TakeTheInterview
We've been using a really nifty service to hire our next analyst. It's called TakeTheInterview. This product/company came out of this summer's DreamIt Ventures program in NYC.
We wrote a blog post outlining the position and then linked to TakeTheInterview (note – the application process ended twelve days ago and is closed). Candidates click on that link, fill out a few key data points (name, contact info, blog url, linked in profile, etc) and then they take two short video interviews (90 seconds and 120 seconds). The minute our post went live, I put myself through the candidate flow and I found it drop dead simple. Obviously looking into a webcam and speaking articulately and well about two topics for almost three minutes is not drop dead simple but that's the point of TakeTheInterview.
For the employer, TakeTheInterview has a nice interface that makes it fairly efficient to watch a ton of video. We got about 250 completed applications so that is about 10 hours of video. About half of the people in our firm watched each and every video. The other half watched the top 1/3 of the applicants as rated by the team that watched every video. So in total, our firm watched about 45 hours of video in this hiring process. And TakeTheInterview does a nice job with the video consumption flow. I watched a bunch of the video on my family room TV via a mac mini and that worked pretty well.
The main piece of feedback we've given TakeTheInterview is that they need a better scoring system in the service. We cobbled together one using Google Docs which works, but a slick candidate scoring system in the service would have saved our team a lot of time. I suspect that won't be too hard for TakeTheInterview to build.
Our hiring process in the past started with a blog post asking for a web presence (blog url, linkedin), followed by phone screens, ending in face to face interviews with the finalists. We swapped out the phone screens with TakeTheInterview and in the process we were able to see everyone in action as opposed to phone screens with a small subset.
I'm very enthusiastic about this new tool. Seeing people live and in person without having to commit to a long in person interview creates a lot of important information early in the hiring process. I'd encourage others to give TakeTheInterview a try.
Comments (Archived):
Very interesting. Thanks for sharing Fred. Simple service and clear business model. One question that came to mind – do you expect every Analyst to have a blog?
no, but we do expect them to have a web presence of some kind
Aha. Understood. All the best with the hiring then! 🙂 Early morning in NYC.. so hope you have a nice day!
I want to see the out-takes
they won’t see the light of daybut they are good
Christina needs to be bribed to post them on Wikileaks.
what sort of bribes are we talking here? 🙂
Who knew the avc crowd were such job shopping voyeurs?My wife appreciates bribes of flowers and chocolate for my little sins. But when I royally screw up there’s nothing quite like diamonds to make it right. I believe the bidding has to begin there for a “leak”.
I think by now she must be owning a diamond shop 🙂
It’s true Kasi, you know me too well 😀
That is very easy Mark…because i see a lot of similarity in our character.P.S. I could not reply to your other message.
I defer to deeper nested replying by email. There’s a common acceptance of strong opposing perspectives. We need to nourish that with more dissenting voices.
name your price and I’ll put something up on kickstarter.
how reasonable is it to ask for a flying car? if it’s not, and it’s $57mm for the nigerian presidency (http://saharareporters.com/…, i’ll take a cool $5.7mm.
I think you should swing for the fences, I’ll launch a kickstarter project for a flying car.
A new one to me.I love the verticalization of the app which pushes the simplicity of the design.Although immediately I want to use the tool as a more general feedback mechanism for people to post short videos about an event, a meetup, a blog post and such.If there is another more general purpose video feedback tool out there, I’m interested and would appreciate the link.
Hi Arnold, Why wouldn’t you use Youtube/Vimeo for something like that? Maybe not YouTube.. something like Vimeo which is less popular for general purpose feedback?
Harder for hiring manager/team to organize, forward, collaborate, rate etc.
Yup. I agree with that. I guess I wasn’t clear as to what ‘general purpose’ feedback meant. Makes sense if it was referring to hiring.
Hi RohanI want it simpler I guess.Just went to a bloggers conference where every blogger was asked to do a short video as an intro.It worked with YouTube but seemed too many steps…and…the presentation on the conference site seemed disbursed and disjointed. Likewise few did this (I didn’t) and overall it didn’t work as a vcard,Maybe Vimeo is better.
Possibly. Vimeo is just a more private version in many ways – doesn’t have the clutter that comes with YouTube.Not sure if it will solve the problem. Let you know if I find anything, I will.Only know we will when we do.. yes.. hmmm;)
Would you consider such a tool for round 0 of startups pitching to you for funding?
possibly
it would be cool to have a blend of taketheinterview and prezi…
Very cool.During the hiring process for the community manager position in the US, I encouraged candidates to record a private audio message into my SoundCloud Dropbox and the results were great. Some candidates wrote songs (one even produced an entire rap song, super slick), others found ways to make the audio sound engaging. I actually really like the fact that I had to focus on the voice only. Personal yet with a certain distance.Unlike TakeTheInterview, I didn’t have a way to organize, rate or forward the recordings to other team members but I’ve found audio messages to be a great way to find out about the personality of a candidate. Potential use case for TakeTheInterview: support ability to record audio and outsource it to SoundCloud.
Interesting approach, David. And interesting thought that you would prefer audio to video – like preferring phone to f2f.
Some may see a lower barrier for audioI like being able to focus on the voice. And a well crafted, engaging, friendly audio recording can be much more powerful than a phone call.
Interesting you feel that way. Feel the opposite, I do. Yes.. hmmm
I can see potential uses for audio only, but you’ll eventually want to meet the candidates anyways,- so why not see them on the video at the initial encounter?
agree!
I actually preferred listening before seeing during the process.
Hey, two questions:1) Are there warning signs if you go over video length for the interviewee?2) how endemic in enterprise type software are those missing niggling aspects of the product, such as the lack of a good scoring system? What makes a good enterprise tool?
i saw a bunch of candidates get cut off so i think there is no warning one of the problems with enterprise software is feature creep. customers always want this feature or that.
You may want to add number your answer to number one as feedback.
What a great idea. I can see Donna all over this one.Re: Scoring, what would you have liked to see more specifically?One that comes to mind is the ability to score as you watch via a split screen & the app tallies the scores so the top candidates emerge in real time.
we can send them our google spreadsheet if they want to see how we do group scoring of candidates
What extra information did you receive from this process? Does your outcome (so far) look different than you think it might have?
We get a much better sense of prrsonality and verbal communication skills, both of which are important in our culture
Skills which are – surprisingly – remarkably lacking in many business cultures. I suspect it is why so many CxO levels/et al do not participate in Twitter/etc – they simply have nothing to say and certainly don’t know how to articulate/engage with people. For years they have been insulated by their suits and can’t adapt to the non-suit economy/culture…
Thanks! In the end, I guess it’s another tool. It will be used well by those who apply skill and intention. Others, not so much.
45 hours of video watching is incredible! Most recruitment managers won’t want to invest anywhere near that much time at the screening stage – especially for 1 role. I applaud you for taking the time, and there are companies that do invest that time, but most simply won’t. In the past, using a phone screen, did you spend that much time on it?Video can be an effective tool – but I think it works best at the actual interview stage (or at the phone screen stage, where the candidate list is already triaged), when you’re already somewhat committed to the candidates. HireVue.com is an example of that. But at the first screening phase, most HR managers/recruiters won’t want to sit and watch video. And for small companies / startups where the CEO is often in charge of recruiting, I don’t see CEOs (unfortunately!) investing this much time in the process either. It does look like you can use TakeTheInterview at the phone screen stage (just send out an email invite to prospects), which is good.For smaller companies with a few open positions this might work, and I can see that’s their target (from the pricing page), but it will be hard to scale use when you start hiring more people…I don’t know if the team has recruitment/HR experience (I didn’t see any on the team page) or if they have mentors/connections into the industry – but it’s a very tough space that requires a good inside track into channels, as well as a genuine and deep understanding of the market. I would encourage them to find those *active mentors* to help them with industry expertise.
seems like video doesn’t necessarily make the process more efficient or time saving, but rather higher quality and perhaps more fun.
Absolutely agree. Getting the right people into the right roles is key for companies of all sizes. This is one of the areas where (IMHO) we should all invest more time – and, therefore, money.Fred was talking about measuring fit with the organization (communication skills and personality), for that we need time and tools such as TakeTheInterview. It is no quicker but it is better!
I think in hiring you should allow in the information that is pertinent, and try to keep out the information that is not.I just hired an account manager that will have most of her contact with clients over the phone. Even if I had this tool available, I would still have done the initial screen over the phone, because that’s what my clients will get. If I were hiring a position that depended heavily on written communication or analytic thought, I might want to avoid TakeTheInterview just because something like personal attractiveness can bias you subconsciously. On the other hand, maybe TakeTheInterview would be perfect for a position that requires a lot of in-person client face time.Of course, eventually you need the face the face. There’s no substitute for looking someone in the eye.
