Cheers,
Keith

“What the resume of the future might just look like”

http://bit.ly/NUV2uI

Simpler is better on all aspects.

Bottom line: An applicant’s personality and motivations (fit) are best at determining their overall performance at work.
SMB’s don’t have a lot of excess time or money to spend on the hiring process. Assessing an accurate personality fit is generally a big challenge for them. I doubt any of us have a ton of free time during the day that can be voluntarily spent on sorting through resumes and personally screening applicants.

Realistically, finding a site that makes it easy to hire is indeed attractive. Furthermore, one that makes it easy to predict candidate success.

As an Employer myself, I know the needs and wants that a hiring manager faces. That’s why I created ClearFit to fix hiring. If you’re entertained at the idea of taking the guesswork out of hiring, give it a try.
Our Businesses are far too valuable to be damaged as a result of poor hiring decisions.

Unlike a traditional resume, a video resume only takes about a minute to record. Instead of a candidate saying they have strong communication skills, you will be able to see it on film. Video resumes also display more personality, allowing hiring managers to decide if the candidate seems like a good fit for the company culture. Video resumes don’t address every problem of the traditional resume, but they help hiring managers glean more relevant information about a candidate much faster.

Resumes — and other forms of self-reporting — are stubborn artifacts of an entrenched recruitment/screening process. Technology has caught up and can now be relied on to whisk candidates through an engaging, meaningful “dialogue,” that yields more revealing and pertinent info than is typically supplied by a resume (or other forms of self-reporting)…and from a candidate’s perspective, is more empowering — they get to show their stuff and get more immediate feedback on where they stand (as opposed to sending a resume into a “black hole,” and never getting a response). The technology is here, there are alternatives — it’s a matter of hiring managers breaking old habits and embracing tools that are more in line with the way today’s smart phone-wielding job candidate lives and interacts.

In OZ the elaborate application systems developed by government agencies to ensure “fairness” “accuracy” and “equality” do just the opposite. Busy people outside the government system don’t bother to apply, whilst current government employees can often be found completing their applications in work time.

Linked-in at least tends to have less exaggerations and falsehoods as it is visible to your own connections but as Dave mentioned it is still a self reporting system.

Technical tests and actual work problems provide relevant information, but can be too resource-intensive to administer and assess for every applicant (e.g. the 300 people who will apply for your help desk opening). They can be useful for those people who pass the initial screening, but it’s borderline abusive to ask everyone to complete them and the best candidates (with many options available to them) may simply move on to the next employer rather than spend an hour doing an online assessment. You run a real risk to your employment brand by setting up too many hurdles, IMHO.

If there was a magic bullet, we’d buy it, but we’re probably going to have to rely on resumes for initial screening for the next few years, at least.