Should we bring back in-person interviews to stop candidate fraud?
On this page
- Why are employers bringing back in-person interviews?
- What does an in-person interview actually prevent?
- What does an in-person step cost?
- Which roles justify an in-person step?
- What are the alternatives when in-person isn't practical?
- How will you know whether it worked?
- How do you make an in-person round fair?
- What should the in-person round include?
- Questions people ask
For most employers the answer is one in-person step, not a return to all-in-person hiring. A face-to-face meeting defeats the frauds that depend on a screen, deepfake video, proxy interviewers and hidden AI assistants, and candidates are open to it: in Gartner's 2025 survey, 62% said they are more likely to apply where in-person interviews are required. But it costs time and travel, narrows the pool for remote roles, and verifies neither identity documents nor work history on its own. Put the in-person or verified step where fraud would do the most damage, typically finalists for remote roles with system, data or money access, and pair it with an ID check.
This page weighs that decision as of October 2026. The checks themselves are in the candidate identity verification checklist, and the signs of fraud in how to spot candidate identity fraud.
Why are employers bringing back in-person interviews?
- Large employers have said so publicly. Asked on the Lex Fridman Podcast in June 2025 how Google's coding interviews were changing with AI, Sundar Pichai said "we'll introduce at least one round of in-person interviews for people just to make sure the fundamentals are there."
- Hiring managers are doing it. In Greenhouse's November 2025 survey, 39% of US hiring managers said they were conducting more in-person interviews to verify authenticity. In Checkr's 2025 survey, 36% of managers said they would invest in more in-person verification, ahead of AI fraud detection software (31%). Both are vendor surveys.
- Government advisories recommend it. The FBI's January 2025 warning on North Korean IT workers advises employers to complete as much of hiring and onboarding in person as possible, and a July 2026 multinational alert lists requirement of in-person interviews among identity verification measures.
- Analysts recommend it. Gartner's July 2025 advice lists conducting in-person interviews among the anti-cheating safeguards assessments should include.
- Remote hiring is shrinking anyway. HireRight's 2026 benchmark found organizations reporting declining plans to hire fully remote employees and rising expectations of office-based or hybrid work (June 2026).
Note the mix of motives. Pichai framed Google's change around checking fundamentals, which is about AI help as much as identity. The FBI's concern is identity and location. Be clear about which problem you are solving, because they need different designs.
What does an in-person interview actually prevent?
| Threat | Does in-person stop it? | What else you need |
|---|---|---|
| Deepfake video or voice | Yes | Nothing, for that round |
| Hidden AI assistant or reading from a script | Largely; there is no screen to hide an overlay on | Questions that rely on the candidate's own experience |
| Proxy interviewer | Only if the person you meet is the person who starts | An identity check at onboarding, and comparison with earlier video rounds; the FBI suggests capturing images to compare at later meetings |
| Stolen or borrowed identity | Not by itself; a stranger with a confident manner is still a stranger | Photo ID checked in person, then the usual employment eligibility process |
| Fabricated work history | No | Employment, education and reference verification |
| Location fraud | Partly; the person was in that city that day | Equipment shipped only to the ID address; payroll in the employee's name |
An in-person round is the strongest single control against screen-based deception, and a weak one against paper fraud. That is why it works best combined with document and history checks rather than instead of them.
What does an in-person step cost?
- Candidate time and money. Travel, time off work and sometimes childcare. Paying travel and keeping it to one visit removes most of the objection.
- A narrower pool for remote roles. If the role is open nationwide or internationally, a required visit deters some strong candidates, unless you pay for it or offer a verified alternative.
- Slower hiring. Scheduling a visit adds days. Strong candidates with other offers may not wait.
- Interviewer time. Panels in a room take longer to arrange than a video call.
- Accessibility. Some candidates need adjustments to travel or attend; others cannot. Offer accommodations through your normal process (ADA accommodations in interviews).
Against that, a fraudulent remote hire can mean system access, stolen data and, if the worker is North Korean, sanctions exposure. In one case the Justice Department said victim companies incurred at least $3 million in damages, including legal fees and network remediation (April 2026).
Which roles justify an in-person step?
| Role profile | Recommendation |
|---|---|
| Fully remote, with access to systems, customer data, source code or money | In-person or verified step for finalists, before offer |
| Contract IT or engineering roles filled through a staffing firm | Same, and ask the firm how it verified identity |
| Hybrid or office roles near your sites | Make the final round in person; it costs little |
| High-volume hourly roles | Identity is usually confirmed in person at onboarding anyway; keep screens remote |
| Roles where you want to see how candidates use AI | In-person is not needed for that; allow AI openly and assess it |
| Remote roles with low access and short contracts | A live video identity check is usually proportionate |
What are the alternatives when in-person isn't practical?