Does this use of technology capture the authentic character and personality of a person? Doesn’t it have a bias toward the ‘performer’ ego (not necessarily the ‘achiever’ though), someone who may or may not be so good when the hard yards need to be made?It’s a bit like old time radio stars who couldn’t make the transition to the new world of television because they didn’t have the qualities (‘looks’ in this example) to suit the medium.It sure saves time, but I’m not convinced of its overall value to picking the right person. Some people have an aversion to being taped, but would thrive in the real environment of the position up for grabs. A lot of talent can be lost. I’m not sold on all applications of technology. Just a thought, nothing more.
I think the bias is not towards the performer but towards the communicator.That’s less of a bias and more of an essential characteristic that everyone needs.
Maybe. I feel that important decisions are made best in face-to-face meetings. This technology can tell me the applicant isn’t a zebra and can speak English.
Agree.It’s not a replacement for face to face but a filter.
FILTER OUT WRONG THINGS IS BAD.
I fully agree. However, at some point, you’ve got to begin drawing lines since you can only hire one person. It’s just that when you are using an artificial process to begin with then those lines tend to become artificial as well. Unfortunately, much of the interviewing that happens out there has an artificial quality to it. USV seems to do a better job than most.
Don’t agreeFilters are the context creators for online (and offline) life. Nothing is perfect but without filters it’s just chaos and a raging stream of info. I’ll take choice and recalibration over a rushing torrent of data anytime.
It is a riskThats why we are inviting in a large pool for f2f interviews
It’s worth trying though, and even if the successful applicant turns out not to be a successful employee it’s not necessarily an indictment of the technology or USV or even the applicant. Hedging against risk is what we all do, in large part so that we feel we’re in control. Ordered chaos rules.I watched Mike Bloomberg on the video. He spoke about being sacked from Salomon Brothers (was it?) and that it was the making of him. I’m sure we’ve all been sacked (I have), and it does benefit one tremendously…in the long run. At the time it doesn’t seem quite so good, but there’s always tomorrow. He got $10m (and didn’t mention it in his speech), I didn’t. Nevertheless, it’s a necessary mechanism to more efficiently distribute talent and skills in the market. Round pegs and square holes don’t fit.Do you think the personality traits of VCs are generally similar?
Why not do some follow-up interviews via skype or other videocall. Then, bring in the short list for live ones. LMAO- I recall a few years ago, when video cam’s weren’t so popular, large companies would fed-ex a video camera to candidates so they can conduct a remote video interview.
“someone who may or may not be so good when the hard yards need to be made”Same with husbands, wives, and dates.I think that’s a great point. And while I really like the service (and think it’s a great business idea), I’m pretty sure a halo is created around certain people (based on both looks and communication skills) that would disadvantage others that would be better suited for *certain* positions. In a sense we see this happening in politics where either a particular look or a family name allows someone to win an election.
IF POSITION REQUIRE GOOD LOOKING PERSON COMFORTABLE WITH VIDEO, THIS GREAT TOOL.FOR EVERYTHING ELSE, IT NOT.
I agree with FG.This cannot possibly replace phone interview – unless your company’s phone interviews are done very poorly. Then again, 90% of companies do piss-poor phone interviews – such as the ones done by HR and other clueless peeps.A well-done phone interview can never be replaced by a candidate recording a video answer. NEVER.
Wouldn’t it be great though if you could share that experience of a phone interview with multiple people prior to an in-person interview? When you are speaking with someone on the phone it’s just you and the candidate. Unfortunately, you are not usually the only person who will work with that candidate. Getting other people’s opinion early on in the screening process could make the rest of the interviewing process more efficient. Just a thought, but open to opinion and feedback.
I agree with ObnoxiousGeek. 90% of companies do piss-poor phone interviews. Within the past several months, I’ve had three phone interviews for three separate jobs with Amazon. They obviously love my resume, but I never get beyond the phone screen. Why? Because they don’t know how to interview. They ask irrelevant questions. Their monotone questions clearly indicate that they have no experience or training in hiring people or conducting interviews. And I should know; I have formal, professional, and substantial interview and hiring training; and have conducted literally thousands of interviews and hired hundreds of people in my career. Amazon’s hiring managers are in significant need of formal training; but they are not the only ones. In contrast, last night I did a phone interview with a different company; he’s an older guy, but I could tell he actually knew what he was doing; knew how to dig deeper…and we are proceeding!
Additionally, if more hiring managers had better interviewing training, they would NOT need to spend as much time on the process; they’d hire better people who would stay because they were better fits, and they’d identify the right people SOONER in the process, and not need to read hundreds of resumes. If hiring managers were better trained, they wouldn’t hate the process so much, and they could assume more of a role in the hiring process, and leave less of it to recruiters, who have a hard time understanding the role and finding great matches are NOT 100% perfect “fits”.
I’d add to that … that if the position doesn’t require a good looking person with communications skills you probably want to actually *avoid a good looking person* with communications skills. (And of course this is always a matter of degree, nuance and particulars obviously.) In a previous business I was in I usually avoided hiring good looking women/men for *certain* positions. They were the ones that found it easiest to get another job and leave. They would go on an interview and some infatuated person would hire them on the spot. This might not matter if you are running the best thing in town but it does matter if you aren’t.
“happening in politics….”Famously, this is why JFK won the 1960 election over Nixon. Radio listeners of a debate clearly thought Nixon better; TV viewers gave the debate to JFK. Audio makes you focus on the message; Video lets viewers focus on the superficial appearance. I don’t want Miss America dealing with the Russians or the Chinese. I want an ugly old man with brains and experience.
Hi Jason. You make some pretty amazing points, but I have a pretty good case study to share. After receiving 75 resumes in less than 48 hours for a marketing position at our company, I was overwhelmed. I did scan them and narrowed them to 30. There was no way I could phone screen 30 people. I was starting a company and attending business school simultaneously. Instead, I used the alpha product of Take the Interview to get a sense of who really wanted this job and who could just articulate that. It was just to get a general sense of who I wanted to meet in-person. Some of these people I would have never spoken to and I would have never met. One of those was our current Marketing guru. He has proven to be an amazing hire. If I didn’t have our screening tool, I most likely would have missed out on a great candidate because he didn’t have as much experience as others that I would have phone screened.
4 things I like about this:1) I like that you’re supporting startups and using their technology and helping them improve2) 250 candidates got voice time with USV – It’s a fairer process for candidates than skim reading resumes3) USV got to see 250 people, more chance of finding the right fit. There is no way you’d have the time to interview this many candidates – and if you filtered them you’d have discarded them with less insight than you got from a video. 4) You can interview people in your pyjamas 🙂
I hope we hire someone who went with the pajama approach!I love all four of your points
Oh man. Reminds me of something deep in my past.I was contacted by VideoProfessor about BECOMING the new Video Professor (you know the product; mediocre computer training on your choice of topics, all delivered in a way that wasted time, you could have done faster w/o the aid, and ultimately led to sales pitches for more videos). Seems the company had decided it was time for someone more slick than their hucksteresque founder to be their face. They asked me to do a few-minutes video showing my vision of what the next Video Professor would “be like”.I submitted a video of myself that included, at the end, me in several locations in my home using my then-catchphrase from my radio program: “I AM the Computer Answer Guy”. And in one of them I was sitting on a workout bench in my basement, sans shirt.And they hired me.Sadly, they them decided to scrap the transition. Or maybe not so sadly. Who knows?Aren’t you fascinated? Hire me, Fred . . .
You may need to submit the shirtless workbench still to have a chance!
Oh crap … why didn’t I think of that??!!!??
Actually Fred I was referring to you being able to interview for the comfort of your family TV room – however that said, a candidate willing to interview in their pyjamas deserves a fair go!I actually blogged about your interview process a few weeks back because I was intrigued by the request to show an internet presence instead of a resume. http://www.lindventures.com…The process of having to submit a few thinks is great because:1) It demonstrates passion2) It demonstrates consistent or inconsistent interest over time (think frequency of blog posts)3) It demonstrates to an employer how you think4) You can’t fake a blog or web trail – it evolves over time5) It makes for a quicker and more enjoyable filtering process6) It eliminates a lot of candidates immediately who can’t write or express themselves well7) It demonstrates a level of technical competence
These are interesting thoughts, but I am not sure I am buying them.I think I could say that points 1&2 could point to a self promoter – someone more concerned about their web presence than their current job.As for 3, anyone skilled at creating an online presence is most likely focused on the creation part —– lots of people have huge online presence and hide what they really think.4) true, but only indicates activity5) a lot of pros seem to be arguing the opposite today6) so does a cover letter7) not anymore – I am totally incompetent technically, but I am on Li, Fb, Twitter & Tumblr.Just putting the cranky old school guy hat on and seeing what comes out from under it!
