http://www.ere.net/2009/08/14/why-recruiting-has-to-go-video/print/
http://www.ere.net/2009/06/29/interview-from-anywhere-live-video-interviews-are-now-a-best-practice-part-i-of-ii/print/

Video resumes are only one facet of emerging video technology. I recently facilitated a roundtable discussion at a recruiting conference on live, virtual interviews; it’s saving a lot of money – but the consensus is that it won’t replace face-to-face interviews any time soon.

As an ATS vendor, one problem with video resumes (which our system accepts) is they are not searchable by keyword or boolean string. And they can be every bit as deceptive as a piece of paper, soft copy or Linked In profile.

I think Jim is on the right track, that the video will eventually replace the cover letter as an introduction.
Meanwhile, the lawyers are going to make money until the employment laws catch up with the technology.

I just read your article in regards of Video Resumes which is by now almost 2 years old. Currently we are seeing quite some interest in the use of Video Resumes and our web site http://www.Mayomann.com gets quite some attention. I was wondering what your thoughts are now on that subject. Recession, Unemployment rate rising, etc. People need to get creative to apply for jobs and now they have certainly gained enough knowledge with Video editing.

Please feel free to contact me anytime.

Sincerely

Teresa Lindsay

The time argument is a better one, but again this is yet another indicator of the candidate’s abilities, is it not? We’ve all seen the six-page resume filled with nonsense and grammatical/mechanical errors. In the same vein, a VR that runs for 10 minutes and doesn’t really say anything is a very telling resume indeed.

Video resumes may be valuable for students submitting a highlight video/resume to get into a athletic program or a model for a designer…but it won’t work for general employment.

Regards,

Moshin Manji
Partner
HRinmotion.com, Candidate Preparation Software
“prepare your candidates, build your brand”

Great article. We always are interested in views and feedback from all parties.

We launched a Video Resume business in Australia this year called Candidates Alive – and our comments are below, including the issues of privacy, confidentiality and anti-discrimination.

http://www.candidatesalive.com.au

Some real feedback we have received so far:

Candidates Alive have had an excellent response from jobseekers, recruiters and especially employers who have used video resumes. Jobseekers relish the opportunity to stand out from other candidates and be seen and heard first by employers.

Recruiters finally have a way to win new clients by offering them an innovative solution to the recruitment process which ultimately saves employers tremendous amounts of time.

Candidates Alive launched in October 2007 holding seminars in Sydney, Melbourne, Brisbane, Perth and Auckland and the response from all parties including the media has been fantastic.

We provide recruitment agencies with the opportunity to create high quality candidate video resumes from their offices and then showcase these candidates to employers.

We spent 12 months researching the market and trialing our system to ensure the needs of recruiters, jobseekers and employers were met. Currently we have a number of recruitment agencies using the system and creating video resumes for their clients.

We are not a job board and privacy and confidentiality are of the utmost importance to us and our clients. The recruiter controls and manages each video resume and can discontinue a video resume link at any time. Candidates have the option of going on video if they choose and many of them see this as a great opportunity to stand out from other jobseekers.

Recruiters have found it frustrating at times to get their candidates in front of hiring managers. There are many candidates who have outstanding communication skills and vibrant personalities. To convey this to an employer in black and white or over the phone is can be difficult.

Through our user-friendly system, an employer can instantly view a candidate video simply by clicking on a URL link that has been sent via email by a recruitment consultant. In such a tight labour market, responsiveness wins in this game and it is critical to get good candidates in front of hiring managers fast.

With regards to discrimination, video resumes are just like any other step in the recruitment process. Whether it be an initial telephone conversation with the candidate or a face-to-face interview, all employers must abide by the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Act.

Ultimately, if an employer uses video resumes in the right way, while abiding by anti-discrimination laws, they are at no risk and will enjoy the benefits of a faster recruitment process.

We believe that with the technology now available, video resumes are the logical next phase in global recruitment. The feedback we have received from jobseekers, employers and recruiters suggests that video resumes are here to stay. Like any new concept, it takes time to evolve and some will jump on board quicker than others ? and that?s ok.

Simply, if you think it is a great tool- then why not post a video link on your website- or personal page and see how effective you are- and maybe you can start this with the ERE site?

I am sure all the companies that are espousing this latest and greatest trend- would certainly offer this as a free service to you! How about it recruiters?

I can see it now- when recruiting the skilled talent we are searching we can send them our video bios and if they are interested in speaking with us about a contract or new FTE slot- they’ll have an up-front view of who we are and our backgrounds! The old saying of ‘what is good for the goose…..

The way you have described it, its like an intermediate point between having read and liked a paper resume and scheduling a phone screen.

If people are sending out links to their video resumes, I dont think it will be ignored.

