Blog posts preparing you for your video interview are popping up online more and more often now that the technology has gained greater acceptance among recruiters and hiring managers who wish to improve their hiring processes. As a job candidate preparing for an interview, tips offered to improve the way you appear and sound are valuable but what about the technological challenges for which you should also be prepared? If you aren’t just new to video interviewing but to the Internet and computers in general, here are a few things you should know.
What browser are you using? Internet Explorer, Firefox, Chrome and Safari are examples of browsers so if you surf the web at all then odds are you are using one of these four. If you have technical issues and need to call a support line, you will need to know which of these you are using. Most will work fine with a video interview but if your browser isn’t up to date then you could have a problem. Most video interviewing systems use Adobe Flash Player to facilitate the video interview. If your interview won’t work because of a Flash incompatibility error, I recommend downloading Google Chrome since Flash is built into that browser.
Do you have a headset? One-way virtual interviews don’t require a headset and really neither do live interviews however to get the best sound quality from a live interview, wearing a headset is best. Doing so will prevent your interviewer’s voice from exiting your speakers and then feeding back through your microphone which creates a looping, echo effect. If you are using a laptop, only a headset or ear buds are required but if you are on a desktop computer, then a headset with a built-in microphone should be used.
How many microphones are you using? If you are using a laptop computer then you may use your computer’s internal microphone to conduct the interview. However if conducting a live interview, you may experience a microphone conflict if you have more than one microphone active. For example, if you are on your laptop and you are wearing a headset with a built-in microphone the microphone in your computer may conflict with the microphone in your headset. Only one microphone can be truly in use for the video interview but if you have two that are active your computer the video interviewing system may choose the wrong one. Most vendors will provide a step to test your microphone prior to starting your interview. If your microphone is not picking up sound, try selecting a different mic. from the microphone drop down list likely provided in the interview software.
What type of Internet connection do you have? No, I’m not talking about Wi-Fi. Most everyone is connected wirelessly. I mean do you have fiber, cable, DSL, satellite or “gasp”, dial-up? Fiber, DSL and cable are great but satellite and video interviews don’t play well together. As for dial-up, well, you are still probably waiting for the rest of this sentence to load. Poor thing! If your video/audio is choppy the degradation could be the result of poor internet speed. Make sure no one else in the house is streaming movies or downloading large files or playing online games. If the trouble persists, try unplugging your router for a few seconds and then plug it back in. If the problem continues then it could be that you need a new router (older than 3-4 years is ancient). But your computer may be the culprit which brings us to…
How old is your computer? Computers, unlike many of your home’s appliances, become obsolete quickly. If your computer is four years old and older or routinely takes much longer than it should opening programs and shutting down, you should consider a different device. A slow computer can degrade the quality of your video no matter how fast the connection speed. As an alternative to the computer many vendors offer video interviewing apps. for tablets and smartphones. Try one of these to improve performance. If you have no such devices to use, make sure that the video interview is the only program running on your machine. I would also suggest restarting your computer prior to beginning to optimize performance.
More than 95% of interviewees won’t experience any of these problems, but if you do these tips above can help you pinpoint and solve some problems. Unless of course you are still on dial-up!
As a recruiter you probably sort your job candidates into three piles; “yes”, “no” and “maybe.” How would you feel if one of the “maybe” candidates you dismissed as not good enough was presented and successfully placed by one of your competitors? You might lose sleep over it. Well one such recruiter experienced this and in his post he explains why recruiters are reluctant to take chances on “maybe” candidates.
“We feel they are overqualified.”
“We feel they don’t have enough experience.”
“We feel like they are “job hoppers”.
“They worked at a certain company that isn’t admirable.”
In each instance the recruiter urges picking up the phone and getting the candidate’s story before passing judgement on their resume. What I believe is implied in his post, especially when he mentions looking at hundreds of resumes a day, is that recruiters don’t have the time to get to know the “maybes”, even if this may be their desire. Using the methodology above, if one sorted through just 100 resumes, you might find yourself with twenty yes candidates, twenty maybes and sixty no candidates. The recruiter explains that inevitably, even after revisiting each “maybe” candidate several times, you will still find many reasons such as those above not to select him/her.