One of the things I am most impressed with about USV’s hiring process at this level is their taking into account the person’s web presence, because this seems to be wholly consistent with the nature of USV and its portfolio. If Fred and crew were not equipped to make the right assessments based on the web presence, then this would be concerning, but I have a feeling they know what to look for. I don’t think quantity/volume is the key here.One of the things that troubles me in interviewing is when the process is not consistent with what is actually being assessed and measured. An artificial interviewing process produces faulty hires. The more consistent the interviewing and assessment with the nature of the company and the job, the better.
Agree w the alignment of looking for and then measuring against. Certainly given the firm’s ‘eat the dog food’ philosophy, this makes a lot of sense.I think GRIM has voiced my concerns – although I think he holds a stronger concern than I do!
For the most part I share @fakegrimlock:disqus ‘s concerns/viewpoints but with a more nuanced perspective than his “communication style” lends itself toward. ;-)Sent via mobile
Maybe it should be integrated with Chatroulette? 😉
Brad – we’re glad you enjoyed USV’s use of Take the Interview! We’re happy to be part of their search for a new analyst and we’re particularly enthusiastic about the interview’s response! It’s great to see they’ll have such a wide range of candidates to choose from.
I’m quite interested in how this product takes hold.Live, unedited video as a data format for communications has been slow to find mass market appeal. I’ve tried a bunch of times to build products that make it so.Few do video updates on their Facebook walls. And none of the host of video chat platforms really has staying power.Maybe it’s the stark reality of being live and unedited and the lack of personal filters. Don’t know.But maybe a vertical defined usage is the way to make to make this data type, video as a communications format, really find utility.
I agree. I wonder if this a feature, a product, or a company. A great feature to have for hiring, for sure. Can it evolve into a great product,- perhaps. The risk for something like this is that it can copied quite easily, or made to integrate into other products.
True…but don’t underestimate the difficulty in making it really useful and really simple and tailored to the specific needs of the recruiting industry.Just because its easy to do technically, doesn’t mean it’s easy to catch the support of the industry.
Facebook.
would be interesting to see how who had made the cut would be different if the video was audio only.
Yes, it would be very interesting. I have little doubt it would be significantly different through no fault of anyone involved. Whether it would result in a different hire is not so certain: Our biases may be subtle but they will definitely be projected into the process at some point.
Although you could argue that if the bias is there, may as well let it do its work earlier in the process rather than later, especially if the result will be the same — the candidate won’t be hired..
Yes, I agree.
We will never knowBut its a good question
Alternatively, in the spirit of Gladwell’s blink and at the risk of sounding shallow, if you just took a videocapture of the candidate and made a snap judgement based solely on the candidates’ appearance/demeanour, how would that have correlated with the actual ranking? (and you could still have a 3rd party do this to triangulate…)
now we’re talking
Do Outliers do video interviews?
They’d have a hard time staying on screen 🙂
Outliers do well in interviews with other Outliers. Otherwise, they often get “missed” in the interview process.
You have a point. Pretty people get paid more. It would have been interesting to see who was chosen if we compared just audio to audio and video…
In my experience video has not been superior to audio.And it doesn’t replace the live interview. So, I’m still wondering what the true value is. There are online automated phone screen services available. Admittedly I have a bias against assessing a candidate based on a non-interactive interviewing format unless you are merely assessing their presentation skills. Interpersonal skills and presentation skills are not the same.
Donna, I value your input because this is your business. 2 questions:a) can you elaborate on the online automated phone screen service. how does it work?b) by playing the video, wouldn’t you be assessing their communications skills rather than their presentation skills?
William – Pretty slammed today, but hopefully can come back later and comment further to Fred’s post.Caveat: Executive search is a different type of recruiting than this type of service targets and so my experience with these types of tools is limited.The only automated phone screen I am somewhat familiar with is SayHired.com which seems similar to the service Fred describes except it is audio rather than video. The interview questions are prerecorded (using the interviewer’s voice) and the interviewee responds to the questions (by phone). The responses are recorded to be accessed later by whoever is doing the screening.And, yes, an automated video (or audio) screening process does allow you to assess how a person communicates in terms self-expression and ability to articulate their thoughts. I make a distinction between one-way communication and interactive communication referring to the former as “presentation.” May be semantics.
Thanks for responding during your busy day.
I hope you have time to elaborate, I was wondering what you thought!
Anne, is there anything in particular that you wanted me to comment on?
No specific questions, just wanted to see your thoughts, based on the business you’re in…your earlier comment offered a good perspective.(and I don’t have a “reply” option on the thread where you asked the question!)
Thanks, Anne. You have to reply via email when the thread gets to the end.Edited to add: I realize that this is not a one size fits all type of solution — it will have strengths and limitations and these will vary based on factors such as the job level involved, where the particular role fits in the market and the culture of the organization, etc. I am wary of methods that inhibit objectivity, assess for attributes not truly relevant to the job, and recruiting and interviewing techniques that benefit the employer but exploit or are demeaning or dishonoring of the applicant/candidate. I’m not sold on video yet. I’ve used it and can see some value, but recognize the limitations.
I tend to agree that audio is a better solution and makes for a more even playing field. Most people just aren’t good “on camera” but more comfortable with speaking. After all they’ve been trained through years of phone interview techniques. I have created a job posting app for iOS that that actually integrates audio into job descriptions. The thought being to humanize these boring pieces of content. One future idea I have is to somehow allow applicants to also apply by voice where they answer a question such as why they’d be a good fit for the job.Your thoughts?http://jobspeek.com/
Agree. And that was the premise of “The Dating Game”.Along those lines, there is an episode where a serial killer made the cut:http://www.youtube.com/watc…http://www.youtube.com/watc…Apparently the girl who chose him decided he was creepy and didn’t end up going out on the date.
Their motto should be “when you can’t ask applicants to attach a photo to their resume….”p.s. This has all the makings of an amazing prank.
Spoken like a prankster
Is there anyone who didn’t do well enough and not make the cut but was compelling enough to get another look? I guess I mean does this eliminate your “gut”.
if you ask me (i know you did not 🙂 )… this is just a screening thingy to see how well a person talks and pose himself. ‘gut’ comes in when you make eye-to-eye contact and talk to a person in-person…looking at his expressions for your expressions…his posture for your posture etc.,etc.,
You’re right about eye to eye.Sometimes you know someone is right when they walk in the door.
It’s also when you know it feels right when they walk out the door 😉
Hiring is so hard. I’ve had the perfect candidate be a dud and guys off the street be stars.
I think this product or modified model of this concept developed by individual companies to suit their requirement would fit in for mass-recruitment agencies ( software service companies) to do screening after resume go through and initial filtering before calling for personal interview …huh such a long sentence!!!I know of many cases who get their friends to attend the interview over phone and got the job. Again in service companies. Because most of the software service companies do very low-end jobs and any graduate can manage through if he/she gets in.
Very cool! I love seeing video analysis being utilized outside of sports 🙂
An overlooked but perhaps important aspect of this is the cost / energy implication of avoided travel. I have certainly taken flights in my youth to attend interviews that I could ill afford (eg to The European Patent Office in Holland)For those interested on a personal note – I got the job but it sucked – and that was when patents were often meaningful – I hate the vicarious nature of many “inventors” now
As someone who deals with the recruitment industry, video has been considered the “next big thing”. And while I’m always open to innovation, video has some serious flaws.1. It adds a new dimension of lost time to a recruiter’s workflow. Where hiring managers are normally accustomed to a 30 seconds skim over the resume, and that’s being generous, videos significantly increase this. No one needs another time sink in the day.2. Videos introduce a new form of potential discrimination. For whatever reason, it’s still taboo to send a photo of oneself in the resume despite a profileration of social media services where finding the applicant and their photo is all too easy. Videos however require additional considerations like lighting, sound quality, as well as acting and some creativity. Take creativity for example – perhaps someone has amazing After Effects skills and wins the recruiter over with a flashy video but an average resume, whereas Johnny Simple might be more qualified for the job yet doesn’t win the day because his skills lie elsewhere – the job itself.I’m sure there’s also bound to be some racial, disability or age-related bias for candidates who fall into these respective categories.If you’re looking to innovate, look to orchestras. When musicians audition for top orchestras, many of these institutions have done their best to introduce a fair hiring process. Those responsible for hiring sit in the audience seats and the musicians play behind a dark curtain. No silhouette is visible. The candidates don’t speak and they take off their shoes (so that gender bias is omitted). Finally, the decision makers don’t even have the person’s name in front of them. Simply a candidate ID and a list of musical pieces that will be performed. Why is this relevant? Instead of opening up and being fully aware of what the candidate looks like, how they speak or what they wear, the orchestras simply want to hear the best music. They don’t care if you’re male or female, young or old, disabled or not disabled. If you’re amazing at what you do, that’s all that matters.The hiring process should be as unbiased as possible, and room for bias should be managed very carefully. Videos struggle to do that.