As for recruiters being ADD or hyper or twitchy, have you ever listened to Danny Cahill?

Just curious.

I don’t think anyone in my office is particularly patient (or overly impatient) – its all about how fast you can OODA loop…

Great comments! I doubt you would last a week without meds…maybe 2 hours!

Actual video resumes are going to be the hot, chic way to present oneself until viewers become bored, or comatose, which will be nearly instantaneous, for most of us.

A video introduction, however, lasts about 10-15 seconds, and acts as a teaser to attract attention to the candidate. That format has legs, and will likely become part of a candidate’s emailed resume package whenever possible.

Just my thoughts…

That is where many recruiters and HR people are missing the point!

As I thought I pointed out, the video resume is a ‘tool’ not to replace the written resume. Again, as I said, I too would scan the resume, and then if I liked their resume and the applicant had a link to a video attached, I ‘definitely’ would watch it.

To answer your concern; and I am with you… who wants to listen to ‘even 1 minute of video before it could determine – ah, you install cell towers’.

OK… Here is the real waste of time:

I don’t know about you but I want to know as much as possible about an applicant ‘BEFORE’ they walk in to my office sit down and tell me they install cell towers. Should I just be rude and tell them to get out; or, site there wasting time knowing I am not going to hire them?

Again, a video resume is a tool; don’t use it, no sweat off my back. But if I were a betting man the HR person or recruiter that does not start looking in to this technology is going to get left behind.

As for recruiters that are ADD or hyper or twitchy or just plain impatient… they are in the wrong business.

Seriously – a lot of recruiters are ADD or hyper or twitchy or just plain impatient.

A video format makes consume the resume at a fixed pace and in the order presented by the candidate. That is obnoxious and presumptive.

For me, I work specifically in the niche of RF Semiconductors – one slightly annoying problem is that there are essentially two kinds of ‘RF Engineers’. There are the ones that design hardware and the ones that go install cellular base stations. They are frequently both BSEE/MSEE and use the same list of buzzwords (making filtering a problem). If I had to sit through even 1 minute of video before I could determine – ah, you install cell towers, I cant help you, I would gouge out my eyes with a flip phone.

Paper resumes let you scan and quickly find the information you need to make a decision about your interest – video resumes remove this ability and waste time – for what benefit?

I get so tired of hearing about discrimination; of course there is discrimination. Isn?t that the job of a hiring manager or recruiter? OK!!! So you say you do not discriminate against race, sex, religion, (someone just down right ugly) or any of the other typically known reasons for discrimination; but, I guarantee ?you do discriminate?.

My point here is if you people (the nay Sayers of video resumes) are so hung up on discrimination, then every single person who applies to a job has grounds to file a law suit. So I guess you better hire everyone!

What?s to say you didn?t just discriminate against a candidate that could have excelled past the individual of your choice? Your candidate looked (on paper and through the interview process) like the ideal candidate, but six months down the road they move to a different company and the person you didn?t hire has been secured by another company who goes on to retire there as VP of operations. Our industry is a crap shoot!

A video resume ?to me? is a ?tool?, not to discriminate, but to discover if the applicant has motivation and desire to really warrant being interviewed. There is absolutely nothing that will replace the written resume; fact is in my opinion, if an applicant does not have a written resume? I will discriminate! I will read the resume FIRST then if it looks good I would go on to the video (if they had one). I feel the hiring process would be streamlined for the recruiter or hiring manager, with less time wasted on setting up interviews that turn out to be dead ends.

I see the video resume in addition to one written as a way for me to weed out who has the desire, motivation and yes the ?qualifications? to get the job.

I think we should file a law suit on the individual (probably a professor, and I might get sued for saying that) who discriminately developed the word discrimination.

This is not to make light of the potential hazards out there, the number of law suits filed each day against recruitment agencies highlight the need for diligence and social responsibility. A smart recruitment firm will have in place a transparent system with extra steps and protocols, to ensure that they protect themselves from the risks associated with this industry. Recruiters should learn to embrace technology; video resumes can be highly effective and may just revolutionize the job-search process as we know it. At http://www.stafftube.com the firm I work for, we certainly believe video resumes are the way of the future, and actively and spiritedly promote this new tool. The point is discrimination can be both good and bad; it is how it is applied that is important.

You seem to focus on that, but unfortunately it detracts from what the purpose is..

Do I think that Walmart is guilty, No, they have not been found to be guilty in a court of law.. Do I think it is a Fiasco.. Absolutely, due to the fact that there is a potential for 1.5 Million Plaintiffs..

Anyways, please review the Meat and Potatoes of my post, to determine what I was discussing.. It isn’t about the Lawsuits, whether one is guilty or not, it is aobut the Expense in Defending or Settling them..

