If you set a dish of dog food out at night and it is still there untouched in the morning, is it logical to say “Dogs Don’t Like to Eat”? If you post a job online and no one applies, is it fair to say “People Don’t Need Jobs”?
I’m referring to CareerBuilder’s recent and very quiet de-installation of their particular version of candidate video hosting, using the excuse that candidates just didn’t respond to their offering and therefore the market just isn’t ready.
Let’s analyze from the beginning. In April of 2007, this was posted by CareerBuilder on their site:
In a November-December 2006 CareerBuilder.com survey, conducted by Harris Interactive, 60 percent of over 2,200 hiring managers and human resource professionals expressed some interest in viewing video resumes of potential candidates. Nearly half (49 percent) of over 6,000 workers expressed some willingness to post a video resume of themselves to capture the attention of prospective employers.
So, last summer (2007) CareerBuilder rolled out something called CBVideo Resume with a very ugly page that looked like this under their “Post a Resume” tab:
Their message to candidates was: “Don’t get caught relying on a paper resume to sell yourself” and “show off your personality with a video resume” and finally “Ever thought, If I could only get an interview, I know I’d get the job? This is your chance to get that interview with a video resume from CareerBuilder.com.”
So, what went wrong?
First of all, there never was an offering for a “Video Resume from CareerBuilder.com”. CBVideo Resume was not a place to build a video resume. All they were offering was a place to upload your video that you had already made using some other tool somewhere else.
Secondly, there were no instructions at CVideo Resume about how to technically build that video resume, or where one might go on the web to accomplish this feat. And yes, to many, it is a feat. There are still lots of candidates who don’t own webcams, have never used a webcam, have no patience with webcams, or would have to have their children help them with webcams.
Thirdly (if thirdly is a word) CareerBuilder provided no instructions on this intro page about what happens with their video resume once they did upload an elsewhere produced video onto the CareerBuilder site. What would that get me as a candidate? Candidates had no clue as to:
- What happens to my video resume once CareerBuilder gets hold of it?
- Who gets to see it?
- Who has control over it?
- Does CareerBuilder just post my resume on their site for all subscribers to see? Where?
- If so, where does it appear? I see no examples.
- If not, what do I have to do to SEND my video resume out to employers or recruiters? Is there a facility on CareerBuilder to do that?
- How long is my video stored on this CBVideo Resume site and how can I get it off?
- And lastly, there was no significant marketing push to candidates to market the fact that this new tool would be a great thing to use, and how, and why, and when.
They just put out the dog food and didn’t whistle.
It is no wonder this product, (which, by the way, is not a video resume but simply a place to store a video resume), did not have any traction. What did they expect?
This is an example of a major player in the industry just attempting to “dabble” in a hot new technology, but not putting much energy or thought into it and then “dismissing” that technology as a failure simply because they failed to execute properly.
This kind of irresponsible behavior ruins it for the serious small vendors who are spending every ounce of energy to get the concept right and roll out new technologies in a clear concise and useful way for the end user.
September 16th, 2008 at 11:06 am
I am wondering how CareerBuilder pulling their product is bad for your company? That logic simply doesn’t follow. If CB had hit a home run (which is near impossible considering video resumes aren’t in demand from the people that matter in the process: hiring and recruiting), wouldn’t that put you in a worst position? With CB out of the space, you have more opportunity to take valuable market share from a company that could bury you marketing dollars wise.
September 16th, 2008 at 11:12 am
Video resume’s? Interesting, I wonder if someone presented a quality offering it would gain much traction. Or if it would be more trouble than it’s worth. Is the assumption here that headhunters, in order to market candidates would send a video clip? That seems like the most rational place to test this technology.
September 16th, 2008 at 12:03 pm
Wow this is a stretch!!! “This kind of irresponsible behavior ruins it for the serious small vendors who are spending every ounce of energy to get the concept right and roll out new technologies in a clear concise and useful way for the end user.”
So CB is responsible for all small vendors out there? I would think that CB “dabbling” in the game opened plenty of doors. There was penty of opportunity there for the small guys to fill the gaps and they didn’t….why? Could it be the demand was not there?
September 16th, 2008 at 2:15 pm
Colleen - your logic does not make sense. You would think that you now have some more room in this space to dabble with CB out of picture - is it that you don’t have any prospects that would use this product? Or are you just trying to rip on a company when you can?