I’ve worked in other countries (Australia, Japan) where submitting a head shot is normal for most jobs. I wonder why it’s so taboo in the US?
You get sued for admitting that physical appearance played any part in the hiring process……?
Yes I get that.I was commenting on cultural (or legal system) differences.And let’s be honest they’re going to google you and see your profile picture anyway.
The US legal system needs some simple, but important reform.Totally agree on the googling – unless you avatar it!
Given our history, the U.S. has become more sensitized to the potential for discrimination and we have laws and regulations to guard against this. I also wonder if those other nations are as litigious as the U.S. The number of attorneys specializing in labor law is indicative. Many HR policies are designed to avoid legal liability.
Australia has a similar set of discrimination laws covering sex, age, marital status, religion, ethnicity and health.They’re all pretty straightforward except for health. For example, you can’t ask someone if they have a physical impairment, but you describe a job function and ask if they believe they are capable of performing that function.You never see any of these points listed of a resume any more, and asking about them in an interview is an act of lunacy for all the same reasons as it is in the US.
Really? In what industry?
Translation.Maybe I’m wrong about Australia, but in Japan it is very normal.
This does add a different dimension to the workflow of a recruiter, and is designed to save them valuable time. We offer two different types of interviews, a public interview- which USV took advantage of for their position; as well as an interview by invitation- which allows the employer to invite candidates to take the interview after a resume review. Utilizing an interview by invitation will allow recruiters to screen more candidates in much less time then typical phone screens. They also have the ability to share their top candidates with the company they are sourcing for, which allows for feedback much earlier on in the process. We also allow for candidates to take practice interviews, so that they can become familiar and comfortable with our software before taking their actual interview. They are able to play back their responses, so they are able to adjust their lighting and check their sound quality. They can also see how they are coming across on video, and make any necessary adjustments. Take the Interview provides a software for companies to use to screen candidates. The software does not discriminate, and is EEOC, OFCCP, and ADA Compliant. We’d love to show you the platform, so you can have a better idea of it’s capabilities. If interested, shoot me an email at shandy[at]taketheinterview.com.
Very cool – I checked out the service when you guys first posted the position – hence the incomplete analyst application from me! 🙂 There’s a 500 Startups company, Ovia ( http://oviahr.com/ ) that’s doing something similar but with more of a focus on larger company’s hr and recruiting departments. They might have some of the missing tools you mentioned.
Why don’t you let people pitch their company this way to you? If you can not explain it in three minutes or less how good can it be?
My first thought was that some of the most effective people I know thrive on reading body language. But if they cannot make it thru a short video, that is a fair screen.Interesting that Gabriel Weinberg posted that he did a fair number of VC calls via Skype Video & only travelled when things got further along……
Fred,Regarding scoring, I am an investor in Chequed.com out of Saratoga Springs, NY. They have an online applicant fit and reference checking solution where the questions and scoring have been developed by UAlbany industrial psychology experts. Many large employers are on board and using it with great results. Happy to have the CEO connect with you or TakeTheInterview to see if there may be a fit.Thanks for the always interesting posts.Nasir
Having gone through this interview process, I can provide a little feedback from the interviewee side.I think that this is a great next step in the interviewing process. Allowing me to get “face time” as part of the initial screening process is a great opportunity that you don’t normally have with other highly competitive positions.The one problem I did have with the process is that my video camera on my MacBook was not recognized during the filming, so only my audio went through. I consider myself to be a fairly tech savvy person, so you can imagine my frustration with the process when I wasn’t able to fix it.But with problem comes opportunity. After realizing my video feed didn’t work, I created two videos and posted them to YouTube to make up for the technical glitch.Due to popular demand by the community and because my video feed didn’t work correctly, I will share my two videos with you. Hopefully USV doesn’t mind and hopefully these don’t fall into the blooper category. (A little nervous about sharing, but I have nothing to hide and I believe in being open and transparent)Video 1: Why I Want the Analyst Position at USVhttp://www.youtube.com/watc…Video 2: What Excites Right Now About Web / Mobilehttp://www.youtube.com/watc…Enjoy :)P.S. Feedback is welcomed
Good for you. Whether you get the job or not, way to put it out there and go for your dream.And nice touch on canvassing the portfolio companies. 😉
Thanks Aaron. Appreciate it. Gotta try to stand out a little you know 🙂
John, I don’t know what the job spec is on this so this comment may be off base but what struck me about your video is you didn’t present something as what you could do for USV but what the USV position could do for you. I might have missed that somewhere but here is a prominent example:In the beginning of the first video you started by saying “before I get to why I want this job” (about 6 seconds in) then you spoke about reaching out to some people (which is fine).. Then at about 40 seconds you said (something like) “why I really want this position: to learn”. When you are selling anything you have to present the benefit to the buyer (in this case USV). Not “I need the order to make my quota this month” (can’t tell you how many salesman have said that to me over the years.)Edit: I just looked at the blog posting of the job. It states “We’re looking for someone who demonstrates” and then gives precisely what are known as “hot buttons”. “hot buttons” are things you directly address. They are what a buyer essentially wants to hear. Taking the request at its face value (meaning this isn’t some kind of a google game in hiring which I don’t believe it is) what I would have done is address those points in terms of how you are the man.
Thanks LE. It’s great advice and something I really struggled w/ when going through the process. I purposefully didn’t try to sell myself in the videos and here is my thinking (not sure if it was right or wrong move):The interview process asks for 2 videos on “Why are you interested in the analyst role at USV?” and “Which web or mobile services inspire you the most?” So I decided to follow the format for those questions and not really come out guns blazing on the “hot buttons.”After I was done, I realized there was never any opportunity to sell myself and explain why I’m best for the position. So I took matters into my own hands and started my campaign — #JBP4USV a blog with posts and videos at http://jbp4usv.tumblr.com/Maybe they won’t look at it because it wasn’t part of the Take the Interview process, but that certainly won’t stop me from trying :)Thanks for the feedback
Love the blog campaign, John. Very clever and very intelligent.And entertaining.Doesn’t mean you are the best person for the job but it does show that you are motivated and interesting. As someone who is something of a talent scout, I’d say that you are “one to watch.”
Thanks Donna. I really appreciate it.
Hey Donna. Thanks for taking an interest in my campaign. Just wanted to update you with the final installment of the campaign…http://j.mp/tpHdAz
John – So sorry that it did not work out. I wrote a comment on your blog. You gave it a try, and an impressive one at that!
You make a good point in your edit paragraph: there’s what people ask for, what they are looking for, and what they really want. John did what they asked; they probably asked to see his enthusiasm and communication ability, which he did a good job of conveying; but the icing on the cake would have been to do that in a way that also shows how you’re the man. In this case, though, it would be hard to do that convincingly.I think the reason is that no one is going to come into a job like this being “the man”. USV is looking for someone extremely intelligent, young, and motivated who they can hammer into someone useful. I doubt any new analyst would be of much use on day 1.
i love it!
“A+” for initiative. I don’t know what is more impressive — your surveying the portfolio companies or their willingness to give you input.
Agreed. At first, I was a little skeptical about the number of responses I would receive from the CEOs because of how busy they are. Got first response in 5 minutes. I was definitely overwhelmed with quality and number of responses and willingness to help. Love how much the tech community is always willing to help each other out
When I first began recruiting for higher levels, I was nervous about contacting CEOs for candidate referrals, but took a deep breath and made a start. What shocked me is that I would get an email response almost every time! And often within 24 hours. (I also learned that the same gatekeepers who fielded my calls either didn’t field emails or let them through.)This put me to shame in terms of my own inbox. It was a real confidence boost. One of these referrals was to someone who later became CEO of one of the largest companies in the world. This person wasn’t interested in becoming a startup CEO at the time — and now I understand why — but it’s my little pleasant secret that I once offered this top CEO a job opportunity.My Dad’s motto and I try to live by it: You don’t ask, you don’t get.
That’s awesome. Your secret is safe with me.And I completely agree with your dad. If you really want to get what you want, you have to be ready to face rejection and you have to ask for it
I haven’t figured out what I’m good at as far as 9 to 5 jobs go. If you ever have a position for a paid intern, I would really love a slot. I’m working on creating a company as well as interested in investing in the future. I need to learn how to socialize, make small talk and network. The experience would be greatly appreciated. I also need a stronger work ethic.
P.S., Companies always want to hire people who have it together (experience, education and etiquette) . Sometimes it’s rewarding to hire people who don’t have the 3 E’s but have great potential to bring froth great results.
