrett said candidates achieved the best outcomes when they used AI to enhance their personal voice and authenticity, rather than replace it.
“We advise candidates to use it as a tool to refine and strengthen applications, rather than substitute for personal insight,” he said. “In a similar vein, at Michael Page we leverage AI to create efficiencies in the recruitment process, assisting consultants in identifying relevant candidates, analysing candidate career trends, and automating administrative tasks. This allows our consultants to spend more time doing what they do best: building personal connections with our customers.”
Barrett said clarity in relation to AI use with job applications is “essential” on the employer side. “Providing clear guidance for candidates around how AI can and cannot be used throughout the hiring process will streamline the recruitment timeline and ensure the right candidates are being considered,” he said.
Spotting patterns
Some solid advice on AI use with job applications came in a November 2024 blog by Nindy Scott, now lead content designer at the Government Digital Service, then working at ICS Digital, which supports the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology and the Department for Energy Security and Net Zero.
“As the old saying goes, just because we can do something, doesn’t mean we should,” Scott noted.
Scott’s blog said that while it is clear AI is being used more and more for job applications, it is also “fairly clear” when people are using it.
“The answer is generally less specific and as a result, often lower scoring,” Scott said. “When you have over 200 applications (as some of our roles get), it’s also easy to spot patterns in the answers, where more than one person has used the same AI interface and received a similarly worded suggestion.”
Scott concluded that, like applicants, employers will also up their game and evolve their recruitment techniques – as suggested by PPMA’s Parkes – to make sure they can continue attracting the right people for the roles they advertise.