How much time are you willing to invest in a “maybe” candidate? Interviewing twenty could take hours and for nineteen of them your suspicions based on the concerns above may as expected be found true. Even then the one “maybe” that could turn into a “yes” may lag behind ten or fifteen of the others you have already chosen. So you may ask yourself why you should bother spending hours phone screening twenty “maybe” candidates only to uncover one potential diamond that is no clearer than the “yes” candidates you already have? And really how often does one of your passed over “maybes” get scooped up and placed by a competitor?
Recruiters have no extra time to waste on a “maybe” that might truly be a “no”. According to some statistics recruiters spend no more than six seconds reviewing a resume. Still, though, no one wants to fail. As an outside recruiter you will kick yourself if you lose a commission and as an internal recruiter or hiring manager you don’t want to miss out on a good employee especially if they go to work for a competitor. So how do you secure greater insight into your “maybe” candidates without further burdening your time?
A 2014 study by the Aberdeen Group showed that “Best-in-class” companies using video interviewing reduced time to hire by sixty percent and in addition reduced their cost per hire. Many video interviewing vendors offer automated interviews which allow candidates to log in and basically interview themselves by answering the questions the recruiter/hiring manager pre-uploaded. So using the scenario above, invites could be emailed to twenty “maybe” candidates and on their time they can interview themselves while you the recruiter better spend your time sourcing candidates. Once the candidates complete their interviews, you review their interviews in just one to five minutes each and confirm whether they are truly a “yes” or a “no”.
Don’t toss and turn anymore over the candidates that got away! Set up your “maybes” with a video interview and while you’re sleeping peacefully they can be interviewing.
Some employers believe older workers are more expensive and harder to manage and so once you reach a particular age threshold, holding on to your job or finding a new one becomes increasingly difficult. A 2014 survey by the Bureau of Labor Statistics showed that 22% of those unemployed under the age of 25 had looked for work 27 weeks or longer while workers 55 years and older searched twice as long. As the workforce ages, it’s not surprising that the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission has seen age discrimination complaints increase 15% over the last decade.
Many of you reading this article might be horrified to find out that at the age of 50 you are considered an “older” worker. But this shouldn’t be surprising since millennial twenty-somethings now make up a majority of the workforce. Don’t worry though, you aren’t alone. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics 30% of Americans 55 or older were working in 1991 while today more than 40% are. This is the first time in U.S. history according to the EEOC that four generations of the workforce, pre-boomers, boomers, GenX and millennials are engaged in the workforce at the same time.
Before you toss the “older” worker’s resume into the trash in favor of what you feel will be a less expensive more energetic worker, take a look at the following reasons why older might be better.
Older workers are more experienced. Workers 50 years and older can help fill talent shortages. Older, more experienced workers are also better equipped to handle problems and emergencies and mentor younger generations. If you haven’t yet, watch the movie trailer for The Intern. Robert DeNiro plays a 70 year old intern at a hot ecommerce company run by Ann Hathaway and her platoon of millennials. I’m sure heat warming hilarity will no doubt ensue as the old dinosaur shows the young whipper snappers what the important things in life are. This movie is a sign that Hollywood is noticing the aging workforce and how older workers have much to offer despite the perceived limitations associated with their age.
Older workers are more reliable. According to research out of the University of Kentucky, older workers show up for work on time more often than younger generations.
Older workers have a stronger work ethic. Younger generations are more likely to arrive late and leave early while older workers tend more to arrive early and leave late. The majority of older workers have no children at home in dire need of dinner or help with their homework.
Older workers are more loyal. According to a study by Aon Hewitt workers fifty years and over are less likely than younger workers to leave their jobs abruptly.
Older Americans are exceptional consumers and older workers of course understand this demographic. Who better to provide insight into what types of products older consumers desire than employees of the same age?
