From Awareness to Action: How Leaders Are Building the Answer | Global Interview Security Summit 2026 [Praveen Srivastava, Devender Kumar, Harish Bhatia, Sunu Philip]

The frameworks, tools, and cultural shifts that forward-thinking organizations are using to build fraud-resistant hiring from day one.

Panel speakers:

• Praveen Srivastava (Global Head of Talent Acquisition at HCLTech)
• Devender Kumar (Chief Information Security Officer (CISO) at Persistent Systems)
• Harish Bhatia (Senior Partner & India Head at Korn Ferry RPO)
• Sunu Philip (Director - Customer Success at Talview)

Transcript

SPEAKER_02 0:01

Welcome to session three of the Global Interview Security Summit 2026. The first two sessions map the problem, what's happening at what scale and what it looks like when AI-driven fraud enters the hiring process. This session is going to be different. We are not here to diagnose anymore. I'm joined today by three leaders who are actually already in the work, people who have moved from awareness to action and who are building real answers inside real organizations. Let me first of all introduce them. We have Devendakumar, also known as Devan, is the CISO at Persistence System. Devend sits at the intersection of cybersecurity and talent strategy, a place most organizations have not yet fully connected. He brings a security architecture lens to this conversation. We also have Praveen Shrivastov, who leads a talent operation at Sierra Tech, one of the world's largest IT talent pipeline clients. Praveen is operationalizing hiring integrity at a scale that few organizations in the world have had to confront. And Harish Patya is a senior partner and head of RPO and Projects India at Conferi. Harish advises enterprises on building talent acquisition programs with integrity, accountability, and scale at the core and bring a vantage point across dozens of large organizations. Welcome all three of you, Harish Praveen and Devin, to the session. Glad to have you over here.

SPEAKER_01 1:21

Thank you.

SPEAKER_02 1:22

I want to start with something personal before we get into the programs and framework. Each of you lead organizations where hiring quality, security, and speed are in constant tension. When did interview security shift from being someone else's problem to becoming your personal mandate? It's open to all of you. I will go with Devin, you first.

SPEAKER_01 1:43

Yeah, I think to be clear, this isn't completely new. I mean, uh, if if you look at uh some of the security standards such as ISO 27001, uh people security has been the core component of these standards. What has changed off late is the with the availability of AI, AI coaching, and all of that, uh allows somebody to do the fraud at scale. So this has changed. But uh, and and that's why the requirement to have all these controls. And what is happening is now from policy on paper, we need the control which can be operationalized to stop it.

SPEAKER_02 2:29

Great. Thanks, thanks, Ivan. Harish?

SPEAKER_00 2:32

Yes, no, I think uh agreeing with Devin, none of this is really new. It's probably just the fact that plagiarism has become relatively easier and a lot more harder to detect, uh, given just the advent of AI and how there is almost a second uh live weight for me to cheat as I go along, right, as a candidate. And because it's so available, uh, I think the other piece is psychologically, candidates are asking if I have to use AI at work, why why can't I use it while I interview? I think that's the other piece, right? So that's you know, when you when you interview thousands and hundreds of thousands of candidates, you realize that they're not seeing it from a view of cheating, they're seeing it from a view of assistance. So I think we've got to figure a way to embed that into our process and into our entire hiring uh, you know, thought. That's that's where I see it.

SPEAKER_02 3:24

Okay, thanks, Arish. Praveen, your thought?

SPEAKER_03 3:28

Uh I I would agree that you know uh this uh concern has been there for a while and it's not a new one, but I think uh particularly uh the year 2020 was a very uh you know changing uh you know environment for the entire interview process when we went from a 100% in-person interview to a virtual interview. And this is where the need to have more uh you know monitoring systems and more accurate uh AI-based technologies uh to identify uh if there is anything which is unfair being used in an interview process uh you know, is is is the need of the art. So if you look at it, uh you know, we have uh introduced multiple systems for candidate evaluation because as of as we speak, uh only 20 to 30 percent of interviews globally are in-person. Rest of it is typically virtual and requiring uh you know a lot more intervention than what could have been an in-person interview in in the past. So that's that's my view. Uh, I think it's it's interesting that you know today a lot of tools in the market support uh you know uh interviews or a proctoring mode, uh, and and and that is an essential part of what I see as you know business need for us on a day-to-day basis.

