by Steven Lindner | Mar 22, 2015 | Candidate Assessment and Selection |
The WorkPlace Group® is very familiar with the process of video interviewing as many of our clients have used it during their hiring process. Typically, when we hear the phrase “video interviewing” we think of a dialogue between two people through two computer screens, similar to talking to someone through Skype. If Skype or another application is being used like Apple’s Facetime — there are several options, some designed specifically for recruitment — then a two-way, live interview is occurring. We might also refer to these interview methods as web-based or mobile-based interviews.
However, more often than not, video interviewing platforms are being used to record candidates’ responses to a preset list of questions prior to the recruiter or hiring manager inviting the candidate to a face-to-face employment interview, whether that means in-person or via the web or mobile device. As a result, what is often labeled “video interviewing” is in reality “video capturing.”
Video Interviewing or Video Capture?
When employers use video interviewing during the job application and recruitment process– for example when the candidate applies to a job or after reviewing candidates’ resumes or job applications– we are typically talking about video capturing. To do this, the employer sends a link to the candidate’s email, which, when clicked, presents a series of questions to the candidate’s computer screen. Depending on the configuration, the candidate may be able to scroll through all of the questions before responding or may be required to respond to the first question before seeing the next. Candidates record their responses using the camera and microphone on their PC. Candidates must have a camera and microphone connected to their computer as well as an internet connection in order to record their responses. Most providers of this technology will send a webcam to candidates who do not have a camera installed on their computer. Candidates will then return the webcam to the provider once they have completed the interview. Some providers of this technology also offer a mobile option. This allows candidates to use their mobile device like a smartphone or iPad to complete the interview.
In an actual employment interview, whether in-person or over the web through video interviewing, there is a real person on the other end and a dialogue occurs in real time with questions, prompts and responses. With video capture the candidates respond to questions presented on their screen or via audio files pre-recorded by the recruiter or hiring manager. They are then given a finite time to record their response; typically, 90 seconds, but can be longer or shorter.
What Makes Video Capturing Different from Video Interviewing?
The employment interview is a specific type of data gathering methodology that contributes to a high-stake decision: hire or not hire.
The definition of an interview, according to Merriam-Webster, is “a formal consultation usually to evaluate qualifications,” and “a meeting at which information is obtained from a person.” What if the person collecting the information is not present during the interview? Is it still an employment interview? Does an employment interview need to consist of at least two individuals interacting with each other, with at least one asking questions of the other? The scientific research on employment interviews suggests this is the case. An employment interview involves a meeting between the employer and the candidate to review the candidate’s qualifications and can take many different forms: structured vs. unstructured; behavioral vs. situational vs. competency or some combination of all.
What if the method of collecting information from the job candidate is a one-way, or asynchronous, exchange of information, as in the case of video capturing? What if the interviewer is not present and the candidate is simply recording responses to a pre-set list of questions? Would we still call this an employment interview? Does this sound more like an employment test?
It remains to be seen whether candidates perceive video capture to be more like an employment test than an employment interview. Either way, this is not necessarily negative. Well-crafted employment tests have proven to be strong predictors of subsequent job performance. However, employment tests have been subject to far more class action litigation regarding inappropriate hiring practices than employment interviews. Thus employers need to use this technology with the same rigor, structure and consistency as a well-crafted employment test or structured employment interview.
Major differences between Video Interviewing and Video Capturing
Whereas a video interview is a virtual face-to-face employment interview, video capture is more like a survey that records not only what you say but how you say it and what you look like when you say it. As such, it is important to note that video capture lacks a number of elements that a live interview entails. With video capture there are no follow-up questions or prompts to explore a candidate’s answers in more detail. There is no opportunity for the candidate to ask for clarification as to what a question might mean.
In reviewing candidates’ responses in a video capture environment, recruiters and hiring managers often have the ability to randomly advance through candidates’ responses. The entire response does not have to be reviewed. Hiring Managers and recruiters also often have the ability to skip through and randomly select the questions they want to listen to. Although listening to sound bites as oppose to candidates’ entire response to questions can save labor hours, employers should avoid haphazardly doing these things as it will likely lead to poor hiring decisions and potentially adverse impact.
How is Video Capture Typically Used?
Although video interviewing technology has been around for several years, it’s still in its infancy and employers are experimenting with the use of this technology.
Video capture is most often used as a first-level screening tool. By listening to and viewing how candidates respond to questions, recruiters and hiring managers can filter out candidates from advancing to an employment interview. Employers who have experimented with a video capturing step in their recruitment process more often do so with entry level, high volume positions. In general, job candidates with little to no work experience are more accepting and willing to participate in a hiring process that includes a video capture step than experienced professionals. Since video capturing closely resembles an employment test, there can be considerable costs for validating the questions to be asked and the way in which responses will be evaluated. At least this is what employers should do to take full advantage of these systems and maintain compliance with fair hiring practices.
