To Authors: The text editor functions become 'live' after you start writing. Please do not use any symbols such as quotation marks and question marks in the blog title. The default setting is NotPublished.
Recent research indicates that there is now no such thing as a passive candidate. The vast majority of workers are open to new opportunities or actively searching for a new role. The rise of social media and smartphones has meant that it is much simpler for recruiters to find those looking to switch jobs. What does this mean for the regular jobseeker?
When I graduated and began seeking work my first ports of call were job boards and newspaper adverts (I’m showing my age here). I spent a great deal of time tailoring my CV in Word to upload to job boards or email to employers (bet you thought I was going to say post, I’m not that old) or completing lengthy online application forms. Being fairly well qualified (if I do say so myself), I believe I got a higher response rate than average, something like 20% of my applications resulted in invitations to interview or calls from recruitment agencies.
Some of the interviews I attended were assessment days including group activities and psychometric testing and some were straight interviews with either a single person or panel, but the overriding theme was that whilst my qualifications got me to that initial stage, to progress or be hired I had to demonstrate something more than could be gleaned from my CV – cultural fit, experience, problem-solving skills, etc. – all things that workers will find it easier to demonstrate than a jobseeker.
Picking up on the reports from the Milch & Zucker conference , A Journey from Attraction to Selection. Still have a few to do, and will bring them out over the next few days. Pictures and video are starting to appear on the M&Z site as well.
Opening up the afternoon sessions, with Miodrag Perin of Bertelsmann, New York office. Met him at dinner and found out he did his graduate degree at my alma mater, SUNY at Binghamton. More evidence of how small the world really is. This was fun, as Bertelsman has done a lot of interesting things, including setting up a specific Recruitment brand and website. Mio is a dynamic and engaging speaker.
A couple of key concepts if you are going to reach out with Social Media as a recruitment media:
What works for marketing also works for us
We want to be where the people already are
Tested the idea of video applications, by filming his own team - proving internally how it can work and what actually has to be done. See the video of Mio on the RCEuro Video section.
Points out that individuals are spending lots of time on the networks (compared to amount of time on a company website), where content and information is relevant.
Create Your Own Career Inside our thoughts, inside our heads - everyday there are tons of ideas, phrases, concepts that should be shared and used in candidate attraction.
Social Media is no longer a 'nice to have'. It is a necessity. What was the Bertelsmann journey? 18 months ago, on Flickr and the business networks like Xing, LinkedIn as individuals, not as company.
Resistance from internal colleagues 18 months ago:
Nobody Twitters
What does this have to do with recruiting?
What a waste of time
We should have our own video player
BUT We want to be where the candidates are Decided to integrate sharing tools such as "tell a friend" into website and integrate various analytics into the website to deploy and track activities
Developed the tag line and the complete recruitment website: Create Your Own Career 2.0 by getting inspired. What has been the result?
New career web sites in Germany and internationally
38,000 unique visitors per month
Top results of ranking, No. 1 in US, Europe, CEE
(Potential Power Ranking 2009)
What does his social landscape look like today? Blogs, maps, chat, self assessment, videos of real employees on YouTube, Flickr
The interview process has long been some what of a insulated and protected process, that no one dare suggest we conduct them any other way then face to face. Sure we have initial phone interviews to gauge whether a candidate is actually human, and can put more than 3 words together coherently, however face to face is seen as KING when we determine whether or not we should hire a prospective candidate.
But what if technology can assist and support our decisions and even help speed up the process of decision making? How would, and how could video be of any assistance, and even replace or add additional value to something that is revered as sacred? And would candidates appreciate a faster process along the way?
Video interview’s can be used in 2 primary ways. As an initial screening tool to replace the phone interview with a series of customized questions, or as a means to forward to a hiring manager or senior management colleague for further insight and assistance in the hiring process.
We all know how difficult it can be to reach people these days. Yes we all have mobiles, are all on 3-4 social networks, but to actually speak to someone on the first phone call is really quite difficult. What if, as part of the application process, we conducted our phone interview, or better yet, our video pre-selection/screening video?
Imagine for a moment the earth is round (yes I know it is, but some people have stopped reading at the sheer thought of using video now, have to keep you here somehow) and we have the ability for the candidate to respond to a customized series of questions (let’s say 5) that are the same questions used in your phone interviews. The candidate, whilst applying for your vacancy, records a video and answers the questions you have outlined. You now have 20 applications in your inbox along with 20 videos attached.