Older workers ease the burden placed on Social Security. As more workers continue to work past retirement, the fear of having to pay benefits to an army of retiring baby boomers is now less heightened. As the Social Security Administration put it, “[delayed retirement] shortens the retirement period that needs to be funded and can generate additional savings”.
Older workers are more experienced, reliable, loyal and have a stronger worker ethic. Hire them! Their golden years could be your golden years.
If you read my post, “5 Ways We Make A good Or Bad First Impression According To Research” you understand how quickly opinions of us are formed and how these favorable or unfavorable opinions can determine the number of doors opened or closed to us.
New research further indicates ways we may be blowing it by unintentionally appearing less intelligent or confident than we are. In addition to the five I previously named in my post, below are a few more.
Using sophisticated words in an effort to sound smarter fails you. Research shows that replacing complex words with shorter synonyms makes you look more intelligent.
Using words and phrases like, “adverse”, “appraise” and “begs the question” improperly knocks down your intelligence rating a bit. According to cognitive scientist and linguist Steven Pinker, these are the most incorrectly used words.
When you are walking with a group of people do try to keep up but don’t walk too fast either. Research shows that if you lag behind or walk too far ahead, you are seen as either less intelligent or less competent. Ouch
Cursing at work. According to a Careerbuilder survey, 50% of employers think a swearing employee was less intelligent. No BS!
Smiling faces appear more intelligent and trustworthy than angry faces according to research. Wipe off that scowl Mr. T.!
Speaking in a non-expressive fashion demeans your intelligence so avoid speaking like Ben Stein during your next presentation. “Bueller, Bueller?”
Asking for advice, contrary to what many of us may think, doesn’t make you look less intelligent but more competent according to research. In the same study the participants who were asked for advice not too surprisingly also felt more confident because they were perceived by others to be worthy enough to offer suggestions.
In addition to the tips above research also points to the following body language errors we may commit which could undermine our perceived value to others.
A weak handshake. Getting one of these makes you want to wipe your hand off on something.
Avoiding eye contact makes you looks less confident and shows a lack of leadership.
Slouching not only portrays low confidence but also a low energy level. During your face-to-face or even video interviews, be sure to sit upright to exude control.
Crossed arms convey defensiveness and suggest you aren’t open to what others are saying which is probably why no one goes to Mr. Clean for advice.
Exaggerating your gestures indicates you may be stretching the truth or at the very least, have a tendency to act out of control. Rein in your movements a bit.
A survey conducted by CareerBuilder of over 2,000 hiring managers showed that 29% of them are turned off by fidgeting job seekers. Playing with your hair, twisting back and forth in your chair or rocking incessantly and tapping your fingers are all examples of this behavior which make you look nervous.
Many of these tips no doubt sound obvious, but in a job interview or at work with superiors, job seekers and employees tend to tighten up and in an effort to impress, harm themselves. My advice is this, stand up straight and smile. Smiling relaxes you and warms the person with whom you are interacting. Aside from that, listen more than you speak. You have two ears but one mouth so listen twice as much. As the old saying goes, “Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak and remove all doubt.”
Every week I see a new post about resume mistakes. Some have five tips, others have seven, one I saw listed twenty-two and another author labeled their mistakes as “Mega”! This particular post, on Business Insider, was apparently so important or popular that they published and re-published it nine times over a three year period.
Your resume won’t get you a job. Your resume may get you a phone screen or a video interview and on the basis of those maybe a face to face but on average a recruiter won’t spend more than a minute looking at your resume. Some may invest only six seconds. Getting your resume right is imperative because the slightest misstep may cause the overworked recruiter to pitch your crumpled up resume through the basketball hoop suction cupped above their waste bin. I’ve looked at numerous posts and compiled the many mistakes you need to avoid. Take a deep breath. Here we go.
- You didn’t write a summary statement – Write one and customize it to each job position.
- Your resume is too fancy/stylized – Fancy fonts and colors don’t make you look smarter.