SPEAKER_02 4:56

Great, thanks, thanks, Prameen. I think 2020 has been pivotal for uh Talview also in many ways. I think that's when we accelerated on multiple sides also because, like you rightly said, that was where everything shifted online and that put in a lot of uh need for bringing forces in place. But thanks, that that's great. Now let's get into the substance. I want to hear what actually is happening, the real programs, the decisions made, and what is actually moving the needle. Uh, Devin, as a security leader, you sit at the intersection of cybersecurity and talent strategy, a place not many organizations have fully connected yet. From your vantage point, what are security leaders across the industry doing to actually secure the hiring process? What frameworks and practices are gaining real traction and what has shifted mostly in the last 12 months?

SPEAKER_01 5:47

Yeah, interesting question. So let's see what has changed in the last 12 months, uh, or maybe recently, maybe 12 or 18 months. Um, see, one thing which has changed is CISO or the security teams are now engaging with the talent acquisition teams uh more often, very actively. And why that is happening? That is happening because uh because to avoid the fraud candidates, to avoid the uh imposters. So the collaboration between the TA teams and the security team has has increased. And in fact, TA teams, talent acquisition teams are the first line of defense now. They are the first line of defense to stop these uh fraudulent candidates. And therefore, uh it is very important for the security teams to work with the talent acquisition team and train them on how to identify red flags. It is no more enough to say, okay, these are the five points, ten points you should look at. It's important to have active collaboration and train these teams on identification of the red flags, which may be there. Um, and what I say is uh uh, I mean, if if you look at in the past, we only used to talk about BGV. Yeah, but uh BGV means background verification. But if you ask me, the background verification starts right from the time you have the resume in your hand or the profile of the candidate in your hand. So so what is happening is what is changing is uh, for example, uh are you comparing the LinkedIn profile with the resume? Are there gaps there? How old or new is the LinkedIn profile? Candidate uh with a 12 years of experience and a LinkedIn profile uh which is created three months back, uh, you know, something to uh be concerned or look at, then the use of technology during the interview um is has become very critical. Who's the person who's joining the interview? Are you comparing at each stage of the interview to the person who has joined your company is is the same individual and not somebody else? Are you uh the use of, like we were uh talking, the use of the AI tools or the coaching tools which are available to the candidates during the interview? Are you able to detect that? Are you able to detect multiple screens? Are you able to detect switching between the browsers? So all of that uh whole uh technology which has come in now to detect these things and and to add more, um is the candidate joining from your blacklisted countries? Each company today has a list of countries from where they don't hire. Is this candidate uh traffic uh which is coming, is he coming from that blacklisted country? Or is the candidate using VPN to hide his uh location or to hide his uh IP address? So a lot of these technologies have come in. The use of multi-factor authentication is is again helping to identify the person. So, yes, um, and similarly, the background checks have improved, the liveness checks have come in, uh, the ability to go and verify the documents online uh from the source, not just collect the identity document, but to verify uh from the source uh who is issued the document. Um, all of these are uh new changes which have come.

SPEAKER_02 9:16

Interesting, Davin. Thanks a lot for that perspective. I think that brings in from the earlier BGV to from where we are today looking at multiple aspects, you brought it rightly, and I think uh all four of us, along with many others, are seeing that happening in our um uh places as well. So thanks for bringing that perspective. Prameen, let me bring you in. You're dealing with this at a completely different scale. Uh at CL Tech operates at a massive hiring scale across multiple geographies. What program or structural changes have you put in place to build hiring integrity systematically and what is actually moving the needle for you?

