Best AI Meeting Assistants for Recruiting and HR (2026)

Recruiting interviews aren't like other meetings. When you record a sales call, the worst that happens is a slightly awkward moment when the bot joins. When you record a candidate interview, the stakes are different: the recording tool becomes part of your employer brand. How you handle consent, what the candidate sees on their screen, how long you retain data, and whether the AI is scoring their answers — all of this shapes the candidate's experience and your legal exposure.

That's why picking the right AI meeting assistant for recruiting requires a different lens than choosing a general-purpose note-taker. You need to think about ATS integration (does it push structured notes to Greenhouse or Lever?), consent mechanisms (how are candidates notified?), data retention (can you set automatic deletion schedules that comply with GDPR or state laws?), and the uncomfortable question of whether the AI introduces bias into your hiring process.

We evaluated nine tools across these recruiting-specific criteria. Three are purpose-built for hiring teams, and six are general-purpose meeting assistants that recruiting teams commonly repurpose. Both categories have trade-offs worth understanding before you commit.

Quick Answers

Best for candidate experience (bot-free): Fellow — option to record with a bot or bot free – no visible bot joining the cal.

Best for ATS integration: BrightHire — the deepest native ATS connections (Greenhouse, Workday, Lever) with built-in interview guides and scorecard automation.

Best for recruiting-specific note-taking: Metaview — purpose-built for recruiters at $50/user/month with configurable note templates and ATS scorecard autofill.

How We Evaluated These Tools for Recruiting

General-purpose AI meeting assistant roundups usually focus on transcription accuracy, pricing, and platform support. For recruiting, those things matter — but they're not enough. We weighted our evaluation toward six criteria that are specific to interview workflows.

Consent and notification mechanisms. How does the tool handle recording disclosure? Does a bot announce itself, or can you record without a visible participant? Does it provide built-in consent language or notifications?

ATS integrations. Native connections to Greenhouse, Lever, Workday, and similar applicant tracking systems matter far more than generic CRM integrations for recruiting teams. Can notes push directly into scorecards? Can the tool pull job descriptions and candidate context into its summaries?

Data retention controls. Under GDPR, various U.S. state laws, and internal policies, recruiting teams often need to delete candidate recordings after a set period. We looked at whether each tool offers configurable retention policies or requires manual cleanup.

Bot-free recording option. A visible recording bot changes the dynamic of a candidate interview. Tools that offer botless recording — capturing audio from the device rather than joining as a participant — tend to preserve a more natural conversation.

Bias considerations. Some tools generate candidate scores, rankings, or sentiment analysis. In a recruiting context, these features carry legal and ethical risks. We flagged tools that score candidates and noted where AI-generated assessments could introduce bias.

Sharing and redaction controls. Interview notes often contain sensitive information — salary expectations, personal circumstances, protected-class indicators. Tools with granular sharing permissions and the ability to redact portions of transcripts are better suited for recruiting workflows.

Individual Tool Reviews

BrightHire

Pricing: Custom pricing (contact sales) · Enterprise-focused

BrightHire is a dedicated interview intelligence platform, not a general meeting note-taker. It integrates into the hiring workflow end-to-end: from generating structured interview plans and job descriptions, to providing real-time interview guides during calls, to auto-generating notes and pushing one-click scorecards into your ATS.

The ATS integration depth is where BrightHire distinguishes itself from every other tool on this list. It has native connections to Greenhouse, Workday, Lever, Slack, and major video platforms, with transcripts, summaries, and structured feedback flowing directly into your existing systems. The platform also includes BrightHire Screen, an async AI interviewer that conducts structured first-round screening interviews, scoring responses against your rubrics.

On bias, BrightHire takes a more proactive approach than most. It offers interviewer coaching based on actual interview data, flags when interviewers deviate from structured questions, and provides analytics on interview consistency and hiring equity. That said, any tool that scores candidates — even against structured rubrics — introduces AI into employment decisions, which triggers compliance obligations under emerging state laws.

