I agree with you that video resumes will not replace the traditional paper resume as they present a number of unique challenges for both job applicants and recruiters.

A more creative way to use video within the job application process does exist. Webcam recorded interviews can offer many unique advantages, including the fact that job seekers can complete the interview at a time most convenient for them, and that job seekers now have the opportunity to be considered for positions in different geographic regions. Without a video component within the application process, recruiters often pass over these candidates over due to high travel costs.

I am not suggesting that the traditional candidate screening process be replaced, but enhanced by the use of video. A combination of employer-specified questions requiring recorded video, audio and/or text responses helps applicants to highlight their personality, communication skills and fit not apparent on their resume. I have several years of experience as a recruiter and know that good candidates are passed over because they do not have a strong resume or a resume with the appropriate keywords. Recruiters simply don't have the time to meet the person behind each resume.

Using a webcam is easy and any initial discomfort is quickly eliminated as there are clear advantages to showing the recruiter who you are. For the majority of occupations, verbal communication continues to be an increasingly important skill – written communication can be very efficient, but is subject to misinterpretation and is unable to convey emotions as effectively as a face to face conversation. Emoticons give it their best shot – but a real smile can never be replaced, especially within the job application process!

Of course we are all different! This doesn't deter us from in-person interviews, so I think it is a moot point when discussing the use of video. I would argue that applicants are more comfortable doing a webcam recorded video interview as they are able to create one from the comfort of their own home!

Indeed it is the 21st century, and the traditional recruitment screening process needs to catch up! That being said, it must be done in a way that benefits BOTH job applicants and recruiters. By using webcam recorded interview questions in addition to a resume and written text responses, job applicants can now show recruiters and employers that they are so much more than their resume.

Rachel Evans, MBA, BSc.
InterActive Applicant
http://www.interactiveapplicant.com

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

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

Good post.

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.

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.