- A live identity check on video. Photo ID held up to the camera during a live call, as the FBI and South Korean guidance of October 2023 describes, with background effects off.
- Third-party identity verification. Some applicant tracking systems now include it; Greenhouse, for example, lets candidates verify through CLEAR with a selfie matched to a government ID.
- Notarized proof of identity, which the October 2023 guidance also lists.
- A local in-person check without travel. The FBI's July 2025 guidance suggests requiring in-person drug testing or fingerprinting, where possible, to confirm identity and location.
- Remote document examination for Form I-9. E-Verify employers in good standing may use the DHS-authorized alternative procedure, which includes a live video interaction; others can use an authorized representative near the employee. See I-9 remote verification.
Each of these confirms an identity document. None of them confirms that the person in your final interview is the person who will do the job, so keep continuity: the same recruiter or interviewer across rounds, or notes and transcripts that later interviewers actually read.
How will you know whether it worked?
Treat the in-person step as an experiment for a quarter and watch a few numbers before and after:
- Withdrawals at the announcement. How many candidates drop out when told about the visit, and at what stage. A spike among strong candidates suggests you need a verified remote alternative.
- Fraud found, by stage. Count identity problems caught before offer, at onboarding and after start. If most were already caught at a video identity check, the visit may be adding cost rather than protection.
- Time to hire and offer acceptance for the affected roles compared with similar roles without the step.
- Cost per hire, including travel you reimbursed.
- Interviewer confidence. A short question in the debrief, "Did the in-person round change your view of the candidate?", tells you whether it is producing new evidence or repeating the video rounds.
Review the results with recruiting and security together, and keep the step only where it earns its cost.
How do you make an in-person round fair?
- Announce it at the start. State in the job posting or first invitation which stage is in person, so nobody is surprised late in the process.
- Apply it to every finalist for the role, never to selected candidates because of a name, accent or background.
- Pay for travel and offer a choice of dates.
- Offer accommodations and an alternative verified route for anyone who cannot attend.
- Keep the same structured questions and scorecard as the remote rounds, so the room does not become a test of charm.
What should the in-person round include?
Make the visit count for more than a handshake:
- A structured interview built on the candidate's own experience, with follow-ups; see interview questions that expose AI-assisted answers.
- A short work sample done in the room, talking it through.
- An identity check by HR, with the candidate's photo ID, and a quiet comparison with the person from the video rounds.
- Any onboarding paperwork that benefits from a physical meeting, if an offer follows soon after.
Text you can adapt for the invitation:
Our final stage for this role is a half-day visit to our [city] office.
We cover travel and will work around your schedule. Please bring a
government-issued photo ID; we use it to confirm identity, a step we
take with every finalist. If you need an adjustment or can't travel,
tell us and we'll arrange an alternative.For a fully remote team that cannot meet in person at all, the remote loop in the interview guide for remote roles builds identity checks into each stage instead.
Questions people ask
Should companies go back to in-person interviews because of AI cheating?
Usually one in-person or otherwise verified step is enough, placed where fraud would do the most damage: finalists for remote roles with access to systems, data or money. A face-to-face round defeats deepfakes, proxy interviewers and hidden AI assistants, but it does not check identity documents or work history, so pair it with an ID check and verification rather than moving every round back to the office.
Do candidates mind in-person interviews?
Many prefer them. In a Gartner survey of job candidates in the second quarter of 2025, 62% said they are more likely to apply to a position if the organization requires in-person interviews. Paying travel costs, offering accommodations and keeping it to a single visit make the requirement easier to meet.
What can replace an in-person interview for a fully remote role?
A live video identity check with photo ID held to the camera, a third-party identity verification that matches a selfie to a government ID, notarized proof of identity, or an in-person drug test or fingerprinting at a local site, which the FBI suggests where possible to confirm identity and location. Combine one of these with continuity across interview rounds.
Can an employer require an in-person interview for a remote job?
Many employers do, provided the requirement applies to every candidate at that stage, disability accommodations are offered, and it is never applied selectively based on national origin or another protected trait. Rules differ by location, so check with HR or counsel. This is not legal advice.