SPEAKER_03 9:56

So I I completely uh echo what uh Devendar is saying in terms of you know uh background verification uh process being a little more intricate than what it was done in the past. Aside from that, we're also seeing a lot of uh fake documentation coming in at various stages of uh you know evaluation. Uh some of it are so genuine. Uh you know, we recently realized uh that you know people can alter even PDF metadata. Uh becomes very tricky for us. Uh we've introduced some AI-based tools developed in partnership with uh the big force uh to validate uh you know the documentation being submitted by uh the candidates during the interview process or the selection process. Uh we've been able to you know achieve a lot of success on that. I wouldn't say it is foolproof. Uh and and I have a CISO over here, so you know I'll need to be careful about what I talk about technology. But that said, uh, you know, uh I think the existing AI systems have made it a lot more simpler for candidates and prospective uh you know people who might want to do some bit of unfair practices into play, uh a lot more easier. So uh we as recruiters and as an organization, uh, we are keeping ahead. Uh we've introduced multiple checkpoints to kind of eliminate uh such cases, and and uh we've been able to eliminate at an early stage uh uh very successfully. Uh that's that's the change that we've incorporated in the last uh 18 months. And and you know, with each discovery that we come across, uh, it's an evolving process. We we kind of uh put in more filters and more uh checkpoints to kind of eliminate uh potential frauds.

SPEAKER_02 11:59

Great, great. What I find compelling there is the distinction between the process change and the technology change and uh and the fact that both have to move together. So thanks for that perspective. Tarish, let me bring you in from the advisory side. You are seeing this across many organizations at once. Uh, Conferi manages talent acquisition at scale for some of the world's largest organizations. From your vantage point, running large RPO programs, what are you seeing enterprises actually do to embed lining integrity into their TA operation? And what's making the biggest difference?

SPEAKER_00 12:35

You know, as we speak, Suno, I think I'm just thinking through there's one big differentiation in this whole advent of AI, right? I mean, what's happening is the candidate environment is not as regulated as the organization environment. So the use of AI doesn't seem as wrong or illegal to them as much as it can seem to us. And hence you're seeing a lot more people use you know uh technology to its to support them with sophistication and at scale. Whereas in the organization, there are still privacy controls, there's a lot of data privacy laws countrywise, globally, which need to be uh you know adhered to while you try to intrude into an individual candidate's uh, I guess, space, right? And to the earlier discussion we had about the fact that you know very large percent of the interviews are now virtual, you've got to be able to intrude in some way to do that. So that's happening. I think it's the sophistication and the scale at which this is happening, the bad actors are coming in. It's not it's no more about catching one or two wrong people, it's about saying out of the hundred, eighty people are using it. So it's about rewiring that process. Um, of course, I agree with the fact that you know, from a tech point of view, this has got to be embedded, which is no, it's you know, it's no more about one-time identification check. We're in a world of deep fake, right? So, how can I continue to have identity checks and a process verification as I go along different stages of the interview? How can I, you know, the organizations that we're talking to are are asking, how do I change my interview process so that we have more um judgment than kind of scripted answers to things, right? What should we be asking so that we can assess the candidate more on judgment than on scripted answers? Because that's where AI cannot help me, right? I mean, if it's it's more about my judgment. So, what should we assess for is got to be changing. And that's what we're doing as a leading organization as well, working with our recruiters to understand how we're reducing bias, but at the same time, how we're you know helping them learn to assess for judgment and to assess for scripted answers. And that's kind of where we start to understand. And I think the third thing which is happening is also just separation of stages, right? So, can we have multiple lens look at this while we are sourcing, while we're assessing, while we're evaluating people? So, you know, if we start to move to slightly a different process, we can help do that. And of course, you know, makes it all difficult while we're also trying to reduce costs in the whole process, right? So we want to do more with less in a way.

SPEAKER_02 15:10

Great. Thanks, Harish. I think the gap between what organizations think they need and what they actually need to build or assess, I think that's that's a theme that we keep hearing, and it's exactly where this conversation gets interesting. Let me shift gears slightly because I want to be honest with the audience uh who are participating about why this progress is so hard. Uh, what I'm hearing from all three of you is that organizations that are succeeding have made deliberate choices, but most organizations haven't. So let's be honest about why. And this question is open to all three of you and it's an open discussion. So most leaders in the audience know this is a real problem, but many organizations still haven't acted or have tried and stalled at some stage. What's really blocking progress and what are the most common mistakes leaders make when they try to uh to move to this switch?

