Letting AI in
Recruitment, absence administration, appraisal notes and policy text: most HR work is text. Exactly where AI wins time in a team that is usually too small.
AI use inside HR
AI reaches HR through vacancies and case files. Do you know which tools?
See which AI tools are actually in use across HR and decide what may be done with employee data. Help your team when a file goes into a prompt, and show those agreements are followed, without tracking your own colleagues.
14 days free, no credit card. Rolled out across your organisation within the hour.
"Awareness fades when you're busy. That's why we use BeeSensible." Debby Elfrink, Operations director, Speck Pompen
Your HR team 
Microsoft 365 Copilot Allowed 
ChatGPT Limited use 
Claude
Microsoft 365 Copilot Allowed ChatGPT Limited use Claude Deel AI
Humanly No decision yet
Fetcher
SeekOut
Sapia.ai
Eightfold AI Not allowed
Candidate name Performance review Sickness absence CV Salary details
Your HR team Microsoft 365 Copilot Allowed Eightfold AI Not allowed Fetcher Sapia.ai
Candidate name
Performance review
Sickness absence
CV
Salary details
Plus everything else that is running
Microsoft 365 Copilot Allowed Eightfold AI Not allowed Fetcher Sapia.ai No prompts stored. No per-employee view. Everything processed inside the EU.
What this is about
You guard your colleagues' privacy. With tools you chose yourself.
A recruiter has a job advert rewritten. An HR adviser asks a chatbot to summarise an absence file before a meeting. Somebody tests a tool that ranks CVs, because the pile got too big.
That makes HR doubly exposed. You process the most sensitive data your colleagues have, and you are also the department expected to know how to handle it. Which sharpens the question: which AI, with what employee data, and can you explain it to the works council?
Protecting employee data
Salaries, national identifiers, home addresses and sometimes health information. In absence and return-to-work files there is data under a heavier regime.
Staying explainable yourself
A tool that ranks candidates or scores behaviour touches automated decision-making. You want to know what you are bringing in beforehand, not after.
Policy and practice
You write the AI policy for the organisation. Your department included.
HR often helps write the AI policy, and is at the same time a department where AI lands hard. What is missing is sight of the tools that quietly arrive, and someone beside the adviser when a file goes into a prompt.
BeeSensible makes that connection, in four steps that keep coming back around.
01 See 02 Decide 03 Help 04 Substantiate
01See
Know what your organisation has picked up along the way.
Not only the applications IT holds a licence for. BeeSensible sees when AI tools are opened and shows, at organisation level, which ones appear, without reading prompts and without building a file on anyone. Not on your own team either.
- Which tools are in use, and by how many people?
- Which recruitment or assessment tools turn up without a request?
- What share of the usage runs through what you approved?
AI adoption
68%
81 of 120 seats AI-active this month
Prompts sent
1,596
22% vs previous 30 days
AI tools in use
7
2 newly discovered this period
Safe adoption
71%
of AI use via allowed tools
How often AI is used
Daily3428%Weekly3025%Occasionally1714%Not active3933%
Computed on-device and reported as anonymous counts, never per person.
What AI is used for
Analysis & knowledge354
Summarizing353
Writing communication258
Detections over timeLast 30 days
12,438+18% vs the previous period
Detections by platform
78% adjusted
8,124
81% adjusted
3,210
74% adjusted
812
Most encountered data types
4,212
2,930
1,486
1,104
612
SensitiveHighly sensitive
An impression of the AI tools catalogue. The tools and their risk scores come from the product's own catalogue; the verdict in the last column is your organisation's to set.
The catalog
865 AI tools assessed for risk, and more arrive every week
You should not have to research a tool before you can decide about it.
Before you can decide anything about a tool, you need to know what it does with your data: where the vendor sits, whether it trains on what you type, whether incidents are known. We worked that out for 865 tools, and more arrive every week. What is left is the question only you can answer: is this allowed here, and under what condition?
The GDPR asks for a record of processing, NIS2 for a view of your suppliers, and the EU AI Act for demonstrable AI literacy. Because every observed tool is recorded with its vendor, hosting region and training policy, and carries a decision from your organisation, you can answer at any moment.
See the catalog-
Which tools are in use, and for what
Every observed tool is in the register, with vendor, country, hosting region, training policy and the kind of work it is used for.