The WorkPlace Group®’s Advice to Employers
As is true of all technology designed to enable aspects of the recruitment process, the methodology of how the technology is to be used and the intelligence that is loaded into system makes all the difference in the accuracy of the employment decisions it helps us make. In absence of methodology and intelligence, the technology is like having a navigation system without an uploaded road map. Without knowledge of highways and where they lead, the navigation system can’t get you to your desired destination.
To best take advantage of this technology, employers need to ensure that the questions asked in the interview are job related. Employers also need to develop an evaluation or scoring key and train recruiters and hiring managers on how to make accurate and fair employment decisions based on what candidates say and do during these video captures. Employers are well advised, if they don’t have an expert on staff, to work with an Industrial / Organizational psychologist to ensure the content loaded into the system has been validated and those using the system do so correctly and in line with good hiring practices.
For more information about using video interviewing and video capture in your recruitment, selection and hiring process, please contact a WorkPlace Group® associate.
Please read Increased Availability of Pre-Employment Assessments Increases Employer Responsibility for more information on the value of validating candidate assessments.
by Steven Lindner | Mar 22, 2015 | Candidate Assessment and Selection |
Fact #1: Bad hiring decisions cost a lot of money – not to mention all the intangibles, such as disruptive work environment, management’s and HR’s time dealing with the “bad” hire, etc.
Fact #2: Incorporating pre-employment tests/assessments into a company’s selection process can help minimize erroneous hires and improve quality of hires and retention rates … but only if:
The pre-employment assessment tool is:
- Appropriate for the job you are hiring
- Properly incorporated in your employee testing and selection process
- Used in the spirit in which the developer(s) intended it
Being a team of Industrial/Organizational psychologists, we are obviously huge proponents of incorporating structured pre-employment assessment methodologies beyond the typical interview (which, as a side note, is still considered a pre-employment test from a legal perspective in the U.S., as is the resume review) in the employee selection process. As consultants working with corporate clients, however, we oftentimes have to caution them about using such tools, particularly, off-the-shelf (or, nowadays, off-the-web or on-demand) tests. Such advice has nothing to do with the quality of the pre-employment assessments available in the marketplace but everything to do with the clients’ willingness to do the right thing by doing it right.
With increased availability and easy access to these off-the shelf/web pre-employment assessments, comes increased responsibility on the part of employers to make sure they are using the appropriate tools and using them correctly. It’s not enough to simply identify a pre-employment test that appears to be assessing the desired skills or competencies; you need to dig deeper.
To start, you need to ensure:
- the reliability of the pre-employment assessment
- the validity of the test
- that it assesses the skills or competencies you really want to measure
Ensuring that the pre-employment assessment you are considering was developed using a solid methodology (speaking to its content validity) and has robust psychometric properties (e.g., good reliability, reasonable item-level statistics) can get a bit tricky, especially if you are trying to decide among two or more tests.
The testing industry does not use a standardized way of communicating this type of information. What and how much information you can get about a pre-employment assessment depends solely on the vendor – and beware of vendors that don’t have substantive information readily available for your review. When it comes to evaluating the psychometric properties of an assessment tool, our recommendation is to always get an independent expert opinion. If you do not have someone available on staff, spend the few extra dollars and use an independent consultant – it will pay off in the end.
We recently reviewed a multiple-choice pre-employment assessment that one of our clients was considering using in their employee selection process. The test was titled “Written English” and was described as a test evaluating individuals’ reading comprehension and grammar knowledge of the English language. If our client wanted to ensure that candidates could comprehend written language and identify grammatical errors in written passages, then this test would have definitely been one of the pre-employment assessments to consider. However, when we dug a bit deeper, we uncovered that what they really wanted was to ensure that candidates could write comprehensible English. Thus, this test did not measure the specific skill or competency the client was ultimately targeting.
Now if you did your homework and found a pre-employment assessment that accurately measures skills or competencies you need and you determined it does well from a psychometric perspective … are you ready to put it to work for you? Not quite. You still need to establish policies and procedures governing the use of the selected pre-employment test.
Ask yourself these questions:
- At what point in the employee selection process will the test be administered?
- How will the test be administered (e.g., paper and pencil vs. online, off- vs. on-site, supervised vs. unsupervised)?
- What, if any, will be the “retake” policy?
And most importantly:
- How will the scores be utilized in the employee selection process?
This last consideration should be taken very seriously, especially if you want to ensure the “legality” of your employee selection process. Your answer to this last question dictates the final step necessary prior to using the pre-employment assessment. If the test scores will be used for screening purposes (i.e., determining whether candidates move on in the selection process or not), then you will need to conduct a cut-score study. The purpose of the cut-score study is to establish the “minimum acceptable” amount of information a candidate needs to know in order to be considered “qualified” for the specific position.