- You put in too much irrelevant content – Don’t tell me you are a hard worker, show through your work history how you were a hard worker.
- Your descriptions are vague – “Highly organized, go getter, best of breed professional.” Huh?
- You massacred your grammar/spelling – Instant rejection.
- You wrote a novel – One page preferred but no more than two.
- You forgot to attach it to the email – Not exactly a resume mistake but this happens often.
- You revealed confidential information about your past employer – Don’t betray anyone!
- You lied!!! – Even a small fib can hurt you.
- You wrote long paragraphs rather than bullet points – Keep it punchy!
- You are listing the successes of your team, not your own – What are your individual accomplishments?
- You used a bunch of technical jargon – We all know that flux capacitors are not real. You aren’t fooling anyone.
- You put “references available upon request” – Don’t waste space by putting this. The employer already knows that everyone can provide references.
- You included every job you ever had – Your lifeguarding duties twenty-five years ago are unnecessary….unless of course you are still trying to be a lifeguard.
- You didn’t use any action verbs – Don’t say “Responsible for balancing the budget” say instead, “Balanced the budget.”
- You used the same verbs over and over – Mix it up!
- You put in the incorrect contact information – If the recruiter calls you and gets someone else’s voicemail your resume will be slam dunked into the trash.
- You listed your references on the resume – Again, save the space.
- You left out dates – Recruiters need to know when and how long you worked at each location.
- You used an inappropriate email address – Hockeystud12@hotmail.com is not cool. Also complicated email addresses are annoying and are more prone to being keyed incorrectly such as firstname.lastname@example.org Keep your address simple!
- You included a picture of yourself – The employer doesn’t want a picture of you at this stage because if they reject you, they don’t want you to think they have done so based on your picture. In other words they don’t want to be accused of discrimination.
- You left out the URL to your professional online profile – They will look online if they want to discreetly discriminate against you. Oh, and Facebook does not count as a professional online profile.
- You embedded tables, images and charts – Don’t waste your space or the mere six seconds you may have.
- Your resume and your online profile don’t relate to one another – Your work history should be consistent all around.
- You left out relevant keywords – Resume scanning software will kick you out without relevant keywords.
- You put your work history in chronological order – Most recent experience first please!
- You didn’t include your relevant hobbies – Dungeons & Dragons is not a relevant hobby when applying for a boat captain position however sailing would be appropriate.
- You included skills that most job seekers already have – Having good communication skills means simply that you know how to read and write.
- You wrote in the third person or used pronouns like “I” – Everyone knows who is writing the resume.
- You used lazy words like “etc.” – “Extensive knowledge of Banking, Finance, etc.” – So I read your resume and yada, yada, yada, we hired someone else.
- You included party pictures – Pictures of you drinking don’t make a good impression.
- You listed your spouse as a reference – Also not appropriate are your children, grandparents, 1st grade teacher or pets.
Your resume is your opening salvo to finding a new job. These tips will at least help you aim and give you the right range. Good luck!
According to a recent report by Payscale, students graduating from one of the Ivies or more prestigious technical institutions will over the course of their lifetime earn far more in career earnings than students who graduate from lesser respected institutions or “party” schools. This on average is true but perhaps the Ivy diploma lends less to a person’s success than the person themselves. Ivy League schools recruit the best of the best from around the country. The students in most cases are brilliant, overachieving and ambitious. In essence the Ivy has stacked their roster with talent. Would these same students be less successful after graduating from less prestigious schools or do their natural attributes already pre-destine them for success?
Years ago economists Alan Krueger and Stacy Dale published a study comparing the success of students who were accepted to Ivies, but chose to attend a lesser prestigious school, with that of students who attended the Ivy institution. Their results showed that when comparing apples to apples the added income potential from selective schools disappears.
Krueger breaks it down this way, “The average graduate from a top school is making nearly a hundred and twenty thousand dollars a year, the average graduate from a moderately selective school is making ninety thousand dollars. That’s an enormous difference, and I can see why parents would fight to get their kids into the better school. But I think they are just assigning to the school a lot of what the student is bringing with him to the school.”
