A lot of these problems can be solved adapting to online video interviews, maybe not ‘live’ but recorded.

Adapting to this process significantly reduces time and cost during the recruitment.

Online video interviewing firstly reduces the number of applications from casual job seekers and enables recruiters to identify suitable candidates based on more than just their CV’s.

The ability to see all applicants on one page, reduces time spent ‘scanning’ CV’s to meet desired criteria.

With online video interviewing you can shortlist ideal candidates, not only spending less time scheduling but also improving the quality of candidates that make it to final stage interviews.

Recruiters can save an unlimited amount of pre-recorded text, audio or video based questions for the online interview so less time is spent repeating questions in first stage interviews, and each candidate is asked the same question which is relevant to the job role.

Employers can share and review applicants’ recorded interviews with colleagues. Again not only saving time on colleagues ‘sitting in’ on interviews but also improving the standard of all new hires.

Research proves that candidates also prefer this method of job application and companies with a large turnover of staff are already adapting to this new process, so it is only a matter of time that this change is seen across all aspects of recruitment.

I especially love your comment in the Process Errors — # 6 Interviews are held in person — encouraging the use of the Internet and live video for interviewing. I strongly agree and believe that both recruiters and companies need to consider economic factors for the applicant. I live in the North Jersey region where a trip into NYC can cost upwards of $75 for a one day trip (non-discounted). I also know there are some recruiting firms who want an in-person interview simply for the recruiter to “earn a credit” for the applicant’s account. I recently refused to travel about 1.25 hours to one of those firms at the cost of about $60 in gas. I invite you to read my blog post from Nov. 28, 2011 “Company Recruiting: Missing Out By Not Using Skype”

http://impalbizbuzz.wordpress.com/

I was tracking the conversation from Amie Fallon and Keith Halperin regarding the testing/screening. Thank you Dr. Sullivan for debunking Cream Metrics and that entire “screening” process. Here is the bottom line — many people, including me, simply do not test well on those tests. I have been fighting those tests for years as an inaccurate picture of an applicant. In the past few months I was asked by three companies to submit to tests. Only in one case did I get to speak to the HR recruiter before the test. That company’s test was the most bizarre test I have ever seen including multiple timed sections. One section was for “mechanical applitude” and the entire test took 2.25 hours to complete. This was for a software sales position! The other two tests were part of the job application process and I had no opportunity to talk to a human voice.

I think people in transition are looking for human interaction and at least a chance to have their skills get past a mechanical HR scanner.

@ Steve; Your suggestion sounds very sensible. At the same time, ISTM that a new solution needs to be effective, easy/intuitive to use, and affordable to overcome institutional and personal resistance/inertia.

Happy Friday,

Keith

Thanks again for a great article

Steve Green
http://www.workpersonalities.com

I looked up data from the Cream website. The personality portion is based on a single research paper (Hirsh, B.J . & Peterson, J.B, Predicting creativity and academic success with a “Fake-Proof” measure of the Big Five, Journal of Research in Personality, Vol. 42, 5, October 2008, PP 1323-1333. If you notice, this investigation addressed students, GPA, and creativity…not job performance.

I was not able to verify the professional credentials of any principal other than Neil MacGregor who is a prolific re-packager of over 90% of the citations on the website. Mr. MacGregor’s Linked-in Profile identifies him as being Cream’s Web Director, but does not mention any memberships in professional test associations nor graduate degrees in testing and assessment. Rather it indicates he has a BA in Philosophy and works with learning disabled students.
I took a few hours to look behind the curtain and found the test is a combination of a Big Five generic personality test and a cognitive ability test. As I mentioned earlier, virtually all cognitive ability tests … intelligence tests by another name… have a long history of job discrimination. A job analysis and validation study is highly recommended here. Second, the B5 test design required subjects to pick between most-like-me/least-like-me statements. It fake resistant, but NOT fake-proof. Most/least designs mean each time one item is chosen another must be rejected. Fake-good subjects, for example, sacrificed scores in Agreeableness in exchange for Emotional Stability and Conscientiousness. In the final discussion, the authors suggest this approach “might not” improve the ability to predict job performance on an individual basis.

You can do the math.