Alternatively, if you will use the test to rank candidates in making employee selection decisions, you should first make sure that, indeed, a higher test score is likely to result in better job performance; i.e., the test has criterion-related validity.
It is a fact of work life that pre-employment selection tests are here to stay, and for good reason – they help us identify the “most qualified” and screen out the “unqualified,” while saving time and expense, especially in cases where you are lucky enough to have large pools of candidates applying to your openings.
However, with the proliferation of pre-employment assessments in the marketplace, the ease of acquiring them, and their relative low cost, there is also an increased propensity to quickly adopt them without giving it much thought.
A pre-employment assessment can yield substantial benefits but only if it is the “right tool for the right job.” If it only minimally contributes to the ”quality” of your hires, then it is a tool you can do without.
For more information about choosing, implementing and administrating pre-employment tests in your recruitment, selection and hiring process, please contact a WorkPlace Group® associate.
by Steven Lindner | Mar 6, 2015 | Hiring and Retention |
Employers spend a lot of money hiring the right employees. We here at The WorkPlace Group devote ourselves to helping our clients hire only the best. With the hundreds of thousands of candidates we recruit, screen and evaluate each year, we thought it would be helpful to provide some examples of how those in the top 1% of their field manage to perform their best. Lessons from the best in their field provides great insight into how employers can shape their culture by motivating employees and join the ranks of the top 1%.
Motivating Employees: Part I – TV Soap Star from Emmy Award winning show, Days of Our Lives
The WorkPlace Group recently had an opportunity to have lunch with a veteran soap opera actress from Days of Our Lives onset at NBC Burbank Studios in Los Angeles, CA. She also introduced us to Days of Our Lives staff members who gave us a behind-the-scenes tour of the studio operation where we met many cast and crew members.
Although we did not get to witness an actual on-set scene, the general demeanor of the crew and cast members we did meet were gregarious, upbeat, full of energy and incredibly engaged.
Most of us don’t think of a television soap opera as just a day in the office. We’re not watching Days of Lives thinking, “Is she having issues with her colleagues or manager? Any water cooler gossip or office politics going on? How often does she have a performance review meeting? How much work does she have to do get done by tomorrow? What are her annual performance expectations and how is Days of Our Lives developing her for her next promotion?”
Nonetheless, soap operas are major companies. The actors and actresses, writers, directors, producers, stylists, publicists, editors, film crew and all the other functions that bring the story to life are no different than departments like customer service, communications, engineering, and IT — although maybe a bit less glamorous than cameras, lights and the red carpet.
When we asked our long-term, successful soap star about her typical work day and what it’s like to work for Days of Our Lives, we captured a number of important messages and observations about how she continues to perform her best and several important aspects of how her employer enables her success. Here are a few important takeaways for employers to nurture in their own corporate culture in order to bring out the best by motivating their employees:
- Teach employees to create and own their self-development plan
Our soap star neither waits nor expects Days of Our Lives to develop her professionally. Instead, she develops herself. For example, she has continued to take acting lessons for almost all of her 15+ years on-set even though she is one of the most well regarded stars on daytime TV. The scenes written and presented to her push her to new limits, but ultimately she is in charge of building her own skill set. And, as her skillset develops and she steps up to the plate for those challenging, complex, dramatic moments, the writers, directors, and producers provide her with more and more opportunities.From a corporate perspective, this is equivalent to providing employees with an opportunity to take on tasks and challenges outside of their role to evaluate if they are ready for a step up prior to promoting them for excelling in the role they are currently in. Freedom of creativity and expression can be an important factor in motivating employees.
- Ensure employees are aware of how their behavior impacts their employer’s costs and revenues
Showing up late to the set can cost the producer $1,000 per minute lost. With dozen of scenes to shoot in a day, staying on time is imperative.When we asked our soap star friend about taking sick days and what happens when she needs a day off, we were surprised to hear that she has never taken a sick day in the past 15+ years despite the fact that she suffers from occasional migraines. Our soap star said, “I never call out sick because it will cost my employer thousands of dollars for my absence, as my employer still needs to pay everyone who is in my scene or connected with something I contribute to.” It was a real surprise how readily she knew what a sick day or day out of the office would cost her employer and an even bigger surprise to hear that she cared about her employer’s costs.Our veteran soap star articulated the importance of being on-time, prepared with her script memorized, and ready to work. It’s not only expected and preferred by her employer, but also sets the stage for her colleagues to perform at their best. Being unprepared with lines means re-doing scenes; in the corporate world this is equivalent to re-doing meetings and project plans. Unprepared actors interrupt the natural flow of creating great scenes; or below standard / poor work product as we call it in the corporate world. Unprepared actors cause everyone, including film crew, directors, editors and fellow actors, to fall behind. In the corporate world this means reduced efficiency as a result of increased production costs and delays in key deadlines.