-
Which of them fit your policy
One decision per tool: allowed, limited use, not allowed, or no decision yet. Nothing is silently approved; the decision is always yours.
-
What you do to uphold that policy
Anyone opening a tool you have decided something about sees it at that moment, right in the page. That the notice appeared is counted, without content and without a name, so you can show the mechanism actually reached people.
The overview does not establish that you comply with the law. It shows which measures you can substantiate with measurements, and which you cannot. The judgement stays with you.
02Decide
A writing assistant is not a selection model.
Having a job advert rewritten is not the same as having candidates ranked. Per tool you see the vendor, the country, the data processing agreement, certifications, documented incidents, a risk score across six dimensions and a separate reading under the EU AI Act.
That reading weighs heavily here: applications for recruitment, selection and employee assessment can fall more heavily under the regulation. We supply the facts, you record the decision.
- Allowed
- Fits our boundaries, including with employee data.
- Limited use
- Fine for text and drafts. No personal data about staff.
- No decision yet
- Newly surfaced, not yet assessed.
- Not allowed
- With an approved alternative alongside it, where one exists.
03Help More about document anonymisation
Your adviser should not have to know the policy by heart.
When someone opens a tool you have decided about, they see that decision with the reason behind it, and the alternative that does fit. When they type into a supported application, names, national identifiers, salaries, addresses and staff numbers get marked as they write.
Masking or removing takes one click. BeeSensible does not block and changes nothing by itself.
BeeSensible notice
Not allowed Eightfold AI is not allowed here
Your organisation does not allow this tool for work. Use an allowed alternative.
Use instead
Open Microsoft 365 CopilotAlso allowed: Deel AI ·Claude
Hold to continue anyway
BeeSensible notice
Limited use Eightfold AI is allowed here, with limits
Your organisation allows this tool with limits. Only use it with anonymised data.
Use instead
Open Microsoft 365 CopilotAlso allowed: Deel AI ·Claude
Hold to continue anyway
BeeSensible notice
No decision yet No decision yet on Eightfold AI
Your organisation has not made a decision on this tool yet. Do not share personal data or confidential business information here.
Use instead
Open Microsoft 365 CopilotAlso allowed: Deel AI ·Claude
Continue anyway
Only enter public information here
GeminiDefault1 / 3Draw box
Absence file - confidential
Employee Ilse Draaisma, staff number PN-40917, national ID 139274618, living at Rozenstraat 8 in Deventer.
Gross monthly salary 4,180 euro. Partially fit for work since 3 June following occupational health advice.
8 items will be removedPreviewAnonymise (8)
04Substantiate
Explainable to the works council, without following anyone.
How often was a marking acted on? How often did someone take the approved alternative? What share of AI usage now runs through tools you said yes to? And which kinds of sensitive data still keep turning up?
Exactly the figures for a conversation with employee representatives, precisely because no per-employee view exists. You show the policy works, not who ignored it.
Warnings about tools
Shown the moment someone opens a tool you have not decided on, or have limited or disallowed. About the tool itself, not about what gets typed into it.
148
warnings shown
61%
chose an alternative
Not allowed52 times
38 alternative9 held through
Limited use44 times
21 alternative15 held through
No decision yet52 times
31 alternative14 clicked through
alternative openedcontinued anyway
Browser use only. Counted at most once per tool per day. Group figures only, never who.
Sent despite warning
1,120
Detected, not adjusted, and still sent.
Critical sent despite warning
214
14% of critical detections
OutcomesLast 30 days
9,702
adjusted before sending
78% of 12,438 detections
Masked7,428(60%)
Removed2,274(18%)
Sent despite warning1,120(9%)
No action recorded1,616(13%)
Accountability GDPRNIS2
- Substantiated
Data minimisation at input
Sensitive data marked and handled before sending
- Substantiated
Register of AI services
Vendor, classification, and a decision per tool
- Partial
Appropriate technical measures
Detection active on the supported applications, handling still below the norm
- Not substantiated
Personal data breach notification
BeeSensible provides the signal, not a reporting process to the regulator
A Monday in the department
Risk rarely looks like risk.
09:10
Recruitment
A recruiter pastes three CVs into a chatbot to compare them. Names, addresses and dates of birth travel along.