Social scientists call this the treatment effect vs. the selection effect. Best-selling author and columnist Malcolm Gladwell explains that the Marine Corps is a treatment-effect institution. The Corps doesn’t take only tough recruits but rather their training is what makes recruits tough. A modelling agency on the other hand is a selection-effect institution. You don’t grow beautiful by signing with the agency, you are signed because you are beautiful.
In May Ronald Nelson decided to go to the University of Alabama despite having been accepted to all eight Ivy League schools in addition to West Coast Stanford. He is intelligent, was his high school’s senior class president and an accomplished saxophone player. How much less successful, if success were solely measured monetarily, will he be by graduating from UAB than from say Princeton? The Ivies wouldn’t make him successful. He already was successful and that’s why the Ivies chose him.
Well of course you may suggest that employers will view him more favorably with Harvard or Princeton on his resume than Alabama. Not necessarily. As I pointed out in an earlier post, a Gallup survey of 600 business leaders showed that 84% were more interested in a candidate’s knowledge compared to only 9% who felt that a candidate’s school pedigree was important.
Furthermore, as I also noted, Google found no correlation between a candidate’s ability to perform well in school and their ability to perform well at Google. As their SVP of People operations put it, “…G.P.A.’s are worthless as a criteria for hiring and test scores are worthless.”
Now if you’re wondering which prestigious university provides the best ROI for its graduates, Princeton, Harvard, Yale, M.I.T., Stanford, you might be surprised none of these are at the top. That distinction goes to Harvey Mudd College. In my ignorance I have never even heard of this school. Now whose name is Mud?
The advantage of the exit interview for departing employees is that you can learn so much more about the current state of morale at your company than from present employees who are too fearful to vocalize their criticisms. True, ex-employees who are disgruntled may be overzealous with negative feedback, but overall exit interviews can provide valuable input.
A recent post on TLNT, “The Four Benefits Of Conducting Exit Interviews” discusses these benefits in more detail. The article points out the following:
- They are cost effective
- You get more accurate points of view
- It’s an opportunity to uncover the real work environment
- They can increase retention
The article indicates that exit interviews take time and effort to be done right however if you have jumped on the video interviewing bandwagon to improve your hiring cycle why not use video interviews to improve your exiting cycle as well? One big issue with exit interviews, as stated in “You Need to Stop Going Through the Motions On Exit Interviews”, is that many professionals don’t know what they’re doing when it comes to administering the exit interview. The author suggests this solution: “A secure link to an exit interview module based on your company’s specific needs means that the departing employee can answer exit interview questions in relative anonymity.”
With video interviewing you could send the candidate a secure link to a set of questions customized by a qualified HR professional that are based on the specific job or area for which the departing employee was responsible. Each departing candidate for a given job would answer the same set of questions and thus a structured exit interview is accomplished. Furthermore, because the interviews are recorded, the candidates’ answers can be compared with one another. Ideally from that an accurate picture of your company’s weaknesses and strengths will come into view.
Now of course some candidates may be reluctant to share their honest views especially on camera for fear they will be burning a bridge with their former company. A good practice would be to create a brief video explaining the purpose of the exit interview which departing employees could watch prior to providing their responses. This video if done properly would convey to the employee that they have the opportunity to improve the organization even upon their departure.
While all this may seem like a lot of work it actually isn’t. Customizing questions within a video interviewing portal is fairly simple and once in place, as many employees as you wish can answer your structured exit interview at a time convenient for them.
Now it is time for me to exit. Please let me know if you’d like to submit your comments via video.
“Ugh, I’ve been invited to complete a video interview,” whined the job candidate.
As a recruiter or HR professional have you been putting off or ignoring video interviewing? As a job candidate, does your stomach twist and turn when you’re invited to complete a video interview? Relax, here are a few things you may be worrying over needlessly and why you should not.
Video Interviewing costs a lot.