I have a general policy of hiring crazy people and misfits. It has served me extraordinarily well.
i lean in that direction as wellit has served me well too
I used to be hung up on things like perfectly formatted resumes, well-polished emails, etc. Then I figured out how to look past that and try to find the attributes that drive growth and success. Just another adjustment in coming from a large company to a startup. Obviously the role and the industry make a big difference too.
Indeed. As espoused in ‘Funky Business’ – not enough people see the benefit in this approach. Most hirers love conformity/no threat.I recall with horror a colleague at the time, when I was just a middle-manager hiring quite a few people for the company I was then with, saying (seriously): “Never hire anyone you think is better than you.”Incredible, to this day – I will never forget that insanity. Sadly, there’s an awful lot of that attitude around, still…
insecurity is the enemy of creativity and innovation.
The only downside with video is that some people completely freeze up when they have a camera pointed at them. I have a probono community that I got brands to fund. As part of it I asked them to get someone from the company to contribute to our video wall (all voices together for ovarian cancer awareness http://www.itstimetoshout.com).It was so strange – one of the clients was the most wonderful personable person in the world – as soon as we turned on the camera she became a robot. Literally. Reminds me of Chandler in this friends episode (go to 1:06 – totally classic) http://www.youtube.com/watc…
That’s true, Leigh. We try to make the process as easy and as comfortable for the candidate as possible. We provide all candidates the ability to create practice interviews to get used to the format of the interview and get the pre-interview jitters out of their system, so that they can shine when doing the actual interview.
This seems like a very interesting job. However, I just saw the post. Will it be open to the public again for hiring?
nope
I did a similar video-based interview recently (not via TakeTheInterview).It was easily the most prepared I had ever been going into the interview.(No way did I want to look unprepared or foolish on video.)I did not get the job but it was a terrific experience –
I have friends who founded voicescreener http://www.voiceadvantage.com/ . While hiring an analyst for USV one can safely assume they’ll have a webcam, for a great number of companies it’s going to be voice only.
Interesting. Hiring is sooooo critical to any organization’s success. Done well it takes a lot of senior management’s time, i.e. an organization’s most ‘expensive’ and highly leveraged time. Any way to separate signal from noise early in the process and thus spend more time with the best candidates is hugely beneficial, and a potentially huge opportunity.
hire well, and fire fast
The challenge with something like this is it’s hard to scale. It’s probably fine for smaller firms looking to hire 1 or 2 individuals every few months, but not those that hire several folks a month. There’s also the advantage of saving travel time/cost if the interviewee has to fly into another city.However, as Fred points out, they watched 45 hours of video just to get a few candidates pre-screened for the in-person interview. That is a lot of time to prescreen because the regular process still follows viz interview, offer, close.Most Recruiters make a decision in 10-15 seconds if they are going to read a resume further and it will be an uphill battle to convince them to do otherwise. And most hiring managers in companies take days to even respond when a Recruiter sends them a resume, let alone provide good feedback. I know hiring managers should be spending more time and blah blah, but the reality is that very few do. So to make them watch videos of candidates is going to be tough.There are other companies who tried the same video interviewing approach in the last 4-5 years. But they did’nt move beyond the early adopters and are going sideaways now. I hope Take The Interview has better success.
Thanks for your feedback. Watching 45 hours to find the perfect candidate is actually a much lower cost than interviewing the majority of USV 200-something candidates in person or even over the phone. While yes, this this video engagement did require a time commitment on the part of USV, we anticipate the end goal will be worth it. They were able to see the widest range of candidates possible, thus opening up the interview process to more than just a resume. I encourage you to review the costs of recruiting to see how Take the Interview actually saves both time and money. Check out our recent infographic that illustrates these savings: http://www.taketheinterview…
The infographic is nice but one point that you need to drive home is the fact that the interview is *not* in real time. Using wording such as “video interview” you are leaving the impression that you are offering basically a real time video chat service for an interview which of course is not what you are doing. The key selling point appears to be the 3 minute average time as well as the fact that you can efficiently view the responses whenever you want and get a feel for the applicants. Also you are not “trapped” either talking to someone that you know you don’t want or worse yet in an office going through the motions. (Money savings is great but remember in many of these situations someone is spending a budget or the companies money.)The home page copy also gives that impression. The fact that you address that in the FAQ won’t help if a potential client doesn’t make it to the FAQ because they make a snap judgment about what you are offering.
Thanks for the feedback! We are actually in the process of a complete redesign of our website, and will be changing the copy to reflect the asynchronous nature of our product. Also, USV chose to do a public interview- which lead to 250 responses. There is also the ability to interview via invitation, which could be done after the initial resume review, it would cut down on the number of interviews to review and still save a lot of time phone screening candidates that are not a fit for your organization.
I think it’s a novel effort and I wish you guys luck. My point was basically that it’s been tried before, and it’s going to be an uphill battle to convince the regular hiring manager to do this. If you would like, I’d be happy to connect with you and we can try it at my day job, which is running Recruiting at a mid-size company (~1700 employees). You can find me on LinkedIn or Twitter.I also agree with LE’s point. The ‘interview’ word is going to throw a lot of people off. Basically, what you are doing is providing a layer of pre-screening before the actual interview. At best, you are replacing the phone interview, though not exactly as that is live and not scripted.
1/250 for a good job. pretty decent odds.i nearly applied for this, but i’ve been a bit ill recently and wouldn’t have been able to start right away even if i did get it. which i probably wouldn’t have.plus, a job that a lot of people can do isn’t the best place to be IMO. if you can keep on learning powerful yet relatively complex skills then it eliminates competition; just because other people either can’t or are unwilling to follow. i saw this when i started doing seo, there was a ton of white space in my little market, which was otherwise totally saturated.that’s not to say the right person for the role isn’t going to be wildly successful etc etc
I applied for the analyst position at USV, and after the experience I had an opportunity to engage in a dialogue with the team at Take The Interview (amazingly friendly and responsive). Our conversations led me to describe the pros and cons of the experience from the interviewee perspective in a blog post. (http://benwinokur.tumblr.co…One feature that has not been discussed so far in the thread is Take the Interview’s mock interview tool. This service allows candidates to answer sample questions from different job spheres (legal, finance, etc) and rewatch the video to gain perspective on their strengths and weaknesses as an interviewee. As someone searching for a job, the opportunity to record and evaluate myself in a (somewhat) pressurized setting is a great tool for improving performance in face to face and video interviews.My ultimate feeling, having experienced the service from the interviewee side only, is that this process could ultimately replace the on-campus interview process. The costs associated with on campus interviews (travel and lost productivity) cannot be justified (in my opinion) by the thin-slice of information that can be gathered from a resume collection and short conversation. The Take the Interview process can provide a similarly small amount of useful information without the extraordinary costs.Note: The preponderance of my experience with on-campus interviews comes from the legal sphere.
thanks for the comment Benvery helpful!
No problem. AVC has been an amazing resource for me since I became interested in high growth companies several years ago. Watching your “lean vs. fat” debate with Ben Horowitz two summers ago convinced me to pursue a career in the startup world rather than pursuing the path of least resistance into a more general legal practice. Thank you for the opportunity to apply. I was thrilled to have an opportunity, regardless of the result.
I did a final round interview by video phone from South Africa for a job in Australia……It was hard to put across my best qualities and not feel like I was in an awkward stage performanceStill I think a video interview is still more valuable for both parties than a simple resume/CV application.
If you study Careerbuilder you will notice that 250 applicants for one position is not all that many. Having hired a couple of thousand people in my life I have to admit that I have been testing Indeed, Jobvite, and Jobscore. I have tested them from the perspective of an applicant and whether they allow the applicant the ability to get their message across.I have read a couple of hundred job openings on Indeed, Jobvite, and Jobscore and I notice a real “disconnect” between the particulars of the job description. I think the best model would be to create an applicant database, not only dealing with experience and education, but also that allows some self expression above and beyond skill set. Oh, and a video would really be helpful.Then allow employers the opportunity to search the database. I know from experience that lots of times you list an opening, get resumes and applicants, and you say either, “…we are not getting the applicants we want….” or you say, “gee, these are great applicants…for the position we hired last month.”I also know from experience that sometimes you see a resume of someone who is outstanding but just too overqualified for the position at hand but you know, as you are growing that in 6 months to a year you are going to need someone with those qualifications. I have actually interviewed these folks and told them right up front that I was looking toward the future. Those were actually the best interviews, because making a decision was not pressing, and we were able to focus on what issues we would face getting from current to the point in the future; they actually mentored me to the point that they became valuable and necessary.They also hit the ground running when I eventually did call them back in for an interview.
awesome post, carl. if you have a moment, i was curious if you could elaborate on this observation:”I notice a real “disconnect” between the particulars of the job description.”i am very intrigued, and understand your larger point to be that life would be better if employers could get a better sense of what the total pool of talent looked like (the way a sports team knows who every single free agent is on the market), then drafted a job description accordingly? in the interim, i wonder if you have any concrete tips for improving jobs descriptions? (e.g., my company @Unigo:twitter is looking to hire a few people.)