11:45
Absence
A file is summarised with AI ahead of a meeting with a line manager. It contains health information.
14:30
Reward
A settlement agreement gets smoothed out by AI, including name, salary and the reason for leaving.
16:20
HR systems
Someone tests a tool that ranks candidates. Nobody has looked at what that means under the EU AI Act.
Nobody here is hiding anything. They are working through a pile that is too big. That is why help while the work happens beats one more instruction.
The rules you already sit inside
Fits obligations that already apply.
GDPR
Employee data, and sometimes more
Salaries, national identifiers and addresses are personal data; in absence and return-to-work files health information comes with it, under a heavier regime. And you process it inside an employment relationship, which makes consent a difficult basis.
BeeSensible marks that data before it is shared and gives aggregate insight into what happened afterwards.
EU AI Act
Recruitment and assessment weigh more
Applications for recruitment, selection and employee assessment can fall more heavily under the regulation than a writing assistant. The catalogue holds an EU AI Act reading per tool, separate from our own risk score.
A current register of the AI services in use is the start of that. Classifying your own applications stays your work.
Employee representation
What you can show the works council
Introducing tools that touch employee behaviour often needs the works council's agreement. That conversation goes better when there is nothing to see per person.
There is no per-employee view and who did something is not recorded. We supply the material for that conversation.
The question that always comes
Sight of AI use, without following your colleagues.
“So HR is going to introduce a system that lets us track our own people?”
No.
No, and for HR that is the most important question of all. A system showing behaviour per employee is exactly what works councils are rightly critical of. That is why the product is built so that view does not exist.
The full story in the Trust Center- Detection runs on our own servers at European providers, in working memory, and the text is discarded straight after.
- No external AI service is involved: nothing goes to ChatGPT, Google, or any other party.
- Prompts do not reach the dashboard. Not shortened, not as an example.
- The usage data holds no user id. What an individual colleague did cannot be reconstructed afterwards.
- Reporting is counts and patterns, never a per-employee view.
How it is put together
One process, four parts.
The first three can be bought on their own, so you can start with one.
Before you look further
The questions people ask first.
Does BeeSensible read along with what our colleagues type?
No. The text is checked to mark sensitive data, and then not kept. It goes to our own servers at European providers, is checked in working memory and discarded straight after. No external AI service is involved.
Can administrators see which colleague got a marking?
No. For markings, documents and notices, who it was is not recorded, so it cannot be looked up afterwards either. The dashboard has no per-employee view of any kind. At most the department is stored, and only if you switch those insights on, with a minimum group size.
Does BeeSensible block AI tools?
Never. It also never changes what someone wrote by itself. Your colleague sees what was found and what your organisation decided about that tool, and chooses. If something was sent anyway despite a marking, that gets counted, without content and without a name.
Will the works council need to have a view on this?
That is for your own organisation to judge, and it depends on how you deploy it. What we can say: there is no per-employee view, who did something is not recorded, and reporting is counts and patterns. We supply the material for that conversation.
Does BeeSensible assess our recruitment or assessment tools?
It gives you the facts per tool and an EU AI Act reading, so you can take a well-founded decision. It does not test whether a selection model is fair or accurate; that judgement belongs with the vendor and with you.
Where does BeeSensible run?
On our own servers at European providers: the application and the database at Scaleway in Amsterdam, the models at Hetzner in Germany. European companies rather than a European region of an American cloud, so there is no US parent that can be ordered to hand data over. The text is checked there in working memory and discarded straight after. What reaches the dashboard are counts and attributes, never content.
How much work is the rollout?
Not much. No proxy, no change to your network. The extension runs in Chrome and Edge and deploys centrally through Intune; the desktop app installs silently in the background. With a managed rollout your organisation is up inside an hour.
Does detection recognise employee data?
Yes. The engine works in Dutch and English and recognises names, national identifiers, salaries, staff numbers, addresses and dates of birth among others, plus health data such as diagnoses and medications. Which of those get marked, and how heavily, you set per profile.
Start by seeing
Give AI room. Keep your colleagues' data with you.
Within two weeks you can see which AI tools are in use across your organisation, and build from there: decide, help, substantiate.
14 days free, no credit card. Rolled out across your organisation within the hour.