SPEAKER_01 16:03

I think uh yeah, some of that was uh I'll I'll take on from what Harish said rewiring your processes. I think that's one of the reasons why uh progress stops. Uh when you bring in a new piece of technology uh without redesigning your process, when you don't do the proper chain management, uh that's when the progress stops. When you don't have the required right accountability, that's another place progress stops. And one place where progress stops is also the trade-offs. Trade-off of uh, like we typically talk speed versus security. Um and and if you have trade-off, have you defined those thresholds? Which trade-off will be accepted at what threshold and when and by whom? When these things are missing, uh the progress stops. And finally, uh the most important thing is when you allow the bypass, uh allowing the bypass uh of controls, uh things like joining date, hiring targets uh are there behind you, quarter is ending, there is a billing pressure, and and then you want to dilute some of the controls. When you do this selectively, that's where the progress stops. Uh, and and and the last one, what I mentioned is actually very uh very dangerous for the organization when you selectively bring down the controls. So, yeah, these are my views why the progress stops uh uh at stages and at different times.

SPEAKER_02 17:37

And and just on your point, uh, with all these different like change management, the tools, the security, somebody else who's driving. Uh, do you think the collaboration within uh the organization is that also something which because there are multiple teams working together to make this happen? Is that also something which you see failing, or you think there are methods which absolutely, absolutely.

SPEAKER_01 18:01

So collaboration is key while while you have the do the collaboration, the accountability is is has to be defined. Who's the one who will take the final decision? That should be clear. The final uh you can't have everybody accountable.

SPEAKER_02 18:19

Yeah. Thanks, Syman. Harish, Prapeen.

SPEAKER_00 18:23

So just to add to that, I think, you know, again, we've got technology experts in the room, so I'll let them talk through the technology, and I'm sure it'll continue to evolve and we'll have more sophisticated systems to continuously monitor and all of that. But I think the question becomes what is integrity? Uh, you know, and what is acceptable, what is not acceptable for an organization? I think it's very important very quickly for leadership to define that, right? Is it acceptable that I use AI to think through my points and you know answer them well? Is it acceptable I use it to learn? So I think important that organizations are able to do that. Um, the organizations we're working with are not necessarily just talking about how do we detect fraud better. And I'm, you know, to that point, technology will help it get more sophisticated, right? But it's also a question of trust, right? And there's been cases where you have the other side of existing employees asking if I'm being monitored all the time. And if you're questioning my trust and integrity, then that's a that's an area to worry about as well, right? Ultimately, we're talking about organizations where people are treated like a part of it, right? So every employee comes in with that, every candidate comes in with that view. So in the quest for going in, ensuring we have the right security protocols, we can't uh annoy the ones that are not necessarily using it wrongly. So that that's happening too. So it'll be a balance, uh, in my view. Uh, it'll not be about um you know just detecting fraud, it'll be about continuously monitoring that we're not allowing the system to make it easier for anybody to completely rely on AI. So I think that's that's kind of where this is going with organizations, uh, in my view.

SPEAKER_02 20:04

Thanks, Arish. I think this is one of the most honest conversations I've heard in this topic, and I think the audience will recognize themselves in what you're describing. Uh Rabeen, what's any thought from your side?

SPEAKER_03 20:19

I think it's it's you know uh something which uh is a lot of thought that needs to go and organizations in the little more sequenced uh in terms of you know uh getting things in one place. The challenge that we see today is that the entire process is changing on a day-to-day basis, you know, with with AI coming into play and you know new platforms coming into existence, uh, a lot of things today change at a dynamic pace at which I think we are not prepared to you know adapt to at this point. If you see our ATS system, for instance, uh you know, most of the organizations that use uh ATS systems uh use them for 10, 12 years with small, minor upgrades, whereas the ecosystem around it is changing on a much rapid pace. As organizations and as uh you know entrepreneurs, we need to look at solutions which are much more dynamic and faster in terms of evolving to a larger phase uh and and and an implementation bit. Uh I think uh we we are still probably in a stage where uh we we are kind of trying to navigate between a quick and a nimble solution versus what should be a long term solution. So that that part I think is still in an evaluation phase and an thing that is developing on the go. Uh we don't really have a perfect solution. As you speak, but something which uh I think should stabilize over the next few years, in my view. That's that's how I would look at it.