Recruiting-Specific Strengths

• Deepest native ATS integrations in this category (Greenhouse, Workday, Lever)
• Structured interview plans with real-time interviewer guides
• One-click scorecard submission directly from meeting summaries
• Interviewer coaching and equity analytics
• Async AI screening for first-round interviews
• SOC 2 Type II and GDPR compliant

Limitations

• Enterprise pricing is not transparent — requires sales conversation
• Uses a visible bot for recording (no botless option documented)
• Primarily designed for high-volume hiring teams; may be overkill for small companies
• AI candidate scoring features require careful compliance review under state AI hiring laws
• Some users report transcription challenges with heavy accents or technical jargon

Best for: Mid-to-large recruiting teams running structured interview processes at scale, especially those already using Greenhouse or Workday.

Fellow

Pricing: Free plan available · Team: $7/user/mo · Business: $15/user/mo · Enterprise: $25/user/mo

Fellow is a security and privacy-firstAI meeting assistant and notetaker, built to be used across the entire organization (different teams in your company). It handles recording, transcription, and AI summaries across Zoom, Google Meet, Microsoft Teams, and Slack Huddles, with both bot and botless recording options. For recruiting, its relevance comes down to privacy controls and flexibility.

Fellow offers mid-meeting pause and resume for recording — useful when an interview veers into territory you don't want captured, such as a candidate sharing personal circumstances. Post-meeting transcript redaction lets you remove sensitive information before sharing notes with the wider hiring team. Granular sharing permissions mean you can control who sees what, rather than defaulting to all-or-nothing access.

You can push notes to CRM tools (Salesforce, HubSpot) on Business plans and above, and use Zapier for custom workflows, but there's no scorecard autofill or structured interview feedback loop. You'd be manually copying notes into your ATS or building your own automation.

Recruiting-Specific Strengths

• Botless recording option preserves candidate experience
• Mid-meeting pause/resume for sensitive conversations
• Transcript redaction for removing sensitive information
• Granular sharing permissions (not admin-only)
• SOC 2, GDPR, and HIPAA compliance
• 50+ integrations including Zapier for custom ATS workflows

Limitations

• No native ATS integration (Greenhouse, Lever, Workday)
• No scorecard automation

Best for: Companies that prioritize using one AI meeting assistant across the entire company (IT teams love centralization). And teams that prioritize privacy controls and candidate experience (botless recording, redaction) over dedicated recruiting features, and are comfortable building their own ATS workflow via Zapier.

Metaview

Pricing: Free (25 conversations/mo) · Pro: $50/user/mo · Enterprise: Custom

Metaview is built exclusively for recruiting conversations. Unlike general-purpose note-takers, its AI is trained on recruiting workflows — meaning the summaries it generates are structured around candidate evaluation, not generic meeting recaps. You can configure note templates to match your hiring process, and the tool pulls context from your ATS (job descriptions, candidate CVs) to produce more relevant summaries.

The standout feature for Greenhouse users is scorecard autofill: open a scorecard in Greenhouse, click "Autofill with Metaview" via the Chrome extension, and structured interview notes populate both text fields and attribute ratings. This alone can save significant time in the feedback loop between interviewers and recruiters.

Metaview has also expanded beyond note-taking into AI-powered candidate sourcing, with an agent that runs searches across candidate databases. This makes it more of a recruiting platform than a pure note-taker, though interview documentation remains its core strength.

Recruiting-Specific Strengths

• AI notes purpose-built for recruiting (not repurposed from general meeting summaries)
• Greenhouse scorecard autofill via Chrome extension
• Configurable note templates aligned to hiring workflows
• Pulls ATS context (job descriptions, candidate materials) into note generation
• Used by over 4,000 organizations including well-known tech companies
• SOC 2 and GDPR compliant

Limitations

• $50/user/month is a significant step up from general-purpose tools
• Uses a bot to join meetings (no documented botless option)
• Some users report summaries can feel generic for highly technical interviews
• Limited customization of summary templates compared to what some enterprise teams need
• Chrome extension required for some ATS integration features

Best for: Recruiting teams that want purpose-built interview documentation with strong Greenhouse integration, and are willing to pay a premium over general-purpose alternatives.

Pillar (by Employ)

Pricing: Custom pricing · Available through Employ (Lever, Jobvite) ecosystem

Pillar is an interview intelligence platform that was acquired by Employ (the parent company of Lever and Jobvite) in early 2025. This acquisition is significant because it means Pillar's interview intelligence now sits natively within the Lever and Jobvite ATS ecosystem — if your team uses either platform, the integration is tighter than what third-party tools can offer.