Christopher, I know you asked Carl (and I will love to hear what he thinks). Hope you won’t mind my $0.02. I see this disconnect too, and it comes from employers a) not knowing what they want, and/or b) not doing a good job of articulating what they want. A job description is a kind of code. Write it correctly and it will work…and used well, it can also serve as a platform for managing people’s performance down the road.
“…and used well, it can also serve as a platform for managing people’s performance down the road.”That’s key, Anne! I’m glad you mentioned this.Interestingly, a client who didn’t really see the value of taking time to develop a quality job description before conducting the search (but went along with it) just called me six months after the hire to send him a copy of the job description as a performance management tool. Another convert! (It was a more junior hire than the norm for me, but really fun to help a guy I knew when he was in college hire a key staff member for his small company and then continue to walk him through the process of managing this employee.)
Good save, Donna. It is so easier it is to manage someone when all parties know what’s expected.
Welcome to AVC where you ask someone a question and other people just jump right in! 😉 To write a good job description you have to actually analyze the job — really think through what the job involves. It’s not enough to use a generic job description based on what the job title generally reflects in the marketplace; you must actually describe what that job is at your company! You start with the purpose of the job — a sentence or a paragraph stating the mission of the job and then everything in that job description should somehow support accomplishing that mission. Everything required in the qualifications should somehow tie in to what it takes to perform those duties and carry out the responsibilities. You can look at generic job descriptions on the internet or on a job board as a reference point, but you have to make the job description your own.Your success in recruiting and hiring will be directly related to your understanding of your target — and as frustrating as it might be, don’t be afraid to pivot your hiring process, because you are going to learn a lot during the recruiting/hiring process and it is okay to apply those lessons as you go. (Confession: Before my recruiting career, I was a compensation analyst with heavy job analysis responsibilities — wrote hundreds of job descriptions.)BTW, Steve Blank shared a tool that I thought was very helpful in terms of determining job requirements and matching them to candidates. Geared toward higher level roles but can be transferable: “Hiring – Easy as Pie” (If the link doesn’t work this way, I will edit and add manually.)Edit: Here’s the link: http://bit.ly/tzz1Wh
In reviewing job descriptions here is what I see:Mixing professional job related skills with personal/personality attributes.Use of key terms: Everyone talks about “teams” then they talk about wanting “take charge” or “entreprenuers” or confusing double talk like that.The reality is that in small growing companies the skill sets of the individual that you may have had, or the skill set you are looking for today, will be totally different than the ones you will need in six months to a year. Thus you are basically looking for people who can adapt and grow; ask yourself what that individuals resume would look like. Trust me, it wouldn’t be pretty!When defining a job, you are talking tasks or areas of expertise and when you are talking the ideal candidate you are also talking personality and mind set. A resume will get you skill sets but nothing on mind set.You also need to not only analyze a job in your description but you also have to analyze your company. All organizations are unique and special; no two are alike. Be able to separate the organizational culture from the job description.If you want send me your job descriptions and I will review and comment; I won’t write them for you but I will attempt to make you think more thoroughly and deeper….
Linked In has some elements of your desired database. What do you think about LI?The problem with hiring today is not the technology, or the people being hired. (As I see it.) There’s little reward in our work lives for those who view work as a series of transactions. It’s about managing relationships with care and attention — like spending the time talking with someone to get to know them before there’s a spot for them, reviewing hours of video, mentoring/training people once they’ve been hired to ensure success.I think about this all the time. While I have a view on some of the structural causes, they’re complicated and have accumulated over the last 25-30 years. I don’t see any simple solutions — there’s no killer app.
Anne,I use LinkedIn very simply: I have a group of contacts who I like their product or service and I want to maintain contact with for the future.I have a group of contacts of people who I like and would be interested in hiring in the future.Then I have a group of contacts who I have done business with or worked with in the past.Linkedin has nothing to do with “managing relationships” because relationships are personal and Linkedin is not.I always looked at the interview as a three step process. First I have to get the applicant comfortable and relaxed, then I have to make all the preparation time they spent useless and so we can speak honestly and openly, then its about skills and what they bring to the table.The reality is that as you say, “…have accumulated over the last 25-30 years” actually is a negative in the hiring process….being good and successful, being engaged and making a difference for 25 to 30 years makes you unemployable today!That’s absurd!
Carl, you’re killing me! (in a good way)
We are devaluing experience, agree. You know how many hours you (and others) invested as you learned to interview and hire, to have a discussionwith someone about performance, other ingredients of a good general manager.It’s probably 10,000 hours. (And for those who aren’t Gladwell fans, psychologist Angela Lee Duckworth calls it the 10-year rule, the time it takes to learn a complex skill at a world-class level.) In my mind, general management – including hiring people – is a complex skill that takes this kind of time.I’m getting closer to the 25-30 years of experience myself every day. Above though, I meant to refer to the timeline over which we’ve made changes in our social contract about work. Some of these changes are good. Others, not so much. The one about off-shoring our low level work so that our “human capital” (egh) can focus on higher order things? Doesn’t seem to be working out so well for us. Maybe it turns out that some of those lower level jobs were experiences we needed our people to have on the way to learning how to run our companies. Jobs we needed for recent college graduates. I did some of those jobs, it sounds like you did too.(Angela Lee Duckworth TED talk from a couple of years back: http://www.youtube.com/watc…
All of this stuff about videos is fascinating to me when I compare it to standard job seeker resume advice in the 80’s / 90’s. Back then, the advice was always, “Do NOT include pictures in or with your resume”. It could / would lead to discrimination based on age or appearance. I still think this is good advice.
Rick,You are absolutely right!I would even argue that it is dramatically worse today than it was back in the 80’s/90’s and even more so in the tech world.My hair started turning white when I was 18 because it runs in my family on my mothers side. I also cannot hide the fact that I am 53.So when checking out Indeed, Jobvite, Jobscore, and one other program used by a company in my industry I actually applied for real jobs.In regards to the company in my industry. Their top HR person was telling me about this awesome program they had to attract and select “the best” and so I volunteered to test it by applying for a job in IT, one that we both agreed that I would be the top candidate.I was never found and the reason why was because their HR department had used previous employers as a screen and all they were looking for was candidates from their two same size competitors. Even their IT department didn’t connect my resume with the name on the users manual for the screen print software they use on a daily basis.After 20 plus years of being right down the street from each other and doing 10 times the screen printing of this company their IT and HR department can only see themselves and their two largest competitors.That is a really small pool of talent to limit yourself to if you really think about it.I did merit a conference call with a successful start up in California via Jobvite and that ended up being over an hour long and was quite enjoyable. In fact, I got a follow up email from the CEO thanking me for my input and letting me know that they have taken everything I said very seriously and were going to rewrite their job description and then re start their search and they hoped that I would re apply.At this juncture and following up on a comment William made about technology and efficiency, is, have we actually made the applicant search any better? Does efficiencies lead to improvement?What is it about age that we do not like? Why does one react to a male applicant different than a female? A black to a white? If you are looking for a skill set or a mind set exactly how does age, sex, or color impact ones skill set or mind set?If technology and the internet is all about “changing the world” then how much is really changing if we still think old world and still see things the old world way?What if the FAKE GRIMLOCK applied for a job with your company? What would his resume look like? I personally would love the challenge of working with someone who is very comfortable with his opinions but I realize it would be challenging; but the challenge would make me a better person and more successful.But what would his resume look like? With typing in all caps and including a picture how would we find him? Unless he used “Fake Grimlock” as a keyword I suspect we would miss him entirely.
There is an appalling lack of creativity in the hiring process. Drives me crazy.It would be so much better if more actual intelligent THOUGHT was given to the hiring process.I know there are reasons why recruiting and hiring have fallen into this state. Definitely an arena in need of disruption.I don’t have all the answers but I know that something is wrong.I actually think people like you have a lot to teach people who do recruiting but “people like you” are busy running companies. Business acumen in recruiting is rare and, yet, necessary.So what will it be? HackingRecruiting? OccupyHR?