SPEAKER_02 22:08

Got it. Thanks. Thanks, Praveen. Okay, so so what I'm taking uh Praveen from this is that the blockers are not almost never technical, they are structural and they are cultural, and that's actually the harder problem to solve. We have covered the problem and the blockers. Now let's build the answer. I want each of you to speak uh what an organization that gets this right actually looks like and where leaders should start if they can't do everything at once. Harish, I'll start with you giving given your experience designing and running large-scale RPO programs. If a CHRO came to you tomorrow and said, I want to make a hiring integrity of first class priority in our talent acquisition model, what would you tell them to trade us? What are the non-negotiables as per you?

SPEAKER_00 22:52

Yeah, I don't think they're coming tomorrow. They're already coming today, they've come yesterday. So that question is coming up, absolutely. See, the problem obviously gets you know amplified when you're doing it at scale because you really can't. I mean, I can sit, you know, face to face, have a coffee with an executive, and have a very hard-to-heart conversation, right? So that makes it that's fine. When you're starting to look at two, three, five thousand people, then it's no more about that. And the fact that you are not worried, but you already know that 80% of them are using in some form some technology to support their case. And how much they're using it, how far they're using it is the question. So I think the conversations we are having with CHROs or with leaders in business is that it's you know, there are tools in the market and we will implement them, right? There will be proctoring tools like Talview and the others that will surely get implemented, and that will help us to equally be aware of you know the modalities that are happening in terms of candidates. But it's also about design. It's about firstly defining what your stance is on AI. Is it fully acceptable? Is it not? How much is acceptable? I think that's that's the question any organization should be able to answer. I think the second thing is redesigning the interview process itself, right? If um if it if there's a question in the interview process that AI can answer, then it's already a broken question. Right? So, how many questions can I add into that interview process, which cannot be answered through AI? It has to be more about me and my judgment or my experience. So I think that's the second thing. The third is just building in identity checks through that process, and that's where you know someone like you comes in, is how do we make it as part of the overall process throughout the stages rather than just at the beginning? And then the fourth for me is kind of just putting some framework and rules around what happens, you know, what right after. What if I find out 80% of the people have UCI? Then what? Right? Uh, what how much of that will be acceptable? So I think a lot of this has to be answered as we go in uh in you know, putting in a governance framework around it. That's kind of how we're discussing dealing with it. And uh, you know, over time it will evolve to be more sophisticated. But it's very clear that we're no more trying to find one or two or three people that are wrong. We're trying to ensure that there is some acceptable code of conduct, and this is what it looks like for us.

SPEAKER_02 25:14

Great. I love the fact that uh this is not a problem which is to be discussed, but it's already in action. And like you rightly said, Arish, I think um it just came to my mind when you were speaking. It's actually one of the organizations which is saying that AI is part of the system, like when people we hire employees, they we ask them to use AI. So, how do you change the entire uh questions itself that we create with AI and then kind of give it to them to kind of figure out what needs to be changing? So, yeah. Thanks for that, Harish. I think that was uh really insightful. Devin, from where you set, uh what does that actually look like in the architecture of hiring process itself? Uh from a security architecture lens, what does a fraud-resistant hiring process actually look like end-to-end? And where should leaders prioritize if they can't do everything at once?

