I agree that video resumes are probably not going to stick around that long, but in your opinion, where do you see recruiting going in the future? Will the old fashioned resume still be around in 10-15 years? Interesting to think about actually - with all the business evolution that has happened, the resume has held fast as the main recruiting tool.

Matt

********
Matt,

-Ryan

I don’t see the problem with video resumes. If anything, wouldn’t they just give recruiters more to look at? Traditional resumes are so old school, but for some reason it’s held on as the preferred reference style.

If recruiters don’t have the ability to look past a candidates race, sex or physical appearance, they really don’t deserve to be recruiters in the first place.

My opinion is that if recruiters would stop being lazy about watching a few videos they would be amazed by some of the great recruits they passed up on a piece of paper.

So why not give it shot?

“Written communication is a more important”

A more important … what? Ahh, wait, that was fixed in a follow-up edit. That pesky publish button!

Hey I finally like a posting by Ryan Healy.

http://www.recruitingbloggers.com/rbs/2007/08/video-resumes-a.html

I had a successful career coach argue with me about this topic just the other day. But I think Ryan is right.

Employers can’t see whatever picture they want of a prospective employee if the prospective employee decides to turn up their privacy settings on Facebook (for instance, not allowing non-friends to see pictures/photo albums)

Anyways, just a heads up. Good post.

********

Very true. But if they really care, I’m sure they could find a way. Thanks.

-Ryan

Well, let’s think about this for a second.

Why does a video résumé have to include a talking head? A web designer might do a screencast, narrating as they went through their work. As shown by sites like tubetorial, videos can be successful without talking heads.

Granted, many jobseekers don’t know how to record a screencast either, but that could change in the future.

In any case, I don’t see video résumés becoming required anytime soon, but I do think they could be a great way to differentiate yourself against all of the other people that send in a boring paper résumé.

Just some thoughts.

I thought video resumes were the fad twenty years ago when hand held video cams became avaiable for not much more than £1000 with prices going down day by day.

I guess it’s all down to watch job you are applying for:

Marketing & Design might want to see your portfolio whether photographic or electronic on DVD, samples of your flower arrangements? samples of your dress designs? samples of your interior design work? samples of your garden design? samples of your website or blog design? …

But most firms just want to know that you fit the bill, ie have the ‘verifiable’ experience and qualifications - and the interview is where you need to shine (hey even if you look good on video, you still have to be able to shine in real life or face to face - unless you are a porn star)

And funally at least in Europe most government or civil service like jobs come with application form only. You have to be able to fill in the boxes, and not scribble outside the margins - lol.

Of course you do get a section where you can add anything that may make you stand out above the rest of the crowd.

However employing people is still a very random selection with smaller firms or those with HR employees with less experience simply looking for either the highest qualification (to be awed by), or the lowest common denominator - someone who will not make insecure people feel uncomfortable.

The measure of any business & any firm employee is the measure of the boss and/or recruitment. Those who are not intimidated by those who know more and hire the better quality people, and those who try to maintain an established hierarchy and employ people ‘beneath’ them.

I shall not give any examples here, but I think it is clear to most of us which kind of circumstances we are talking about. After all a football manager/coach will want a high scorer a winner, whereas a player/coach may want someone who follows his ‘orders’ … and so on.

Qualifications don’t make the person but are an easy way to limit number of applicants, experience doesn’t make the person but it certainly counts for a lot, but though pesonality cannot make up for qualfications or experience, it goes a long way in the hospitality industry.

I think many parts of the argument change if you switch “video resume” to “video profile” … don’t you think?

Jason Alba

Sorry to rain on the parade, but didn’t Penelope make these same points a few weeks back? Although the Facebook one is new.

I disagree. And the reason? The i-phone. I-phone makes it incredibly easy to scroll through videos posted on YouTube. I think we’ll see lots of job candidates posting links to online snips that i-phone owners can flip through while riding the train or eating lunch. Video is the next big thing.

Unless one is trying to acquire a job in Hollywood as an: actor, dancer, model or commercials, I don’t see the positives for average people using video resumes.

I think learning some acting skills can help job hunters in the interview process, whether we have video résumés or not, eventually we all end up talking to a stranger in a one on one situation.

Video resumes are also “noisy” and in many work environments there are fewer private offices. If a hiring manager (whether HR, or the team leader looking for help) receives a video resume, he/she would either have to go somewhere else to view it, or force others around them to listen to it.

Employees should be wary of confidentiality in the latter case (and an employer could get into legal trouble on this issue). Hiring managers will not want to move every time a resume is e-mailed to them.

And I agree with the other commenters — as a job seeker, don’t give the employer too much irrelevant information as your skills and experience will get lost in the flood. A resume is a focused document, a video is not.

“A picture says 1000 words” and videos are hundreds of pictures sewn together, so a video is like sending a million words.

But with a resume, you really only want to say 100 targeted words about why you are the right fit.

Wendy says: ““A picture says 1000 words” and videos are hundreds of pictures sewn together, so a video is like sending a million words.”

All of those million words can be used by the employer firm to defend themselves when a discrimination lawsuit lands on their doorstep. There is a reason why some practices are not common. Employers also want to be safe against such potential issues.

Way back, when I was graduating b-school, one smart-arse in my class stuck his photo under ‘any thing else you wish to tell us’ on the Procter and Gamble paper application form. Needless to say despite perfect grades in Marketing etc, he was not even short-listed in campus recruitment! The P&G guys, whose form did not even ask for gender, an otherwise common question, took great exception to it.

Thank God. So nice to know that “written communication” is turning out to be again important. I, too, have never been able to help judging people by their spelling and punctuation. For a while the attitude was that really smart people don’t need to care about spelling, etc., and that those who did care were just anal-retentive types.

Anyway, I think videos in general are more time-consuming than print. You spend more time getting less content.

Good post.

I mostly agree….I think it is a good opportunity for spokepeople,actors,and such….but, for the general job-seeker I agree that written communication is the best source for getting to know someone before the in-person interview.

Ryan,

As a senior recruiting leader, I agree that video resumes in their present form are not compelling. Yes, most recruiters spend less than 1 minute (I would estimate 20 seconds tops) on a resume… we certainly don’t want to hear candidates read one.

I do predict that video will become an increasing part of the candidate experience for several reasons:

1.) As a pre-screening tool, it allows recruiters to quickly review a candidate’s communication skills and similar core traits, but it also serves to shift time in the same way Tivo does. This creates significant talent marketplace efficiencies; but most importantly, it does so for both candidates and employers (dual economic gain).

2.) It allows potential candidates to be screened for multiple jobs, creating significant candidate-side efficiencies, which will become more important as the demographic landscape continues to shift. ie, if I am a candidate, I can answer several core questions (tell me about a time when you were really challenged in your career… What was the situation? What actions did you take? What made you successful…)on video and then submit that video to multiple companies.

Video won’t die in regards to the job hunt. We’ll just have to incorporate the technology more smartly than we do today.

********

Jason,

-Ryan

Well, I don’t think they’re going to disappear, but I don’t think they’re going to revolutionize the market either. I think they basically augment the current process. One of the biggest problems in the hiring market for many employers is a torrent of applications. If you add videos to the mix, they could be a differentiator for some, but that would require the recruiter to break their regular filtering process. And if everybody does videos, the initial screening becomes that much more time consuming. Furthermore, you can’t scan a video for data like you can scan a CV or resume. So they are not effective for first pass. By second pass you’re already at a brief phone interview anyway. So unless the person is candidate is doing a job that’s appearance-intensive (TV anchorperson) to the point of eliminating lawsuit liability, I just don’t see that video resumes are going to revolutionize things.