Pillar's core focus is equitable hiring. The platform provides real-time interviewer guidance during calls, automated scorecard feedback collection, and AI-generated highlight reels that let hiring managers compare candidates side by side using video clips. Its interviewer coaching feature analyzes patterns across interviews to flag potential bias and help interviewers improve over time.

The bias-reduction focus is a genuine differentiator, but it also means the tool is actively analyzing and scoring interview interactions, which places it squarely in the category of AI employment decision tools that regulators are scrutinizing.

Recruiting-Specific Strengths

• Native integration with Lever and Jobvite through Employ ecosystem
• Real-time structured interview guides during calls
• Automated feedback collection — reportedly 85% of feedback submitted within 48 hours
• Side-by-side candidate comparison with video clips
• Explicit focus on bias reduction and equitable hiring
• AI interviewer coaching and training

Limitations

• Pricing is not publicly listed — requires Employ sales engagement
• Strongest value if you're already in the Lever/Jobvite ecosystem
• Relatively newer platform — smaller user base than some competitors
• AI scoring and candidate assessment features need compliance review under emerging hiring laws
• Integration depth outside the Employ ecosystem is less clear

Best for: Teams already using Lever or Jobvite that want deeply integrated interview intelligence with a focus on hiring equity.

‍

Fireflies

Pricing: Free plan · Pro: $10/user/mo · Business: $29/user/mo · Enterprise: $39/user/mo

Fireflies integrates with a large ecosystem of tools (5,000+ via Zapier), and offers conversation analytics including talk time, sentiment analysis, and topic tracking.

For recruiting, Fireflies has a notable feature: native integration with Greenhouse and Lever. Meeting notes and transcripts can push directly to these ATS platforms, which is unusual for a general-purpose tool. The platform's "AskFred" AI chat also lets you query across your entire meeting history, which can be useful for comparing how different candidates responded to similar questions.

The trade-off is that Fireflies uses a visible bot that joins meetings, which some candidates may find distracting. Its AI summaries are general-purpose, not structured for recruiting workflows, so you won't get scorecard-ready output the way you would with Metaview or BrightHire.

Recruiting-Specific Strengths

• Native Greenhouse and Lever integration for pushing notes
• 100+ language transcription — useful for global hiring teams
• Large integration ecosystem (5,000+ apps via Zapier)
• Cross-meeting search for comparing candidate responses
• SOC 2 and GDPR compliant
• Competitive pricing at scale

Limitations

• No botless recording option — visible bot joins every call
• AI summaries are general-purpose, not recruiting-specific
• No structured interview guides or scorecard automation
• AI credit system on some plans adds hidden costs for heavy users
• Default auto-join and auto-share settings can be overly aggressive (review settings carefully)
• Storage limits on lower plans (800 min/seat on Free)

Best for: Recruiting teams with high interview volume across multiple languages that want ATS integration (Greenhouse/Lever) without paying for a purpose-built recruiting tool.

Otter

Pricing: Free (300 min/mo) · Pro: ~$8.33/user/mo · Business: ~$20/user/mo · Enterprise: Custom

Otter offers real-time collaborative transcription, AI chat across meeting history, and integrations with Greenhouse via Zapier. It also supports both bot and bot-free recording (via desktop or Chrome extension).

Otter's live transcription feature is useful in panel interviews where multiple team members are evaluating simultaneously — everyone can see the transcript, add highlights, and tag moments in real time. The AI Chat function can help recruiters quickly pull candidate insights or draft follow-up emails after interviews.

However, Otter's ATS integration is limited to Zapier workflows rather than native connections. Transcription is currently available in only about three languages, which limits its usefulness for global hiring. And the minute-based pricing model means heavy interview schedules can burn through allotments quickly.

Recruiting-Specific Strengths

• Dedicated recruiting use case with Greenhouse integration via Zapier
• Real-time collaborative transcription for panel interviews
• Bot-free recording option via desktop app or Chrome
• AI Chat for querying across interview history
• Affordable entry point

Limitations

• ATS integration via Zapier only — no native Greenhouse/Lever connection
• Limited language support (~3 languages vs. 30–100+ for competitors)
• Minute-based limits can be restrictive for high-volume interviewing
• No recruiting-specific note templates or scorecard features
• No transcript redaction capabilities documented

Best for: Teams that want affordable, real-time collaborative transcription for interviews and are comfortable building ATS connections through Zapier.