Hope that clarifys..

Karen

P.S – The Court of Appeals has already confirmed the Class action. (it was already appealed) based upon over 1 Million Pages of significant evidence..

I hope this helps.

First , the courts have not decided, as you stated, that there is solid evidence against WalMart. They have agreed to allow it to become a Class Action. They have not heard evidence as the case is , court wise, still in the demurrer stage.

Secondly, the decision will most likely be appealed, based on the fact that this court has previously turned down a class action that was argued on the same merits as the arguments presented in this case, as has the Supreme Court.

Third,the cases that you referred to in your kind reply to me by e-mail, refer to cases such as:
‘Depressed Employee Who Calls Boss A Bitch and Threatens To Kill Her Is Protected From Termination By ADA’

‘ADA Covers Hostile, Tardy, Sleepy and Distracted Workers’

Employers Can Be Sued for Positive and Negative References’

Next, in looking at the past lawsuits that you reference, Home Depot leaps out. You reference the settlement of $104 million for a discrimination suit. That’s true. Never got to court.None of the large cases that one normally hears about went to court. That figure includes the cost of diversity training, as well as the attorney fees.The ‘winners’ received less than the cost of a good used car. The attorneys received the cost of a bunch of new luxury cars.I mean a BUNCH of them.I digress, but the point of this is: Home Depot has been sued each year, at least once, for discrimination, for the past 10 years.Stock price?Up. Sales figures?Up. Profit? Up.Attorney BMW purchases? Up.

Back to WalMart. Before this, the same argument was made against Sears,1986, and the case wound up being lost by the plaintiffs. Again, follow the money. Sears was the biggest at the time.

Now, I can and will send you chapter and verse to rebut whatever it was you said, but my point is this:
There is nothing in your diatribe that is relevant, pro or con, to using video resumes. Your references do not point , pro or con, to the use of video or other media.

Video would not tell whether a person is likely to call the boss a name, go to sleep, be tardy, be distracted, or become disgruntled over a stalled career. You will have a difficult time convincing , or getting people to admit, that they would not hire based on the fact that someone is not photogenic. The only point of law that applies, I think, is that if you do it for one, you do it for all. Picture of one applicant, picture of all applicants.

There are no cases that I can locate that are based on a picture of the applicant.Would a picture prevent an in-person interview of a qualified applicant? Doubtful.

During an interview, would the interviewer not notice that the applicant is male/female,Hispanic, African American,Vesuvian,Rastafarian,whatever? Would they notice that the applicant will one day call them a name, threaten to kill them, fall asleep in the display racks, show up late on a consistent basis, become disgruntled over their career track and sue?

In closing, let me ask you a few questions.
1. Where do the plaintiffs in the WalMart case work now?
2.Have you seen a picture of the plaintiffs?
3.How would a picture or video have made one whit difference in hiring these people,one way or another?

Lawsuits that I can reference that include recruiters are the Mohawk case, which is a RICO case, and two others that were dismissed due to frivolity.None regard using pictures and/or discrimination based on race,creed, religion,gender.

That’s my point.
Let me know if you require references to the ‘fiascos’ that you initially referenced.I’ve got them.

‘As long as verdicts approach the stratosphere, there will be plaintiff counsel willing to bathe in the blood of employment litigation’

As I pointed out, I made a typo regarding by not putting in the OVER – which makes those numbers actually worse.. and No, I used the words May, regarding Walmart, and do I think them Guilty.. nope, they haven’t been tried, but I guess the Courts think there was enough solid evidence for it to be continued on as a Class Action..

Now I didn’t read your whole post.. may I ask you to try putting spaces between what you write, it is hard on the eyes.. but let me just make the One comment which was the Point I was trying to drive home

Yes, there are a lot of lawsuits.. Too Many of them.. Many of them are totally frivoulous..

BUT – why Make more risk? why take More Risk than is necessary?

We don’t hear much about how lawsuits are settled, or even if they are, but we sure hear about them happening.. They are EXPENSIVE to go through, even if it is to Prove one’s innocence. And unfortunately with discrimination cases One doesn’t have to have intent to be found guilty,., nope, one just has to have a pattern of discrimination, and wham! Even if there was no intent..

Due to the expense of lawsuits many companies will settle.. Even if they are innocent.. They are Long, tedious, and time consuming.

So Larry the point I was trying to make.. Companies try to avoid these risks, they also try to make sure they document carefully, keep clean records, so that the process of investigation will be faster.. which ultimately is cheaper..

Would I keep resumes with pictures on them.. Heck No; Will Tell the candidate to resubmit.. I Don’t want any personally identifiable information on my computer unless it is a government mandated self ID form.

Anyways, that was the point of my earlier post..
I hope this helps
Karen