Artificial intelligence has made writing a CV faster than ever, but it has also created a new challenge for job seekers: standing out. As more candidates rely on AI tools to draft applications, recruiters are seeing an increasing number of CVs filled with the same polished yet generic buzzwords that reveal little about a person’s actual skills or achievements.
In this Q&A, recruitment expert Sharon Armstrong shares the tell-tale signs of AI-generated CVs, the phrases recruiters are tired of seeing, and how candidates can create applications that feel more authentic, credible and memorable.
1. What are the most common “vague AI phrases” you’re seeing in CVs today?
The biggest giveaway is not one particular phrase but the repetition of the same corporate language across multiple CVs. We regularly see statements such as “results-driven professional”, “proven track record”, “dynamic leader”, “strategic thinker”, “excellent communication skills” and “passionate about delivering excellence.”
We are also seeing phrases like “cross functional collaboration”, “spearheaded initiatives”, “optimised performance” and “played a pivotal role” appearing frequently. None of these phrases are necessarily wrong, but they are often unsupported by evidence. Recruiters are interested in what someone actually achieved rather than broad descriptions of how they see themselves.
2. Why do these generic phrases negatively impact a candidate’s application?
Generic language makes it difficult for recruiters to accurately assess whether a candidate meets the requirements of the role. Recruiters cannot make assumptions. If a CV does not clearly demonstrate experience, achievements, or technical capability, it is much harder to match that candidate to a position.
When recruiters review large numbers of CVs, those that provide clear, factual information supported by examples naturally stand out ahead of those relying on broad statements.
3. How can recruiters tell when a CV has been overly AI-generated?
It is usually less about identifying AI and more about recognising when a CV lacks authenticity. Overly AI-generated CVs often contain polished paragraphs filled with impressive-sounding language but very little detail about actual responsibilities, projects or measurable achievements.
In some cases, AI also unintentionally overstates a candidate’s level of seniority or authority because it lacks the context of the organisation they worked for. Another common indicator is language that feels unnatural for the South African market, including American spelling or phrases that most professionals would not normally use.
4. What are some examples of weak or overused phrases job seekers should avoid?
Phrases such as “results-driven professional”, “dynamic team player”, “strategic thinker”, “excellent communication skills”, “self-motivated”, “proven track record” and “good leadership skills” have become very common.
Rather than relying on these descriptions, candidates should explain what they actually did. For example, instead of saying they are a strong leader, they should state how many people they managed, what improvements they introduced, or what results they achieved.
5. How does vague language affect a candidate’s chances during shortlisting?
Vague language creates uncertainty. Recruiters should never have to guess the level of responsibility a candidate held or the impact they made. When comparing candidates with similar backgrounds, the CV that provides specific examples, measurable achievements, and clear responsibilities is almost always more competitive. Clarity makes the shortlisting process significantly easier.
6. What makes a CV feel authentic and human written in comparison?
Authentic CVs contain specific details that reflect the candidate’s experience. They describe the industries they have worked in, the size of teams they have managed, the projects they delivered, the systems they used, budgets they controlled, and measurable business outcomes they achieved.
They are written in straightforward language that sounds natural rather than overly polished. A genuine CV should reflect the person’s own communication style because that is ultimately what employers will experience during an interview.
7. How should job seekers balance using AI tools without losing their personal voice?
AI is an excellent editing tool, but it should not become the author of the CV. I encourage candidates to write their own content first, ensuring that all experience, achievements and responsibilities accurately reflect their career. AI can then be used to improve grammar, structure and presentation. If a candidate cannot comfortably explain what is written on their CV during an interview, then it should not be included.
8. What specific changes can turn a generic CV bullet into a strong achievement statement?
The biggest improvement comes from replacing responsibilities with outcomes. Instead of writing “Responsible for managing recruitment”, a stronger statement would be “Managed end-to-end recruitment across engineering and renewable energy roles, reducing average time to fill while maintaining a high placement success rate.”
Candidates should also include measurable achievements wherever possible, whether that is revenue generated, costs reduced, projects completed, team size, productivity improvements or customer satisfaction results. Facts always carry more weight than adjectives.
9. Are certain industries more affected by AI-generated CV language than others?
We are seeing AI used across almost every industry. It tends to be more noticeable in professional services, finance, administration, HR, marketing and management roles where candidates often rely heavily on written descriptions of their experience.
Technical professions such as engineering, IT and healthcare often contain more specific project information, certifications and technical competencies, which naturally makes those CVs more factual and less generic.
10. What role do measurable results play in replacing vague descriptions?
Measurable results provide credibility. Numbers help employers understand the scale and impact of someone’s contribution. Whether it is increasing revenue, reducing costs, managing a R50 million budget, leading a team of 40 employees, or completing projects ahead of schedule, measurable achievements demonstrate value far more effectively than generic descriptions.
11. How important is tailoring language to each job description in avoiding generic phrasing?
It is extremely important. Candidates should never change or exaggerate their experience, but they should highlight the aspects of their background that are most relevant to the position they are applying for. Tailoring a CV helps employers quickly identify the candidate’s suitability and ensures important skills and experience are not overlooked.
12. What final advice would you give job seekers relying on AI to improve their CVs?
AI should be viewed as a tool, not a substitute for genuine experience. Use it to improve presentation, grammar and readability, but make sure the content reflects your own career, your own achievements and your own voice. Employers recruit people, not perfectly written documents.
The strongest CVs are those that are honest, specific and supported by evidence. They tell a clear story of what someone has accomplished without exaggeration, and they give both recruiters and employers confidence that the candidate can genuinely deliver what is written on the page.
For more expert recruitment advice or to learn more about Armstrong Appointments’ legal recruitment services, contact Sharon Armstrong, Director at Armstrong Appointments, for guidance on navigating today’s evolving job market and creating applications that stand out for the right reasons.