Fathom

Pricing: Free forever (unlimited recordings) · Premium: $19/user/mo · Team: $29/user/mo

Fathom's main selling point is its genuinely free tier with unlimited recordings, transcription, and storage — no time limits, no monthly caps. For small hiring teams or startups conducting interviews without a dedicated recruiting budget, this makes it an attractive starting point.

The "Instant Highlighting" feature lets you click during a live interview to clip specific video moments. These clips can be shared on Slack or with hiring managers, allowing them to see a candidate's actual response rather than reading a summary. This show-don't-tell approach can be powerful for building alignment among interviewers.

Fathom integrates with HubSpot and Salesforce, and has Zapier support for broader connectivity. However, like most general-purpose tools, there are no native ATS connections, no structured interview features, and no recruiting-specific AI summaries.

Recruiting-Specific Strengths

• Unlimited free recording and transcription — removes budget barriers
• Video clip highlights for sharing specific candidate moments
• CRM integration (HubSpot, Salesforce) plus Zapier
• Clean, simple interface with minimal learning curve
• SOC 2 Type 2 compliant

Limitations

• Visible bot joins all calls — no botless option
• No native ATS integration (Greenhouse, Lever, Workday)
• Free plan limits AI summaries to 5/month — only raw transcription is unlimited
• No recruiting-specific note formatting or scorecard support
• Only supports online meetings (no in-person recording)
• No transcript redaction or granular sharing controls

Best for: Early-stage companies and small teams that need unlimited interview recording at no cost and are willing to manually handle ATS data entry.

Jamie

Pricing: Free (10 summaries/mo) · Paid plans from ~$24/mo

Jamie is a bot-free AI note-taker that runs as a desktop app on Mac or Windows, capturing audio directly from your device. No bot joins the meeting, no additional participant appears on screen, and audio is deleted after transcription. For interviews where candidate experience is paramount — executive searches, sensitive roles, or situations where a visible recorder would create friction — this approach has clear advantages.

Jamie supports 70+ languages with offline transcription, works across any meeting platform (including in-person meetings), and is GDPR-compliant with data stored in Germany. The speaker identification improves over time through a "Speaker Memory" feature that recognizes recurring voices.

The trade-off for this privacy-first approach is a thinner feature set. Jamie doesn't offer video recording, has limited integrations compared to enterprise platforms, and provides no ATS connections, structured interview features, or redaction tools. It's essentially a very good personal note-taker that happens to be excellent for interview discretion.

Recruiting-Specific Strengths

• Completely bot-free — no visible participant in the meeting
• Audio deleted after transcription (privacy-first)
• 70+ language support for global hiring
• Works for in-person interviews as well as virtual
• GDPR-compliant, data stored in EU (Germany)
• Clean summaries with action items

Limitations

• No ATS integration (Greenhouse, Lever, or Workday)
• No video recording — audio only
• Limited integrations compared to enterprise tools
• No structured interview guides or scorecard features
• Lighter admin and governance controls than enterprise platforms
• Speaker identification can struggle with multiple speakers on one device
• Processing delays reported by some users (5–10 minutes for summaries)

Best for: Recruiters and hiring managers who prioritize a completely invisible recording experience for candidate-facing conversations, especially for executive or sensitive roles.

tl;dv

Pricing: Free (unlimited recordings) · Pro: $18/user/mo · Business: $35/user/mo

tl;dv is a general-purpose meeting assistant with a strong free tier and a focus on shareable meeting moments. Its core strength for recruiting is the ability to clip and share specific interview segments — a hiring manager can watch a two-minute highlight rather than sitting through a 45-minute recording.

The platform offers multi-meeting intelligence, which lets you search across all recorded interviews and generate reports that synthesize insights from multiple candidate conversations. For teams evaluating many candidates for the same role, this cross-meeting analysis can help surface patterns. tl;dv integrates with 5,000+ tools via Zapier and has native CRM syncing (HubSpot, Salesforce).

However, tl;dv uses a meeting bot, has no native ATS integration, and its AI features are general-purpose rather than recruiting-specific. It's a versatile tool that works adequately for interviews but isn't optimized for them.