Video interviewing is actually pretty cheap. Far more affordable and less time consuming than conducting a phone screen. High volume users can conduct video interviews for less than $10 per. You can review five candidate videos in less time than it takes to conduct one phone screen, for less than $40. How much time and money would you spend to schedule and phone screen five candidates?
Video interviewing is difficult to learn.
Login, type in the candidate’s name and email address, choose the group of job related questions you want them to answer, click send. Now sit back and wait for the candidate to take the virtual interview. While most video interviewing vendors offer training, many systems are designed to be intuitive which means training, if any is required, is minimal.
Video interviewing will disrupt my hiring process.
If you conduct phone screens then video interviewing simply takes the place of the phone screen and since it is recorded, you don’t have to rely on handwritten phone screen notes. Plus, unlike a phone screen, you can share the video interview with others and view it repeatedly. If you don’t do phone screens, then adding video interviewing will save you time by eliminating candidates prior to the face to face interview.
Video interviewing will replace our face to face interviews.
No, video interviewing’s purpose is not to replace the face to face interview but to streamline your hiring process so that you interview in-person only with candidates you feel fit culturally with your organization’s values.
Video interviewing will discriminate against me.
Actually video interviewing does not have feelings and thus doesn’t care whether you get hired or not. However, if you have experienced discrimination in the past based on your resume then video interviewing gives you a new way to shine and break down barriers. Frequently candidates who were previously disregarded based on their resume were screened back in after their video interview was viewed.
I don’t look like Denzel, Gisele or Chris Hemsworth.
Just because you are on camera doesn’t mean you need look like a movie star. Webcams don’t actually add ten pounds. Dress professionally of course but don’t feel the need to spend an hour with make up or primping your hair. Often the most real people are the ones who get the nod. For instance I once showed a hiring manager the video interview of an exhausted job candidate who had completed a virtual interview at one in the morning after a twelve hour workday. The hiring manager watched his video for two minutes and then personally called the candidate up before the interview even stopped playing, to offer the candidate an interview.
I don’t want my interview posted to YouTube.
Video interviews are not downloaded and thus can’t be posted to YouTube. They are stored and watched on secure video servers. Your fame or notoriety will come another day.
I want to interview face to face, not over a camera.
Video interviews are not intended to replace your face to face interview, usually just replace the phone screen. You may still get a face to face later in the process. The added benefit is knowing that if they call you in after seeing and hearing you on camera, then you know they really do like you. You aren’t wasting your time.
Do you have more concerns? Send them my way and I will address each one.
“A good rule of thumb is to only hire people better than you no matter how long it takes to find them” Lazlow Bock, SVP of People Operations at Google.
“You can’t get better if you don’t hire better. Hiring under the level of talent you have now is a slow slide to becoming an organization no one wants to work for.” Tim Sackett, MS, SPHR and EVP of HRU Technical Resources.
The message above is clear. To have a first class organization you must hire first class people but why hire someone smarter or more skilled than you? Often managers will not employ someone who will upstage them or one day take their job. As a result the hiring manager may hire an individual slightly less talented/skilled than they. This person in turn may hire an individual slightly less talented and that person hires an individual less talented and so on. Your hiring process becomes a descending slope into mediocrity and you wake up to discover you are employing an army of D-listers and your company is falling behind its competitors.
Great benefits and salary attract top talent but what also attracts top talent is top talent. Why do so many high school graduates strive to enter Ivy League institutions? We assume they do so because they want a great job after receiving their college diploma, but their diploma would be worth little if not for the superior talent at the Ivy League university which supposedly provides a superior education. If every department chair hired new educators slightly less brilliant than them, within a few decades the Ivy League might be no more special than a local community college. No offense to them of course.
What about the specialized divisions of our armed forces such as the SEALs or the Deltas? Soldiers strive to be among the best of the best not the best of the okay. If drill instructors accepted soldiers who were a little slower, a little less intelligent than their predecessors eventually they would find themselves with a platoon of Bill Murray, John Candy and Harold Ramis like recruits.