Donna, I always said that whatever success I enjoyed in life was due to the fact that I was just too stupid to understand “common knowledge” and I realize that by NOT majoring in Business I didn’t get my dose of common knowledge.Today, the big thing is NOT to hire the unemployed and there is a logical reason given for this policy. But the reality is who is going to be more appreciative, work harder, and put out more effort to be successful and ensure that their company is successful than someone who has tasted unemployment?We look at the 50 year old applicant and we discriminate against them in hiring. Why? They got at least another 20 years of work ahead of them and the reality is most employees stay with an employer how long? Hell, with 20 years and the normal employment engagement of 3 years they got at least another 5 employers after you hire them?Everyone talks about their culture and finding the right fit; as if people cannot adapt. If your corporate culture is so great it should be nothing to take someone who is alien to your culture and make them a convert. I cannot help but believe that most people confuse “culture” with “country club.”Think about annual reviews. I would sit folks down after their probationary period and tell them where they stood and then I would layout what they would have to accomplish for their next payraise or promotion. If they achieved the results in 3 months then they got the payraise or the promotion if not then we waited a while. I never once gave an annual review and an annual payraise. But I had to know what the job required and where it would lead and then I had to go to the employee and acknowledge their growth. Nothing builds loyalty and spurs constant improvement in people then to know that the company leadership actually knows what they are doing and will acknowledge it and pay up when called upon to do so.Something is wrong and its wrong in a big way. For recruiting to change that will involve a change in “common knowledge.”We talk so much about individualism, freedom, and entrepreneurship, but the reality is 99.9% of people want to be part of something bigger than themselves. The key is to create a workplace where people feel they do make a difference, where they are part of something bigger than themselves, and where they feel that their lives and their effort makes a difference.The key to leadership is to create that workplace and to make sure that you live by your word.
Carl — My experience in engaging candidates supports what you say in this next to last paragraph. I recently saw a guy take a $100K pay cut to be part of a company where he thought his contribution would be more appreciated and the culture more enjoyable. I don’t think of culture as a country club. It really has more to do with shared values and the rules of engagement. A culture fit doesn’t necessarily mean that the person is similar to the other people in the company — richer cultures value diversity (and not just in terms of demographics).
I laughed at this one Donna! In 1989 after tolerating a 6 hour interview with the two partners who smoked like trains I asked for a salary of $30,000 which they said was way too high! So I told them to cut it in half and if after six months they wanted to keep me they had to pay me $30,000 otherwise we would shake hands and move on! It wasn’t the culture because there was none, but boy the challenge was right there in front of you every where you looked!I have never seen a company that was such a mess…but also successful, but very small. Ah, the crazy things we do for excitement! 🙂
If you missed this…Wharton prof Peter Cappelli in a couple of recent WSJ articles, calling out those who say that there’s nobody out there to hire.He says, “My favorite email came from somebody in a company that had 25,000 applicants for an engineering position and the staffing people said none of them were qualified.” (Hope the link, below works.)http://online.wsj.com/artic…
Yes, and another article said that the start ups in Silicon Valley can’t get enough grads from two east coast colleges and they are forced to find other solutions for staffing…Or read the posts here and every now and then you get a flood of comments about how our school systems need to focus on developing more programs for coders and tech graduates.Yes, we expect the school systems to predict our needs long before even we know what they are and we expect candidates to know exactly what we are looking for in a candidate and to tailor themselves to fit our exact absurd specifications.I was at a small meeting of local manufacturers recently and all of them were complaining about having open positions for machine operators but they could find no one experienced to run these machines; these machines were all specifically tailored to their industry and their company so unless they REHIRED there was no way they were going to find qualified applicants.In manufacturing we tend to forget that UNIONS once provided us with apprentice programs and employee training.I can’t help but wonder if Henry Ford and Thomas Edison didn’t gripe about the lack of qualifications of their employee pool back in those days….So now we want colleges to train and prepare, high schools to train and prepare, we basically want everyone to do everything for us, long before most of us have a clue what we are doing.Locally, I used to participate in career day at high schools and I would go and talk to various groups at the local university. Its really hard to expect students to know what is out there in the real world when they have no access to what the work world is all about.How many Tech firms in NYC actually work with the local school systems? How many of them actually have local high school classes tour their company and see what it is that is going on?We have allowed innovation and tech to turn the hiring process into nothing more than fishing for keywords. Then when our model doesn’t give us ideal candidates we complain about the school system, oh but never a thought that our model maybe flawed.I would love to test Indeed, Jobvite, and Jobscore by having an employee, who left a job, reapply for their old job and see if these programs would “find” that candidate.Technology and the internet have increased the size of the pool that we can hire from, but sadly they have yet to figure out how to make the decisons necessary to hire the right candidate.
One thing I see in many larger companies is the fragmentation of the HR function — this is one of those structural issues that have arisen over the past 25-30 years. Roles that were staffed with experienced generalists who were executives in their own right have given way to cadres of specialists in recruiting, comp, benefits, talent management.This leads to fragmented solutions. For example, keyword search is a great way to “process” the 1000 resumes you get for a job. But it’s not a great way to hire. The real problem that someone needs to solve is, how do you *not* get 1000 resumes? Now, that would be a killer app.(If I led HR in a large organization, I’d want to fill most of my jobs by crowdsourcing, via my people. (Now there’s a product in need of a developer!) But this endeavor would never work unless hiring managers know how to ask for what’s needed — as @Donna Brewington White notes, via a competent job description.)
Actually “crowdsourcing” has been around for a long time as most jobs are never advertised and most applicants gain employment through networking.Like I told the SVP at Fruit of the Loom, you have 4 vice presidents of human resources and a staff of over 50 for what? If you are only going to hire from your direct competition, such as Hanes and VF, then just get on Linkedin and follow the employees of these companies.When you have an opening fire them off an email offering them a job.The reality is for Indeed, Jobvite, and Jobscore, to go from “cool” to useful (from traction to useful) they will have to develop a multi process platform. Something that not only assists in the development of a job description but also allows for a broader offering of information on candidates.
Exactly. Though Garbage In, Garbage Out. (Do people still say that?) If a hiring manager doesn’t know what he wants, no tool is going to help him create a good job description.My thought is that firms could do a better job of institutionalizing their crowdsourcing efforts. (Though as I use the word “institutionalize”, I do imagine the many ways it could go badly wrong. Much as the current process clearly has, generating thousands of job applicants, but “no” matches.)Companies that actively manage their alumni networks might be halfway there on this one.
This combined with some of the other comments you’ve made show that you have turned hiring into an art form.
Hi Carl. If you think video would be helpful in your recruiting process, we’d be happy to get you started with a training session and of course, 30-day free trial. Let me know if I can be helpful in the future as you hire awesome people.
Danielle,Thanks! I am going to add you to my contacts on Linkedin because video is something I think I could definitely benefit from in the future!
You graduated from Cornell…my sister is head of ITS Operations at Cornell (she’s the successful one in the family!)
Great to see you give a Boston or more specifically, Cambridge company props.
Very cool.Stack Exchange is my favorite, where peer ratings scores allow companies to find people that may sync with their values.I like this as well, but believe their will be a social network in the future that supplants boring and dry resumes, and allows people to express themselves as well show their experience in a way less stiff than a resume. In such a network, we’ll see people highlighting videos of themselves giving presentations, running meetings, etc. It will be a marketing tactic for the person, as well as helpful in learning from themselves.
We like stack too
Hey all,Quick question: is it currently possible to link to an individual comment in this thread? I had the urge to share a dedicated URL to one of the particularly helpful comment’s I read, but didn’t see any way to do this. Or is that somehow not in the spirit of this ongoing dialogue…?#WorkingMyWayIntoThisCommunity,DayByDay@chhhris:twitter
Each comment has a permalink
Chris — I am going to have my high school junior take a look at your site. Looks very interesting! (I will look too.)
Hmm, I’m not sure a video is a good substitute for a face to face meeting. Some people do well on camera, others don’t. If the job was for making those kind of TechCrunch video interviews that you and others do, videos like this might be in order. But if the job involves sitting in the back room and crunching the numbers, maybe it wouldn’t get the right guy.I had to laugh when I saw Jeff Pulver post this hilarious video of a guy going through one of those thoroughly social-mediafied interview and how he turned the tables:http://youtu.be/aoGADb_imtcOn an unrelated subject, I stopped by to say how neat SoundCloud is. Look at how it is used by a human rights activist in Uzbekistan covering the use of forced child labor in the cotton fields, and how she then gets it up on a news sitehttp://www.uznews.net/news_…
We will interview about 25 people face to face. Video helped us find those 25
Why not use a video conference to pair down the 25 to maybe 10?
We might. But many of the finalists live in NYC Seems silly to skype with someone who is a subway ride away
As Skype gets better, this could work well. Right now, the delays, drops, etc. not only add potential noise to the extra information you’re getting from visual input — but also to the stress level for all parties. I’ve found that info received from interviewees is better/richer when they’re more comfortable…
My experience is that people are stiffer in video interviews. Has this been your experience?