Recruiting-Specific Strengths

• Generous free plan with unlimited recordings
• Video clip highlights for sharing candidate responses
• Multi-meeting search and reporting across candidate interviews
• 30+ language transcription support
• 5,000+ integrations via Zapier
• SOC 2 and GDPR compliant; partners with Anthropic for AI processing

Limitations

• Uses a visible meeting bot (no botless option)
• No native ATS integration
• No recruiting-specific note templates or scorecard features
• Free plan caps AI features at 10 notes and 10 AI queries per month
• Some users report accuracy issues with complex or technical conversations

Best for: Teams that want a free or low-cost tool for recording interviews with the ability to clip and share specific candidate moments with hiring managers.

Legal and Ethical Considerations

Using AI tools in interview workflows introduces compliance obligations that go beyond what a typical meeting note-taker requires. The regulatory environment is evolving rapidly, and recruiting teams should be aware of several areas of risk.

Note: This section provides general information, not legal advice. Consult with employment counsel before implementing AI tools in your hiring process, especially if you operate in multiple jurisdictions.

Consent and Recording Laws

Recording laws vary by jurisdiction. In the United States, some states require all-party consent (all participants must agree to be recorded), while others only require one-party consent. Internationally, GDPR requires clear legal basis for processing candidate data, including recordings. Regardless of jurisdiction, best practice for recruiting is explicit, informed consent before recording begins — both because it's often legally required and because it sets a transparent tone with candidates.

Most AI meeting tools provide some form of recording notification (the bot announces itself, or the platform displays a "recording in progress" indicator). But for recruiting, a more deliberate approach is advisable: inform candidates in writing before the interview that AI note-taking will be used, explain what data is captured and how long it's retained, and offer candidates the opportunity to ask questions or decline.

AI in Hiring Decisions: Emerging State and Federal Laws

The U.S. regulatory landscape for AI in hiring is becoming considerably more complex. Several key developments affect how recruiting teams can use AI meeting tools.

New York City's Local Law 144 requires annual independent bias audits of automated employment decision tools used in hiring, along with advance notice to candidates. California's Civil Rights Council regulations, effective since October 2025, make it unlawful to use automated decision systems that discriminate based on protected traits, and require four-year record retention. Illinois requires employers to notify candidates when AI is used in employment decisions. Colorado's AI Act, which takes effect in June 2026, introduces impact assessment requirements for high-risk AI systems used in hiring.

The EEOC has also made clear that employers remain liable under Title VII when AI tools produce discriminatory outcomes, regardless of whether the tool was developed internally or purchased from a vendor.

What this means in practice: if your AI meeting tool scores candidates, generates sentiment analysis, ranks interviewees, or otherwise contributes to employment decisions, it likely qualifies as an automated employment decision tool under one or more of these laws. Tools like BrightHire and Pillar, which explicitly score candidates against rubrics, are most directly in scope. But even general-purpose tools that generate summaries describing candidates in evaluative language could be scrutinized.

Data Retention and Candidate Rights

Under GDPR, candidates have the right to request deletion of their personal data, and organizations need clear legal basis for retaining interview recordings. Several U.S. states are moving toward similar requirements. Before selecting a tool, confirm whether it supports configurable retention policies (automatic deletion after a set period) and whether it can process individual deletion requests.

Bias in AI Transcription and Summarization

AI transcription accuracy varies based on factors like accent, speaking pace, and audio quality. If transcription errors systematically affect candidates from certain linguistic or cultural backgrounds, this could introduce bias into your evaluation process. Recruiting teams should treat AI-generated notes as a starting point, not a definitive record, and always pair AI outputs with human judgment.

Comparison at a Glance

BrightHire | Purpose-built recruiting | Native ATS: Greenhouse, Workday, Lever | Bot-Free: No | Starting Price: Custom (contact sales) | Scorecard Support: Yes — one-click submission

Metaview | Purpose-built recruiting | Native ATS: Greenhouse (autofill), others via integration | Bot-Free: No | Starting Price: Free / $50/user/mo | Scorecard Support: Yes — autofill via Chrome

Pillar | Purpose-built recruiting | Native ATS: Lever, Jobvite (native via Employ) | Bot-Free: No | Starting Price: Custom (contact sales) | Scorecard Support: Yes — automated feedback

