Mathias Mengel
In April 2026, I was a guest in the Handelsblatt supplement Future of CEOs. The interview dealt with a question that I constantly encounter in conversations with CEOs at the moment: When does AI really pay off in recruiting and when is it just expensive actionism on a shaky process basis?
You can find the entire issue in the Handelsblatt supplement Future of CEOs from April 10, 2026 (behind a paywall). You can find the full interview with me here:
Table of contents
Mr. Mengel, many CEOs are currently talking about AI in recruiting. You say that many SMEs lack the foundations for this. What is going wrong?
In many cases, a clean process structure is already missing. Applications end up in email inboxes, are forwarded internally and maintained in parallel in Excel lists. There are often no clear responsibilities, documented processes or reliable deletion routines.
This is a silent growth risk that does not appear on any balance sheet but delays projects, overburdens teams and costs top performers their nerves. Under such conditions, AI is not the first lever. First of all, order should be created.
Why does the public discourse on AI miss the reality of SMEs?
Because it often presupposes a maturity that does not yet exist in this form. Many debates are aimed at companies with already digitized HR processes.
In SMEs, the reality is often different: established structures, limited resources, operational workarounds. Those who are too quick to rely on AI in such cases are not automating efficiency, but rather blurring it.
What are currently the biggest operational weaknesses in recruiting?
Firstly, the quality of selection. A CV alone says little about whether someone really fits in professionally and personally.
Secondly: Recruiting is often seen as administrative, although it is largely sales and communication work.
Thirdly, many companies rely too heavily on standard channels. The most interesting candidates usually do not apply actively, but have to be approached specifically.
Open key positions are often accepted surprisingly calmly. Why is this problematic?
Because the costs go far beyond the obvious. After 83 days, a vacant position has already cost a full gross annual salary. In sales positions, where every day is associated with lost sales, this figure can even be three times as high due to the higher value creation factor.
In other areas, the consequences are less immediately visible, but no less serious: projects are delayed, teams work permanently under overload and key personnel tie up time in substitution and coordination. These opportunity costs are often underestimated.
When is AI the right next step in recruiting?
When the processes are clearly described and controllable. The sequence should always be: document, optimize, then automate.
AI can be put to good use in recruiting, for example in the creation of job advertisements, in the structuring of information or in administrative preparatory work. But it needs a clear framework: defined processes, approved tools, data protection and binding guidelines for its use.
What should CEOs do now?
The first thing they should do is calculate what their vacancies are actually costing the company, not only in terms of salary, but also in terms of lost sales, team overload and delayed projects.
Only when these figures are transparent can a serious decision be made as to where there is the greatest need for action in recruiting. This is precisely why we have developed a free vacancy cost calculator that uses standard methods to provide a well-founded guideline in around 60 seconds, without registration and without any further obligation.
What does your vacancy really cost? Calculate it yourself now – free of charge, in 60 seconds, without registration.
👉 To the vacancy cost calculator
Or arrange a non-binding initial consultation:
Mathias Mengel
Managing Director of Kooku Recruiting GmbH
Mathias leads Kooku Recruiting Partners with a clear focus on innovative, sustainable recruiting solutions.
Together with experienced interim recruiters and consultants, he supports companies in filling open positions and optimizing their recruiting strategies – individually, fairly and transparently.
Frequently asked questions about AI in recruiting
AI is worthwhile if three conditions are met: Firstly, the underlying recruiting processes must be documented and controllable. Secondly, there must be clear tool and data protection guidelines for its use. Thirdly, a specific use case should be identified in which AI demonstrably improves time or quality – for example in the creation of job advertisements, in the structuring of application data or in administrative preparatory work. Those who start without these basics often only automate the vagueness of existing processes.
Four areas are particularly important: the receipt and distribution of applications, the evaluation and selection criteria for candidates, the communication channels internally (between HR and hiring managers) and externally (with candidates), and the data protection and deletion routines. Only when these four areas are properly structured can AI be set up without risk.
The cost of a vacancy is made up of several components: the lost value contribution of the position (especially for revenue-relevant roles), the additional costs due to overload in the team, the delay costs in ongoing projects and the indirect costs due to the commitment of management resources for substitution and coordination. Kooku’s cost-of-vacancy calculator, which summarizes the most important factors in around 60 seconds, provides an initial orientation.
As a rough rule of thumb: after around 83 days, a vacant position has cost a full gross annual salary. For sales positions where turnover is lost on a daily basis, this figure can even be three to four times higher. A more precise calculation – differentiated by role, seniority and industry – is provided by the cost of vacancy calculator.
The tool itself can be introduced in just a few weeks. The real preparatory work – process documentation, data protection approval, guidelines, internal training – usually takes two to four months. Companies that skip this preparatory work often experience setbacks in the first six months instead of efficiency gains. An accompanied introduction with external support shortens the path significantly