I’ve only used video in a few meetings, not in hiring. I didn’t notice any stiffness; maybe we loosened up dealing with our tech issues together!
For meetings with people I already know or with whom I’ve had several phone interactions, video has been a positive tool. Haven’t noticed the stiffness in those instances. Interviewing is such a strange thing anyway. Although I generally try to make it conversational and even enjoyable.
You mentioned that someone watched the videos of all 250 who applied and that this took the place of the phone screen. In the past round of hiring, I don’t recall that you phone screened everyone who applied for the analyst position. After watching all 250 videos, did you still look at the web presence of all 250? I’m thinking that this is still where you would have gained the most insight into the candidates and could have screened some out and moved others to the front.
All 250 got a web presence screen and at least three video views
Did the video screening make a clear difference in who you selected for the next round? Let’s say, as opposed to just reviewing their web presence. Would you have made significantly different decisions without the video?
It was very helpful in identifying people who can clearly and crisply articulate a point of view, which is critical in this job
Roughly, between video, web presence & experience – was the score weighting about 1/3 on each part?
Some of the best candidates are in their first or second year of college. We dont care about experience. The other two matter a lot
I guess I was interested in knowing about your scorecard. Would you reveal it later?
I think that for the job level and relative age range of the applicants for the USV analyst role, this type of approach is fine, especially as merely an initial screening device where you are trying to narrow down the list to a more manageable size for continued and relevant interviewing. The trade off for the time saved and the ability to make a more discriminating determination early on is that you may rule out some who just didn’t do as well on video or who opted out of the video interview. I also noted in the USV comments that several applicants had technical difficulties. At a certain age and/or job level, people don’t want to do anything that feels artificial or like jumping through a hoop. Personally, I would feel demeaned if a prospective employer wanted me to record a video interview before investing any time engaging with me. This type of approach may work in an employer’s market when people are more compliant because they need a job or in a situation where you are putting out a cattle call and then winnowing down the response. When all is said and done, I’d be very interested to know if you thought this was the most beneficial and time effective approach. This tool is great for college recruiting. Kids will think nothing of this kind of thing. Unless those college kids are majoring in fields where they are being wooed. I don’t see this as a good tool when you are competing for talent. When the employment market shifts to a buyers’ market, I predict that companies offering this type of service will suffer. Unless they switch to offering companies the opportunity to market their jobs via video.
Uugghhh!! What a horrible idea. As someone with formal interviewing training and **thousands** of interviews under my belt, I can’t imagine doing interviews via video. A LOT of what the interviewer gains from the interview is non-verbal, and some of that is simply not going to be available from a video clip. If you’re going to hire someone, or do business with someone, and that relationship is going to be long-term and have significant impact on your future, your company’s future, and the candidate’s future, then not investing at least an hour to dig in, and go back-and-forth, is short-changing everyone. And no, I would NOT use this even as a screening tool. Unfortunately, I think most recruiters these days are NOT very good AT ALL, and they routinely screen out candidates that would have brought some nice attributes / skills to the table. Just as unfortunately, too many hiring managers (NOT ME) these days, don’t recognize the importance of investing the proper time in acquiring their human resources. We’ll spend countless hours on a budget, a business plan, or other financial models, but then spend no time actually reading resumes and talking to the people who will potentially impact the business. Doing all this via video clip will only ensure that you miss the right people and hire more of the wrong people.
I think the major problem with TakeTheInterview is the “one-take” requirement combined with the strict time limit.If in a real-life interview if you slip-up over a few words the interviewer will probably just ignore it and think nothing about you taking another 10 seconds to finish your answer, but with the one-take time-limited video you essentially need to rethink everything you wanted to say in order to ensure it fits in the time limit.Although if video interviews become the norm I can imagine it will only be a matter of time before someone builds an app that lets you prerecord a video and then trick the video interview site into think it’s coming from your live webcam.That said I do think video interviews are potentially a good alternative to phone screens once the kinks have been worked out.
I think these video interviews will lead to discrimination based on age / race / origin, etc.
Presumably the firms that will discriminate on those factors will do so regardless. Video interviews may mean that they do so at an earlier stage, but I don’t think they will make an otherwise non-discriminatory interviewer become discriminatory.
Thanks, Imran. You are correct that Take the Interview simply provides a software that allows employers to screen candidates, and that software does not discriminate against candidates. We are EEOC, OFCCP, and ADA compliant. If there are any further questions about this, we are happy to address them.
Sounds cool. Check out Qual Vu http://www.qualvu.com/. They do qualitative market research with video, connecting businesses with consumers, asynchronously.
This is fantastic! So much technology exists, but putting it to simple and practical use is often challenging. As a medical recruiter Atlanta firm, this is a tool I am very interested to try!
It might filter some people perfect for the firm – it requires flash, and we all agree that no one worth their salt has flash installed, right? 😉 On the flip side, it probably filtered out the 500+ people who would have just flung their resume at the application form and walked away, so it’s likely a net win.
They just need to add a “hot or not” button and they’re all set.
speaking of which @fredwilson:disqus : Is usv doing open office hours again?
Instant hire!
That is a very good point! It requires clear commitment on the part of the applicant from the very beginning of the process. A good way to reduce the flow by eliminating the people that are less interested.I do agree with you on the flash topic as well although, one does have to make compromises in life 🙂
Clearly many pro’s and con’s, but I’d worry it might be too much of a filter to the point where the tool is only worthwhile for jobs in great demand. Not every position will garner 250+ complete applications. Does the application have the same utility for smaller roles that would normally return two dozen applicants but instead only get a handful? While it is awesome you will only see the most ambitious applicants, you might lose some very worthy candidates.
FILTER OUT PEOPLE NOT COMFORTABLE WITH VIDEO IN FAVOR OF NARCISSISTS ALREADY PUTTING EVERY MOMENT ON YOUTUBE.THAT NOT SEEM LIKE PLUS.
i’m excited about the canvas element in html5. then stack webgl on top and web apps start looking a whole lot different. the main reason the web looks the way it does is because of the book metaphor; 2d paradigms since gutenberg. this will change. it’ll give us a whole new way to interact with data. it’s going to be beautiful — after the first wave of hack.
For smaller roles I think it depends on what you value. If willingness and/or sufficient commitment to answer video questions isn’t high on the list then culling down your applicant pool with a set of video questions isn’t terribly bright.
We find that companies sourcing for positions with a low response rate have the best luck when they interview via invitation. In this case, after reviewing those two dozen applicants, they can invite those that they are interested in learning more about to Take the Interview and answer a few of their most important questions.
I’m good.But it’s always a battle. The market is weird right now, I suspect the uncertainty will make the annual holiday investor siesta start earlier than usual this year.
yes
Yep. As I said earlier in this thread, the utility of the tool depends on your values and if willingness and/or sufficient commitment to answer video questions isn’t one of them, then it’s a bad filter.I wouldn’t have submitted because a) I’m a numbers guy not a tv anchor [I’ve got a great head for radio], and b) I didn’t love their privacy policy.Edit: Although…If I really, truly, really, absolutely 100% wanted a particular job, I’d run nude through the Union Sq. Greenmarket if that’s what was asked of me.
I see a tool like this as another piece of evidence in the interview process, not necessarily a replacement for something else. It certainly cannot take the place of a face-to-face interview or even a short phone screen.It also depends a lot on the role. If you are looking for someone to do web sales demos, for example, it might fit perfectly. Or, perhaps a way to evaluate how someone behaves in an uncomfortable situation.If you are concerned about preening narcissists, it cuts both ways. Someone who seems too comfortable in front of the camera might be a negative. Like when you talk to that too-slick salesperson.
Also, I think FG is just a little bitter because he’s too big for a webcam. ;)(Please don’t eat me.)
Life is a stream editor, FG…
So true. The anchormen and anchorwomen did not score highly with me
You mean you wouldn’t like to see a hairy, moon tanned fellow, somewhat past his prime, streak past in all his birthday glory?! Me neither.As to what job, it changes periodically. Right now it would be in energy storage optimization research. e.g. creating the future grid.
Yes, in a way.It’s pretty clear the grid of the future will be comprised primarily of renewable energy.Most renewable energy sources are highly variable and can only be predicted in a limited way, so you need to smooth supply through some combination of storing energy and extra generation capacity.The cheapest way to store massive amounts of energy is hydro, but it’s very geography dependent. Other sources, like compressed air and batteries are much more expensive and have their own problems.Some open optimization questions include: How much do we need? In what combination? Where do we locate it? etc. etc.Of course there are lots of people working facets of these problems – I’d like to be one of them.
Yes, I think it’s giant piece of infrastructure proceeding at glacial pace.I’d love to see solid oxide fuel cells for every house, street or neighbourhood. Lot’s of pieces of pie to be carved up before that’s likely though.