SPEAKER_01 26:05

Okay, so yeah, I think the when it comes to the fraud resistance, fraud resistance hiring, uh, we have to look at various stages. It's not just one stage. We have to look at end-to-end, and this will be encompassing several critical stages uh to avoid the deception, uh, to avoid the fake candidates. Starting uh from the stage when you start, uh, like I said earlier, starting from the first stage when you get the uh profile, and you know, Praveen touched upon the ability of the candidates to modify the PDFs and modify the original documents, and our ability to use the same technology to detect it matters a lot. So, right from the time you get the profile, you you get the document, you you have to start looking at what's wrong, what's missing. Uh, and and technology is available to do that to a great extent. On, and of course, technology is not going to solve all the problems. Uh, and then after that, when it comes to the background checks, uh, I mean, uh, like I said, there are liveness checks available and there are identity verification checks which are available. It's no more that you submit a document and yeah, it looks good, you accept it. Um, you actually uh verify online whether you validate the document whether uh through the technology means uh is it right or not. And then using the secure means throughout the process, using the technology during the interview process to detect the um fraud the candidate might be doing is pretty much part and parcel of the architecture now. Looking at the traffic from where the traffic is coming, like I also mentioned earlier, is important. And then uh finally, um the BGV. Uh once all of these stages are are there, BGV becomes critical. There is a lot more use of technology now in the BGV itself. Uh the uh and and finally the people who's joining, are you able to relate it back with all the stages? And process just doesn't end there. When the person has joined, uh, there is a lot more there. Uh do you have a person who always uh uh logs into your network during the off hours? Is there somebody who's remote but doesn't switch on the camera, never switches on the camera? Are you able to detect when when somebody is remotely accessing uh your laptops, your devices? So, yes, uh it's it's technology, and in and technology has to be seen across each and every stage of the candidate, right? From the uh resume to the time when person joins, and after joining, what you're doing uh with the uh employee, yeah. It has to cover all the stages.

SPEAKER_02 29:00

Yeah, I think Harish rightly said we've got a real technical person, so I think you brought a lot of view on that. So thanks for that, Devon. It was really interesting to hear that.

SPEAKER_00 29:11

Devin's job has only gotten hard and continues to get harder.

SPEAKER_02 29:17

That's that's interesting. So, Praveen, let me bring you in with a forward-looking lens because the threat is not standing still. Uh, as the threat evolves and the AI-driven fraud gets more sophisticated, how do organizations build hiring integrity that's resilient, just not reactive? Uh, what's the organizational posture that's needed for this?

SPEAKER_03 29:39

Uh that's an interesting question, Suru. Uh, I think you know, how does an organization posture uh itself? I think first and foremost, uh, have a very serious intent to detect uh you know what is right and what is wrong. If you have the intent, you will find figure out solutions to you know come across uh you know these uh situations. Uh I can tell you uh when we uh came across this situation for the first time a couple of years back, uh you know, it was it was uh an area which we were not really prepared for. Uh but gradually we are uh you know coming across uh various things. For instance, uh for all documents that are submitted by a candidate for uh our hiring, we have uh an AI-based tool which kind of validates it and gives us uh you know whether it is a genuine one or not. Uh besides that, we've put in at each stage of interview, we have uh you know kind of put in uh various uh proctoring tools which evaluate whether the person is uh the same, uh, whether there is any kind of uh you know impersonation done, uh, whether there is lip sync done, or whether there is uh you know any other sort of uh you know fraud which is committed. Um we were we were kind of you know running through some of the technologies which were there uh with us and and we were living in the comfort uh you know we were saying all is well until we suddenly bumped across uh a particular case uh just in a regular audit where we realized that it was a recording which was being played in in interviews, and and we're still trying to figure out how did that recording come in a live interview. Uh but uh you know uh I think it is a constant change that you need to kind of be looking at and uh keep monitoring the systems for what could be a way to bypass the entire tool. Uh and and this becomes the biggest challenge today. Uh it's a constant evolution that you need to kind of keep doing to prevent any frauds occurring in in your regular hiring systems. Uh that's that's I think uh the key change that each organization needs to incorporate.