Now before everyone jumps up and down and say’s “Hey don’t have time to watch 20 videos and read 20 resumes”, guess what? You don’t need to. The process is quite simple. You have 20 applications, you short list an initial 5, and have 2 “maybe’s”. After reviewing the 5 short-listed candidates video’s, you cull this down to 3 as their responses to your customized questions don’t quite match up to what your client, or your company are looking for. You review the 2 “maybe” candidates, and you were right, they will stay in the maybe pile for the time being.
So where does that leave us. You have 3 candidates to bring in for an interview. But has this achieved anything?
Here is a simple calculation.
Average phone interview time – 10 minutes Candidates to be phone interviewed – 3 Time to phone Interview – 30 minutes Time spent chasing candidates for phone interview – 20 minutes
Ok, so 50 minutes approx. saved is not a bad start. But it gets better.
Candidates to Interview (from original process of phone interview) – 5 Average Interview time – 1 hour Total Interview time – 5 hours
Candidates to Interview (video interview process) – 3 Average Interview time – 1 hour Total Interview time – 3 hours
Time saved = 2 hours interview + 50 minutes for phone Interviews Total = 2 hours 50 minutes
Now what could you do with that extra 2 hours 50 minutes. What would you CEO say if you save that amount of time on each hire. How happy would your hiring manager be about only interviewing the most relevant candidates and having more information from the get go? What dollar value can you place on almost 3 hours of time saved and would your CEO and FC be happy with this outcome? Would you be happy with even saving half that amount of time per hire, on half of your vacancies?
Now you might be sitting there reading this thinking there is no way that any of this is possible and that your processes are sound. This may be true, however we are all looking to improve our processes and streamline efficiencies across the board. There is little doubting that candidates are comfortable with video in their lives, just look at the strength of video sites across the net, and the gamut of hours watched.
The Internet and the technology attached to it have added great value to the hiring process already. The ability to strengthen this further by utilizing video platforms to attract, engage and retain your talent is here right now. Is it really that far fetched to think that video cannot add value?
A report today showed that Jobsite has reported that 54,000 jobhunters have sat a virtual job interview with Duncan Bannatyne via the BeMyInterviewer service, with over 210,000 unique users visiting the site in the last year. The service’s most popular question was “I’ve interviewed 20 people for this job, why should I employ you?” which was accessed on average every 50 minutes.
Clear proof that candidates are eating up video content on job sites and clearly would love more video abilities moving forward.
Talent on View can provide recruiters and job boards globally with the latest video technology to enhance your site or recruitment process.
Please contact me on
This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it
for further details.
For years now the technology of video has been available across the Internet for websites to utilise as they see fit. Over the last 5 years the success of YouTube has shown that people not only use video on the Internet, they demand it. The platform is improving everyday and is now ready to take off.
It is quite ironic that the largest news sites on the Internet all have video functionality.........but wait.....so do the sports, weather, social media and travel sites, having all now adopted video media into their site offerings. All of these are part of our daily lives, jobs however, which we all get out of bed for everyday day is far behind. Why hasn't the job board and recruitment market followed???
A recent report showed that, in the USA, the most searched term was "jobs". In 2008 in the UK it was 10th. No real surprise given the current economic climate, but why are these sites that offers the most sort after search term not offering the latest gadgets and options to their users, candidate and advertiser. It is true that Monster and Careerbuilder have recently re-launched (again) their sites offering video to both users, to a degree, but why has it taken this long.
Both companies spent an enormous amount of money on Superbowl advertising and have yielded no result, in fact reports say they went backwards (http://www.ere.net/2009/02/09/what-do-you-get-for-100k-a-second-a-drop-in-traffic/). They spent money on TV advertising (video essentially) to gain brand awareness and traction to their sites. Is this a case of too little too late?
Television is still the most heavily utilised medium for advertising in terms of revenue. The Internet is fast catching up and the like of video across the "net" is the major reason it will pass it eventually. If you know your demographic is on the "net" why not engage with them in the best way?
Video is more engaging, more enticing and offers the viewer the ability to relate to a product or service far quicker and with more relevancy. How many times have you tuned out when an ad on TV comes on that doesn't interest you? A video has the ability to filter out the irrelevant and a great video attracts the best........
A well planned and executed job board video, candidate CV or advertiser (job ad or employer branding) will produce better results then words on a screen. A picture tells a thousand words, a video 100,000+..........................