During free agency, athletes who want to win championships go to where the talent is. They want to play with guys like Lebron James, Peyton Manning or Mike Trout. They want to play for Mike Krzyzewski, Bill Belichek and Phil Jackson; coaches who are proven leaders and players who will help them elevate their game. In the workplace shouldn’t we strive to hire top talent to recruit future top talent? As Lazlow Bock put it, “Make clear why the work you are doing matters, and let the candidate experience the astounding people they will get to work with.”
According to Tim Sackett, “You are overqualified” is the biggest lie HR has told for decades and rather than fearing those better than us we should be taking advantage of their skills even if the candidate leaves in a year for a better position. “You simply need to take the best and most qualified person you can get for every position you have in your organization and let them do great things. Just hire great talent and get out of their way.”
Do you agree?
The hiring process has changed over the years as old methods of hiring make way for new ones. Online job postings killed the classifieds and soon postings will succumb to social media. Video interviews will replace the phone screen. Resume screening software has replaced humans and eventually the flaws these systems carry with them will be replaced with better technology.
I’m setting myself up for ridicule by trying to guess what the future of hiring will be like in 100 years but then again who is going to read this post in the next millennium and point out all the ways I got it wrong?
First off, in one hundred years few jobs may be left that a robot isn’t already performing? According to the Boston Consulting Group, robots will replace humans in factories at a greater clip in the next decade than seen before. As of now only ten percent of jobs than can be automated are taken by robots but by 2025 Boston Consulting foresees that 23% will be automated. Two University of Oxford researchers estimated that by 2033, 47% of all U.S. jobs might be taken over by computers. Imagining that the majority of factory related jobs will be automated by 2115 is not so difficult.
With each new innovation we seek to solve a hiring process challenge. Here are a few of the challenges that organizations face today which we presently strive to solve:
- Finding top talent
- Finding candidates that fit culturally
- Retaining employees
- Reducing cost per hire
- Reducing time to fill
Linkedin, Facebook and Twitter have connected companies and jobseekers in ways unforeseen ten years ago and in 100 years after these companies have become extinct, the Earth will be smaller still. Chips implanted within us to purchase goods without waiting in line, to aid us in medical situations, or to track our abducted children, will also assist in the hiring process. All of our information including our education, degrees, job history, criminal records and personality will be included and readily accessible to hiring managers. Job candidates can be matched to any job quickly based on skills, personality, geographical preferences, and so on.
We will be better connected to big data that will track and forecast the worldwide hiring needs much like our current supercomputers monitor climate changes and the environment. Universities as they exist today will be non-existent. Students if such a thing as a “student” still exists, will be able to upload the necessary skills/information they require to perform a particular job onto their chips a la the Matrix. Naturally the more profitable skills such as legal, medical and engineering will be most readily available to those already privileged enough to afford their purchase thus continuing a cycle of the rich getting richer and the poor remaining poor. In-demand jobs will be tracked years in advance and newer generations will be outfitted with the skills to fill those open, high growth industries.
Employee engagement will continue to rise and fall with each economic resurgence and recession. In an effort to retain top talent a continuing emphasis will be placed on monitoring each employees’ well-being. According to research by Gallup, the greater an employee’s well-being the more engaged, productive and healthy they are. One hundred years from now technology will be able to monitor an employee’s mood, physical and psychological state, and enable employers to take the necessary actions with regards to the employee to counter the life storms an employee might be enduring. You’re depressed because your father died? Your employer will know. Your spouse left you? Your employer will know. You have a chemical addiction? Your employer will know.
Lastly cost per hire and time to fill will decrease drastically. Employees will practically be grown with in-demand skills and employers will be alerted when these culturally fitting employees are ready. Additionally technology will allow us to create four dimensional renderings of ourselves and sit in one another’s offices without ever actually leaving our homes thus saving time and money.
Honestly I don’t believe I’m being forward thinking enough. One hundred years? I bet we can do all this in thirty.