That is, according to Stephen Doubner in his Freakonomics post from almost a year ago.
Here are Stephen's point on why VR haven't catched on yet:
1. The cost of making a video resume falls on the applicant, not the employer; but it’s the employer who reaps most of the reward in terms of not wasting time interviewing unlikely candidates. The applicant inherently has more time to waste than the employer.
Correct ... why haven't applicants then figure this out yet?
2. Applicants may want the chance to impress an employer in person, and fear that they’ll be poorly represented in a video.
Correct again, so to make sure applicants aren't poorly represented VR need to be professionally done and it doesn't cost any more than having a paper resume professionally done!
3. Maybe employers, in their embrace of status quo-ism, think that video resumes are just too weird, or modern, or revealing; or perhaps they’re worried about being charged with discrimination if they respond disproportionately in favor or against a certain type of applicant.
These issues arise every time a new technology or cutting edge process hits the market. Eventually people get comfortable with it and pass these concerns. We are somewhat in the middle of that process right now and the more VR out there, the easier it will be for the recruiters to adopt the practice. And let's not kid ourselves ... we live in a technologically driven world so we will get there sooner or later, so why not be a pioneer on the subject?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
Technology is certainly changing our world fast. While I personally would not have considered a VR a few months ago, I now think it is the ideal way to stand above the crowd while reinforcing my personal strengths and professional experience—definitely not a waste of my time or money! Plus, VRs give employers more information; what great tool to help them make better/quicker hiring decisions.
Post a Comment