Fellow | General-purpose (Org-Wide Usage, IT's Favorite)| Native ATS: No (Zapier only) | Bot-Free: Yes (option to record with and without a bot) | Starting Price: Free / $7/user/mo | Scorecard Support: No

Fireflies | General-purpose | Native ATS: Greenhouse, Lever | Bot-Free: No | Starting Price: Free / $10/user/mo | Scorecard Support: No

Otter | General-purpose | Native ATS: Greenhouse via Zapier | Bot-Free: Yes (desktop/Chrome) | Starting Price: Free / ~$8.33/user/mo | Scorecard Support: No

Fathom | General-purpose | Native ATS: No (Zapier only) | Bot-Free: No | Starting Price: Free / $19/user/mo | Scorecard Support: No

Jamie | General-purpose (bot-free) | Native ATS: No | Bot-Free: Yes | Starting Price: Free / ~$24/mo | Scorecard Support: No

tl;dv | General-purpose | Native ATS: No (Zapier only) | Bot-Free: No | Starting Price: Free / $18/user/mo | Scorecard Support: No

How to Choose

The right tool depends on where your pain is. If your hiring process is bottlenecked by slow interviewer feedback and inconsistent evaluation, a purpose-built platform (BrightHire, Metaview, or Pillar) will have the most immediate impact. If your current frustration is candidates reacting negatively to recording bots or you're dealing with sensitive executive searches, a bot-free option (Jamie, Fellow's botless mode, or Otter's desktop recording) may be the priority.

For teams with tight budgets, general-purpose tools with generous free tiers (Fathom, tl;dv) can cover basic recording and transcription needs, but expect to do manual work moving notes into your ATS. Teams that are already deep in the Greenhouse or Lever ecosystem should strongly consider tools with native integration — the time saved on scorecard automation alone can justify the premium.

Whatever you choose, build a consent workflow before you deploy. Decide how and when candidates will be informed, standardize the disclosure language, and document your data retention policy. The tool itself is just infrastructure — the process around it is what protects both your candidates and your organization.

Frequently Asked Questions

Do I need candidate consent to record an interview with AI?

In most jurisdictions, yes. Even in one-party consent states, best practice for recruiting is explicit disclosure before recording begins. Under GDPR, you need clear legal basis for processing candidate data. Several U.S. states (Illinois, California) require specific notice when AI is used in employment decisions. Always inform candidates in advance and document their acknowledgment.

Can AI meeting tools introduce bias into my hiring process?

Yes. Bias can enter at multiple levels: transcription accuracy may vary by accent or speaking style, AI summaries may emphasize certain traits over others, and tools that score or rank candidates are directly contributing to employment decisions. Purpose-built recruiting tools like BrightHire and Pillar have explicit bias-mitigation features, but no AI tool eliminates bias entirely. Human review of AI-generated interview notes should be standard practice.

What's the difference between purpose-built recruiting tools and general meeting assistants?

Purpose-built tools (BrightHire, Metaview, Pillar) offer native ATS integration, structured interview guides, scorecard automation, and AI summaries formatted for candidate evaluation. General-purpose tools (Fellow, Fireflies, Otter, Fathom, Jamie, tl;dv) handle recording and transcription well but require manual effort or Zapier workarounds to connect to recruiting workflows. Purpose-built tools cost more but reduce friction in the hiring process.

Is a bot-free recording tool better for candidate experience?

It depends on your transparency approach. Bot-free tools (Jamie, Fellow's botless mode) avoid the distraction of a visible recording participant, which some candidates find unsettling. However, the absence of a visible bot doesn't eliminate the obligation to inform candidates that recording is happening. Some teams argue that a visible bot actually makes disclosure more transparent. The right choice depends on your candidate population and the formality of your process.

How long should I retain interview recordings?

There's no universal answer. GDPR generally requires that personal data be retained only as long as necessary for its stated purpose. California's new AI regulations require four-year retention of automated decision-making data. Some companies set a 6–12 month retention window for unsuccessful candidates. Work with legal counsel to establish a retention policy that balances compliance obligations with practical needs, and choose a tool that supports automated retention management.

Can I use these tools for in-person interviews?

Most tools on this list are designed for virtual meetings (Zoom, Google Meet, Teams). Jamie and Fellow support in-person recording via device audio capture. If your hiring process includes in-person interviews, confirm that your chosen tool supports this use case before committing.