- Ensure employees understand how their contributions add to and shape the final product.
Like most things in life, the inherent value of individuals working together results in a more valuable work product, whether it’s content, a physical item or a service.In the world of daytime television, great scenes increase viewers, which increase advertising revenues and other kinds of revenue streams, adding significant value to shareholders. This is no different than a business unit or department working on developing or improving a product or service. There’s superior value in creating products or services and providing experiences that trump your competition. The soap star shared that when filming a scene, it’s the actors who bring it to life and make it feel real. Only by playing off of each other can the audience feel and experience the emotional connections.
Our takeaway from her basic message was that everyone needs to know the direct way in which they impact the final product. The quality of the work product is dependent on each other whether it’s building a product or delivering a service. By motivating employees to perform their best with these steps, you may see an increase in productivity and sales.
Coming soon, Part II – Motivating Employees to Perform Their Best: Lessons from a Rock Star
For more information on how to hire great talent please contact The WorkPlace Group.
Note: The views and opinions expressed are strictly of the author and not endorsed, promoted, or provided by Days of Our Lives, NBC or any of their affiliates, employees or stakeholders.
by Steven Lindner | Feb 25, 2015 | Talent Acquisition |
As The WorkPlace Group gets ready to partner with Fisher & Phillips, a New Jersey-based employment law firm, on an upcoming seminar luncheon, we would like to share with you a valuable article they wrote about the upcoming New Jersey ‘Ban the Box’ laws. Please take a look at this New Jersey employer ‘Ban the Box’ FAQ by Fisher & Phillips to better understand the new March 1st regulations that will go into effect in New Jersey.
by Steven Lindner | Feb 19, 2015 | Candidate Assessment and Selection, Recruitment Process Outsourcing |
To add to our previous posts on the “Ban the Box” trend happening across states and municipalities we wanted to share this interesting article from the Wall Street Journal (WSJ), “Perform Criminal Background Checks at Your Peril.” The WorkPlace Group has been following “Ban the Box” trends because these laws will continue to affect the hiring process of employers. In addition to States like New Jersey, Illinois, California, Minnesota and Colorado, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) is also implementing “Ban the Box” policies at the national level. Should the EEOC continue in this direction, “Ban the Box” laws could come to affect all U.S. employers.
What is the EEOC Saying About Background Checks?
The EEOC has started to use Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act to sue businesses for a wide range of hiring practices that negatively impacted minorities. An example happened in 1989 when the EEOC sued Carolina Freight Carrier Corp. for refusing to hire an Hispanic man as a truck driver. This man had a history of multiple arrests and served 18 months in jail for larceny. The U.S. District Judge Jose Alejandro Gonzalez, Jr. ruled against the agency saying that the “EEOC’s position that minorities should be held to lower standards is an insult to millions of honest Hispanics.” As Judge Gonzalez stated, “a rule refusing honest employment to convicted applications is going to have a disparate impact upon thieves.”
In April 2014, the EEOC unveiled the “Enforcement Guidance on the Consideration of Arrest and Conviction Records in Employment Decisions.” These guidelines state that criminal record exclusions have a disparate impact based on race and national origin. If you have been following The WorkPlace Group’s blog posts, then this should sound familiar. This is the long version of “ban the box.”
Where is the Connection Between Minorities and Ban the Box
The WSJ cites statistics indicating that the crime rate of certain races is exponentially higher than that of other races. These statistics form the basis for EEOC’s concern and recommendation to employers to change their application process. A former EEOC General Counsel stated in testimony to the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights that employers could be considered guilty “of race discrimination if they choose law abiding applicants over applicants with criminal convictions.” (According to the same WSJ article) A considerable challenge for employers will be complying with EEOC guidelines even if they are not in a state with a “ban the box” law.
How Will the EEOC’s New Guidelines Really Affect Minorities?
The WSJ describes several studies that show fewer minorities are hired when employers conduct background checks in comparison to employers who don’t. The WSJ is suggesting that EEOC’s guidelines and stance on this topic may actually hurt the employment of those minorities it is purposely trying to protect.
“Ban the Box” Advice for Employers
Even if your state does not have a “ban the box” law currently, given the EEOC’s position on this issue, we recommend all employers delay inquiring or collecting any information on applicants’ criminal histories or conducting a background check until after an offer of employment has been extended.
We invite examples of how employers are changing their employment applications and selection process to comply with EEOC’s and State trends on “Ban the Box” legislature. We also welcome your questions as to how to best comply with this national trend.
For more information on how to ready your employment process for “Ban the Box” trends, please feel free to contact a WorkPlace Group Associate for assistance.