September 16th, 2008 at 3:05 pm
Ok, Lance. Thanks for asking. Here’s the explanation: When a major market share player such as Careerbuilder makes a statement about a product or type of product, the market listens and is apt to believe them. When Careerbuilder says that the use of video technology doesn’t work or that people don’t want to use that technology (even though their earlier surveys concluded that the majority of people they surveyed ARE interested in this technology), then people might actually believe them… especially when it SEEMS like Careerbuilder tried the technology out themselves and would therefore be an expert.
Here are the salient points:
- Putting up a page on your website for candidates to upload a video that they have created elsewhere is NOT a test of video technology as it should be used to greatest advantage in the employment marketplace. It is not a test of the value of the technology. It was simply a test to see whether Careerbuilder visitors already had a video resume made elsewhere and were willing to give that to Careerbuilder. So to pose that as a definitive basis for the merit of video is flawed in the first place.
- Next, “Video Resumes” are simply talking heads, or a candidate talking their text into a webcam. This use of video technology is not useful as a stand-alone delineator of talent or job match. In fact, video resumes are just one step above a still photograph, useful for seeing what a candidate looks like and how they can recite their resume on tape. This is the reason that your statement is true “considering video resumes aren’t in demand from the people that matter in the process: hiring and recruiting”. You are speaking here about “video resumes”.
- “Video Interviews” are an entirely different animal and have a lot of value to hiring managers and recruiters if done correctly. Several vendors are incorporating video interviewing with other pieces of candidate due diligence (resume, assessment results, endorsements, reviews, portfolio docs, social network links) to create a much richer view of a candidate on first look.
So the fact that Careerbuilder “pulled their product” is not a bad thing. The important point is that Careerbuilder blamed the market for not being ready … which isn’t true… instead of accepting blame for 1) implementing what they erroneously thought was going to be the “demand” use of video technology 2) implementing it poorly and 3) failing to place any significant marketing or support efforts around something so new.
Careerbuilder pulling this particular implementation of “video resume” upload capability is a GOOD thing, since their example was a poor one.
So my blog is centered around making sure that the public sees the Careerbuilder implementation for what is was and to NOT be swayed into thinking that a) the market isn’t ready or b) people don’t want to use video in employment applications…. just because Careerbuilder says so.
September 16th, 2008 at 3:20 pm
Dear Anonymous and Monsterlover1: Thanks so much for the comments.
Please see my response to Lance above and you might want to read my blog at http://interviewstudio.blogspot.com/ — the entry titled “What’s all This About Video Resumes” where i painstakingly list the pros and cons of this video technology. I would be most interested in your responses if you are serious about this technology and its ROI.
This is serious business for me… and all of the vendors mentioned in the recent White Paper “Unmuddying the Waters of Video as an Employment Tool” (www.interviewstudio.com/DisplayResearch.do). These comments are not to “rip” any vendor but to help educate the public in this muddy arena… and believe me, there is plenty of noise to confuse folks!
And believe me, there are PLENTY of prospects who want to use this technology and are using it as beta testers. Staying close to these types of users is one thing that makes me qualified to write these blog entries. It also helps in creating a product that the market really wants and will use.
Stay tuned for my blog about the legal defensibility that the careful use of this video technology may afford employers… instead of creating more paranoia.
Thanks again for reading!
September 16th, 2008 at 4:59 pm
Vid resumes are a complete joke. So what if fatty (well qualified as he may be) sticks his big mug up into a webcam and gives it his best shot?
All your clients are going to come away with is “man - that guy is fat!”
Video resumes are crap. Careerbuilder researched it. Careerbuilder confirmed it.
Stupid idea.
September 16th, 2008 at 5:46 pm
I am surprised that Careerbuilder jumped into something like this without adequate homework on the back end. It is a great idea, but something that should have had a little more planning involved - because this is going to be the wave of the future. We have had telephone interviews and web interviews, why not a web announcement - giving the companies a taste of your personality.