SPEAKER_02 32:09

Thanks, thanks, Pramean. I was just uh smiling because I know that some of these instances, like what you just mentioned, these are something that we over here keep witnessing while uh it's funny, it's silly, but it also is uh worrying because uh if somebody who's playing a recording and then coming in, eventually, I don't know how long that will last. I think um it's it's uh um yeah, it's it's it's the the more and more we build around it, I'm sure people will keep uh so it's it's constantly a uh game that we keep playing as to who wins it and how you achieved it and how you again build it. So that's something that we are constantly in. But thanks for bringing that. I think the last segment, and I'm going to ask you to be brief on this one, like 30 seconds each, maybe for each TA leader, CHRO or CISO watching this today. One thing, one move in the next 30 days. Like if you could get every TA leader, CHRO or CISO watching this one, what is the next uh one thing that they should all be doing in the next 30 days? Uh we can go in whichever order, go with Devanu first, and then Harish and Praveen.

SPEAKER_01 33:16

See, from my perspective, uh I'll say that if if the security teams are listening to this, go talk to your talent acquisition head, talk to your TA teams, train them how to identify red flags. It's very important uh to train them and and give them examples where they can go wrong. So that's one item I would want to take it forward.

SPEAKER_02 33:43

Interesting. Thanks, thanks again. Truly that matters, Harish.

SPEAKER_00 33:48

Yeah, I'll reiterate on the same point that Devin made. I think it's important to um bring people up to speed entirely in the TA and the security together to start thinking of this as a now problem, right? It's no more about is it happening, surely happening. It's just about what all is happening and how do we uh re think our processes to ensure that there is less of it happening, or it's only happening to an acceptable level. That's that's what we're asked to do. And then technology will continue to evolve, like I said earlier, right? So that's uh that'll come. But more about uh defining what's acceptable, not acceptable very quickly. I agree, Ariesh.

SPEAKER_03 34:25

Prameen, um I would I would say two things. One, I I fully agree with uh you know Devin saying that you know the CISO and and the IT teams need to talk to the talent acquisition heads. Uh this is the first part, very essential, but it is also essential that we network with within similar industries and uh you know competitors just to identify what are some of the challenges that they're facing. I think today the a lot of us are operating in isolation in terms of coming up with solutions and probably are connected using consultants uh who specialize in terms of you know getting some of the technologies to us. What uh we probably need to do a little more is uh you know connect directly with with our competition, which we do, and and I do connect with my talent acquisition leaders, but I it's it's very rare that you know you get an opportunity to speak to somebody like uh Devin, who comes from a different organization and and is heading uh you know IT uh to kind of you know collaborate and and and come together on a platform. I think this is a great initiative, and and we should do a lot more of uh these kind of events.

SPEAKER_02 35:35

I was about to say, Praveen, Amin to that, and I hope that this uh summit and the recording of this we are able to circulate to as many people as uh possible. Because yeah, you rightly said I think it's these conversations, which is um really important to kind of bring in, discuss, because I think all of us are doing this at different uh levels, more or less around the same thing. But I think yeah, these conversations when different organizations come together, industry leaders come together and share, I think that's really insightful. So yeah, uh great. It was nice. Um uh simple, direct, and completely actionable uh insights for sure. The audience can take uh some uh actions out of it for the first move. Um so I think what unites Devin, Harish, Praveen today is not just the problem uh they are solving, you guys are solving, it's a conviction that this is a strategic imperative and not a HR workflow issue anymore. The organizations that lead in the next decade won't just hire faster, they will have to hire smarter, more securely, and with integrity built into every step, is what we heard of also today. Uh if the last era was about uh digitizing hiring, I think this one is about trusting what you have digitized. So thanks a lot, Harish, Devin, and Praveen, for just uh not knowing what needs to change, but for actively building it. Uh and thanks to everyone joining the Global Interview Security Summit 2026. I think this conversation matters, and uh we hope it gives you something concrete to take back to your organization. Uh thanks again, Devin, Harish Praveen. Really appreciate your time for this, and I really enjoyed the conversation today. I I hope you guys also enjoyed this. Thank you, Sam.

SPEAKER_01 37:16

Very insightful. Very helpful. Thanks, Harish. Thanks, Praveen. Thank you. Pleasure indeed.