I want a feature in the ATS that allows for the verification of a candidate’s readiness for the real world and not just a candidate’s resume. Before conducting an interview with candidates, I would like to have something in place to be able to verify that they are capable of performing the pace, schedule and core tasks of the position.

Most ATS platforms are designed to filter candidates by keywords instead of their fit for the job. This can be particularly problematic in the hospitality industry, as it has led to many mismatches, a quick turnaround, and wasted time. The addition of a readiness component would allow the ATS to capture candidates’ availability, tolerance for shifts, geographic location constraints, and position expectations up-front; this would allow for dramatically decreased candidate drop-off rates, improved quality of hires, and decreased interview time on candidates who never should have been interviewed.

One feature I wish our ATS had is a real-time candidate engagement tracker that shows exactly how candidates are interacting with every touchpoint, emails, interview invites, assessments, and content we share.

Right now, we can see when someone applies or completes a step, but we don’t have insight into who’s opening emails, reading messages, or engaging with prep material. That makes it hard to know where candidates might be dropping off or losing interest.

If the ATS could show this in real time, we could proactively reach out to candidates before they go cold, tailor communications based on engagement, and even identify patterns that predict who’s likely to accept an offer.

For example, if a high-potential candidate hasn’t opened a single email for a week, we could check in differently instead of blindly sending the standard follow-up. It would make the whole recruitment process far more data-driven and personalized, rather than reactive.

Right now, our limitation is that most follow-ups are guesswork. With this feature, we could anticipate issues, reduce drop-offs, and create a smoother candidate experience, which ultimately improves offer acceptance and quality of hire.

One feature I wish our ATS had is the ability to reliably surface potential, not just past experience. Most systems are excellent at organizing applications but weak at helping recruiters make confident early judgments. They depend heavily on CV signals like job titles, employers, and tenure, which are often poor predictors of on-the-job success.

What would genuinely change the game is an ATS layer inspired by platforms like C-Factor AI, where candidates are evaluated upfront on how they think, decide, and respond to realistic work situations. When assessment, structured interviews, and behavioral signals are integrated into the funnel early, recruiters stop guessing and start prioritizing evidence.

This addresses a core limitation we experience today: too much time spent filtering resumes and too little time spent engaging with high-quality candidates. By shifting decision-making closer to demonstrated capability, hiring becomes more objective, scalable, and aligned with real performance rather than polished CVs.

Unlike our current ATS, where I look forward to having a real adaptive AI sidekick that can change sourcing, screening, and communication flows as they adapt to real-time hiring outcomes instead of rules, this will automate learning about signals of success in particular roles, optimizing shortlist, contact, and interview processes. No human tweaking, just fewer biases from traditional processes, while hiring much faster.

I would love it if we could block out names by default (until we decide to interview someone), to eliminate any subconscious bias regarding gender, ethnicity, and national origin. Not only do human screeners have these biases, but it’s been shown that even AI screeners discriminate based on name. In my opinion, ATS systems should hide the names and contact information of applicants until they’ve been selected for an interview based solely on their qualifications.

One feature I wish our ATS had:

A built-in, role-specific work simulation.

Most ATS platforms are great at sorting CVs, but poor at predicting performance. The feature I miss most is a simple way to test real job execution early in the process.

A built-in simulation would let candidates complete a short, realistic task directly in the ATS — writing a customer reply, prioritizing a backlog, analyzing data, or structuring a plan. Results would be scored against clear criteria and shown to hiring managers before interviews.

This would eliminate weak signals from polished resumes, reduce unnecessary interview rounds, and dramatically improve hiring quality. Proof of work beats proxies every time — and an ATS built around that principle would change how confidently we hire.

I would like our ATS to have the ability to track candidate performance across all stages of the recruitment process, rather than only tracking candidate resumes and interview notes. Additionally, I would like our ATS to provide information about how different sourcing channels, recruiter actions, hiring manager feedback affect candidates’ long-term success in their roles, and how this information can assist in helping companies to better fit candidates into their organizations. The ATS of the future will link historical hiring metrics with results from hires after they are brought on board, allowing for a better understanding of what makes a successful hire and why, as well as shifting the focus away from a “volume” or “speed” approach to recruiting, which is an outdated way of thinking. Instead, recruitment should continue beyond issuing offer letters. By providing real-time access to historical recruiting metrics, companies will be able to make more informed, consistent decisions.

The likelihood of the application being AI-generated. Something that would pick up very obvious signs of AI so I at least know which applicants didn’t bother to put in any work at all. I’m sure it wouldn’t be 100% perfect, but it would give me some idea of who is trying to cut corners.