September 16th, 2008 at 6:21 pm
Hey Colleen, speaking as someone who was with a staffing company that actually built our own web app back in 2000 that provided a candidate/job post matching engine along with a cached video interview, you are exactly right about the demand. It is latent because people don’t know it’s available in a professional and effecitive delivery model. I believe right now, video interviews fall into one of the immutable laws of marketing; “You would be surprised how much people will pay for something tomorrow, on what they didn’t know they needed or even existed today”. Keep leading the way and good luck with your efforts.
September 16th, 2008 at 11:39 pm
I just gotta wonder about that 2006 CareerBuilder survey of 2000+ folks that Harris conducted. I’ve yet to meet a recruiter who considers the prospect of reviewing dozens of video resumes for each of the scores of open reqs he has on his desk…let alone trying to convince the hiring managers to participate in the farce to be a productive use of anyone’s time…even if all the candidates have similar training on presentation skills, equivalent practice opportunities and relatively equal tools to produce their final efforts.
Colleen’s whitepaper [referred to in her comments] on video recruiting models is an excellent overview of the current state of affairs. The potential for video as a means to impact recruiting process is huge but Colleen is right to point to video interviews as a distraction and, in my opinion video interviews, at best, mislead job seekers.
And I’m still wondering who those survey respondents were…as well as the folks who wrote the questions… and the analysts who crunched the results. Did anyone sit down with a couple recruiters and do a reality check?
September 17th, 2008 at 12:23 pm
Colleen, it’s understandable you’re disappointed there isn’t currently more demand for the product & service your company provides, but calling it “irresponsible behavior” because other organizations aren’t currently pursuing them as vigorously as yours is a bit assumptive.
The market isn’t always ready to embrace technologies as quickly as it’s available, even if it’s amazing, super-cool disruptive technology that’s potentially game-changing. Using an example I’m close to (feel free to substitute tablet pc’s, or for that matter “flash resumes”) — four years ago, real “in-flight” internet access was available in a number of airlines. The technology worked great (sub 200 ms latency, 512+ Kbps throughput) and consumers loved it. Unfortunately, due to a confluence of factors, the market at large simply wasn’t ready to embrace this technology. Fast forward four years, and here we are again, hopefully this time it’ll stick.
As Dell, HP and others continue to integrate webcams into notebooks and monitors; Google, MS, and Adobe continue to make basic video editing software more intuitive and simpler to use; and the lawyers and HR professionals work through EEOC and OFCCP issues; and as other potentially related technologies (machine translation, speech to text) become more mature ( check this out: http://labs.google.com/gaudi) there will be a time when these “video resumes” of which you speak will have their day. Won’t it be nice to know you’ll be prepared?
…Hopefully you won’t have to wait for R2-D2 to project holographic resumes.
September 18th, 2008 at 2:34 pm
Chris, thanks for taking the time to contribute… Yes, I remember too well the inflight airline attempts for progressive connections by Connexion and Tenzing… as the other firm I own did the recruiting for Tenzing in a “time before its time” as they say.
Since I see you are with CareerBuilder, I wanted to answer specifically since it seems the point is being missed here. You mentioned: “calling it “irresponsible behavior” because other organizations aren’t currently pursuing them as vigorously as yours”…
Actually, as an aside, several other organizations ARE currently pursuing them as vigorously as we are:
HireVue
Interactive Applicant
ZoomRez
LiveHire
CareerCam
InterviewStudio
FaceHire
InterviewOnDemand
InterviewScreen
InterviewStream
InterviewClips
TalkingCV
Jobaria
MyWorkster
VideoResume
CVTV
SavvyPaper
VideoSnapshot
Jobrific.com
FutureResume
VisualCV
ProfileBuilder
ResumeVideo
Workblast
Vault.com
ResumeTube
JobMatchPro
And No, nowhere did I say that CareerBuilder was irresponsible for not pursuing this technology… the irresponsible part is sending the message to the market that a certain technology doesn’t work or isn’t ready or that no one wants to use it, when CareerBuilder had no basis for these summations.
My point is that CareerBuilder did not implement any new technology. They simply put up a page where users of new video technology who had built video resumes using technology on someone else’s site could upload those videos. This is a move that some then-progressive companies did 2 years ago when the first YouTube video resumes came out. Since then, the convergence of technology (text, video, real-time document sharing, behavioral interviewing online, social networking, Flash, speech to text) has made it possible to develop far greater ROI in applications that actually save time and money in critical business processes instead of simply entertaining.
CareerBuilder’s page was simply an upload page for a video. Again, no new technology here. And therefore, no basis for them to publish opinions about technology they didn’t implement.
After very few people uploaded videos, CareerBuilder (instead of admitting that their implementation was a bit off the mark) made the blanket statement that “the market isn’t ready”. In this case, the word “irresponsible” means “not taking responsibility for your own actions”.
Having said all that (and hammering this to death by now) I am quite intrigued by comments on this blog entry. It appears that the general public really doesn’t know how far technology has come in this arena and what they should and could really expect to come to market very soon.
I agree wholeheartedly with those who “diss” video resumes. But every market needs a failed first attempt at something great. Short of “holographic resumes” (LOL) Video Resumes are now morphing into something more useful, with more wrappers around them for greater usefulness in the hiring process and more legal defensibility. Stay tuned!
September 19th, 2008 at 5:03 pm
I dont know if I agree with your analogies… If you put a bowl of dog food out and 1 dog doesnt eat it… dogs dont eat. What if there were 25 MILLION dogs. Wouldnt the sample size indicate more? Just asking.
September 22nd, 2008 at 10:23 am
I would like to comment on the post by VideoResumeNOT! You are really missing the point of what a well designed video interview system will accomplish. It is NOT about hiring the skinny, good looking people. It is about improving the overall screening efficiencies for both the applicant and the hiring managers. If the “fatty” sticks his “big mug up into a webcam” and is discounted by the hiring manager based on his looks – well, hate to tell you this…but it’s going to happen in person at the interview (unless he wears a bag over his head and wears a skinny suit). So, tell me how inefficient that is for both applicant and employer? IF this is going to happen, it will happen at some point – and the video technology used will just make it happen earlier in the process, saving valuable time of both parties. That is just one value which can be seen with this new technology.
September 22nd, 2008 at 12:16 pm
the value of the video resume isn’t large enough for anyone to pay any real money for. What’s the sell? Other then, dear client, you should use video resumes because you can see what people look and talk like before you interview them. That’s a lawsuit waiting to happen. The screener benefit of video resumes are ones that potential employees could easily use against a company as reasons they werent hired.
September 22nd, 2008 at 4:00 pm
For all of you that keep stating that video resumes are a “lawsuit waiting to happen”, because hiring managers will sift people out based on looks, Darryn’s post is exactly right. On top of that, I believe it says a lot about certain people’s view of hiring manager. Granted some people allow their biases to enter into their decision making, but just because it happens does not mean it is as prevalent to make it a problem. Is there one company that hires all the ugly people and do fat people ever get hired or do they get hired skinny and then get fat?
In this tight market it is my belief that companies will hire the best person that meets a majority of the requirements and gives their company a competitive advantage, no matter what they look like. I am not naive to the fact that it happens on occasion but I have faith in the majority of human race.
Video interviews provide much more value outside of “appearance”. If your organization has pride in its culture and the types of personalities that do well in that culture, you can tell a lot about a person by how they answer questions, how long it takes them to answer, the speed of their voice, facial and body language, etc…. If you can ensure to a greater degree that your first face to face interview with a candidate will be productive and worth the amount of time you have to take out of your day (not to mention everyone else involved in the hiring process…time is $$$), wouldn’t that be worth it? Not to mention being able to provide a better candidate experience, because you know them better after viewing their video…just my three cents (got a little wordy(-:
September 22nd, 2008 at 7:03 pm
Bravo to Eric and Darryn! Kudos for thinking progressively and logically about this.
Video is not a fad that will be stamped out by naysayers. It is here to stay.
The trick is to implement their use in applications correctly so that they save time and money for the employer/recruiter, INCREASE the clarity and quality of hiring decisions when used in conjunction with other pieces of due diligence, and they serve as a more holistic profiling tool for the candidates.
September 24th, 2008 at 8:28 am
One thought here: a video camera is not available for everyone. Trying to get a camera shipped to someone (hirevue) is about as stupid (or more!) as saying “We think you are an excellent fit for our client. We’ll call you in 4 days after you’ve hooked up all this $#@T we’ll be sending you and do a video”
Ever heard the word “practicality”? Doesn’t sound like you big hitters with all the money have thought about that.
October 6th, 2008 at 6:24 pm
Colleen, were you aware of a More Recent survey by Robert Half (and there have been others) which stated that ‘Just one in four (24 percent) senior executives interviewed said their companies accept video resumes from candidates.”
The survey was conducted by an independent research firm and was also based on interviews with about 150 senior executives from the nation’s 1,000 largest companies.
I am known for bringing up the mundane and boring stuff, but you see companies are against allowing a company standard of allowing them due to discrimination issues. Especially with the fact that discrimination is On the Rise not decline.
So, even if Hiring Managers may THINK it is a good idea, they Recognize (especially in regards to the Applicant Candidate Ruling, and making sure that one is CONSISTENT in one’s hiring process) that it really makes ones life EASIER, and probably may help reduce the legal implications..
Many also may not be aware that this is NOT a new idea, there was a company who tried the VHS resume.. didn’t actually take off either, for the same reason that companies don’t like to accept PHOTOS on resumes.. it increases potential for liability
Boring, but unfortunately it is reality.. why even tempt something that doesn’t need to be tempted?
October 6th, 2008 at 6:28 pm
My apologies for the double post, but for the record –
FYI, hirevue.. is NOT video resumes..they are Video Interviews - a common misnomer, and indeed a HUGE difference.. Less liability in Interviewing a candidate AFTER you have seen a paper resume, and made a choice based upon merit, than upon the Hope that maybe your hiring manager will be respectful, and keep his personal opinion out of the decision.. and not judge that person who is overweight, or is scarred, or maybe is disabled or handicapped..
If that were true, that hiring managers would be apt to be mature and trustworthy, why then would discrimination be up?
Karen Mattonen..
October 18th, 2008 at 11:38 pm
Colleen-
I remember clearly the day I saw the CB Video added to CareerBuilders site. I was grinning from ear to ear for days in August after it was rolled out. I thought that since a heavy hitter like CB gave the nod to video of some form, that they had to have invested in some market research.
I do agree that the roll out of it was rather pathetic, and that is certainly part of the blame for its removal. I dont recall much written education on exactly what to do with it, but I didnt care if they did it wrong. We had begin development of our own site a month bofore this rolled out, that had a flavor of Video developed into it, but not as the main focus like some vid sites.
Anyways, I agree that the misguided rollout of the CB vid is not the alert to the world that video is a waste. I truly believe that it is coming, and eventually with the right recipe, employers and recruiters will welcome resumes that have some sort of video enhancement.
Also to agree with some other comments, some employers will discriminate regardless of in person, or via video. If they do not like what they see, hear, or read…you’re not getting hired.
To date, I have yet to hear of a single discrimination lawsuit that was based on an employer reviewing a candidate via video.
Best of luck!
Keith
October 26th, 2008 at 1:45 pm
Karen, yes, Video Resumes are certainly different than Video Interviews… which is why HireVue and InterviewStudio both chose to use Video Interviews to embed in our products instead of the video resume approach.
Stay tuned for my next white paper regarding your EEOC concerns… Using video technology correctly will actually provide MORE legal defensibility to corporations than less.
Also, you may want to listen to the Webinar we hosted with the EEOC entitled “To Video or Not to Video” at http://www.interviewstudio.com/DisplayWebinars.do.
Thanks for blogging!
November 5th, 2008 at 5:32 pm
Crashing “za pahtay” late . . . :) (as usual!)
The bigger question is . . . Can all the little guys (those vendors listed above) drive demand without a Blue-Chip ‘confirming’ (at least if only market perception) proof-of-concept? Or, in layman’s terms, can the little guys above come together to make the pie bigger . . . instead of vociferously gnawing away at the tiny pie piece that currently exists? (Note that when I say pie, I mean demand.) Big Guys making commercials and spending big bucks on advertising typically does more than drive awareness; in addition, it drives consumption even for the little guys!
I’ve seen many times where the big fish pulls out . . . thereby cutting off the flow of oxygen (or better, the ecosystem) to all the little fish. By virtue of competition, the little fish inherently want to kill one another off . . . yet such a strategy only really works in a mature market where there is a desire for consolidation.
As Confucious might say (if he were from Ancient Brooklyn): “Don’t kill yourselves off before you make da pie bigga.”