Insights On Video Interviewing Written by David Creelman Sponsored by videointerview_whitepaper_hirevue_060616.indd
Introduction There s no doubt that video interviewing is fascinating, but is it a technology for the future or something ready to be deployed today? We can now answer that question thanks to this survey conducted by HR.com of nearly 2,000 HR professionals. Let s cut to the chase: the key finding is that in just a few years video interviewing has gone from being an interesting concept to being an important part of a recruiter s toolkit. This does not mean the end of face-to-face interviews nor is it right for every organization; but video interviewing is a technique that in many cases saves money, reduces time-to-fill, and even improves quality of hire. Are companies using video interviewing? There are three approaches to video interviewing: Use a dedicated video interviewing platform Use a free service like Skype Do not use video interviewing The majority of organizations use video interviewing, but of those most opt for a free service like Skype (Figure 1). Figure 1: 46% Use a free service like Skype 11% Use a dedicated video platform 43% Don t use video We do not require video interviews for all of our positions, but have given it as an option to hiring managers. Those who have participated using the system have been our biggest advocates and have helped in encouraging other hiring managers to do the same. It has allowed us to offer a new alternative to our recruitment process. 2
Most of the respondents who were not using video interviewing said it was because they simply hadn t considered it, or hadn t got around to implementing yet. A few (17%) didn t believe it was a good fit for them (Figure 2). The most common explanations as to why it was not a good fit were that they did relatively few interviews or because managers didn t want to change. Figure 2: Why some companies are not using video interviews 26% 17% Are considering it, but haven t tried it Don t feel it would work here 56% 57% companies do some video interviewing Many who we hire do not have active email addresses and therefore it would be hit and miss with this process for our company. Haven t considered it How are video interviews being used? There are two main roles video interviewing can play in the recruiting process: 1. Improved screening: Video interviewing can be used as an alternative to screening candidates by phone or resume before inviting them in to a face-to-face interview. This is the most common reason video interviewing is adopted (Figure 3). 2. An alternative for some face-to-face interviews: Video interviewing can be used as an alternative to face-to-face interviews when distance or scheduling issues make face-to-face interviewing difficult. 3
Figure 3: Main use of video interviews 8% Completely replace face-to-face 34% Alternative to flying in candidate There are also two distinct methods for using video interviews: 1. Live interviews: This is like a traditional live interview, but conducted by video rather than in person; it is the most popular way of using video interviewing (Figure 4). 2. Pre-Recorded Interviews: Candidates record answers to a list of questions; hiring managers and recruiters then review those recordings at their leisure. Biggest Misunderstanding: 58% Improved Screening That video is meant to eliminate all face-to-face interviews Figure 4: Live vs. Pre-recorded Video Interviews Pre-recorded 21% 27% Both 52% Live The pre-recorded interviews allow you to cast the net wider than you otherwise would be able to do. It also takes travel off the table as an obstacle. 58% use video interviewing to improve screening 4
Satisfaction with dedicated video interviewing platforms Satisfaction with dedicated video interviewing platforms is high: 84% of hiring managers are satisfied or highly satisfied 82% of talent acquisition staff are satisfied or highly satisfied 84% of candidates are satisfied or highly satisfied (Figure 5). It s worth understanding the difference between free services and dedicated interviewing platforms. It s amazing that video interviewing services like Skype are available for free, so why do some companies use a dedicated video interviewing platform? The main reason is that Skype doesn t have the tools to allow video interviewing to fit into the recruiting process on a large scale. Skype doesn t enable pre-recorded interviews, sharing videos, archiving videos and other administrative tools. It also doesn t present as professional an image. This is not to say that Skype is not a good option for some companies, just that the dedicated platforms are in a different league. Figure 5: Satisfaction with dedicated video interviewing platforms Hiring manager satisfaction Talent Acquisition Staff satisfaction Satisfied 47% 13% Neutral 3% Dissatisfied Satisfied 35% 1% 37% Very Satisfied Very Dissatisfied 16% Neutral 3% 0% Dissatisfied Very Dissatisfied 47% Very Satisfied 46% Satisfied Candidate satisfaction 21% Neutral 5% Dissatisfied 28% Very Satisfied 5
Advantages of video interviewing Respondents to the survey mentioned many different benefits to video interviewing. The main points they cited were: Reduced travel costs Faster time to fill since video interviews could be arranged faster than face-to-face ones More effective screening Reduced administrative headaches of trying to schedule interviews, especially if several managers in different locations were doing the interviewing Figure 6: Impact of video interviewing platforms on efficiency and effectiveness Improves quality of hire Improves speed in filling roles 21% Neutral 20% Neutral 5% Disagree 35% 7% 46% Disagree 0% Agree 1% Agree 28% Strongly Agree Strongly Disagree 37% Strongly Agree Strongly Disagree It improves not only the efficiency, but also the interview quality. It forced our hiring managers to think further before going to an interview. It has been very helpful in weeding out people that would be a waste of time to interview in person. Most obvious quality improvement: Video is far superior to phone interviews Most obvious cost saving: Reduced travel costs 6
In the long run, the most intriguing promise of video interviews lies in the fact that recordings are archived. This means that in the future HR can go back and look at the interviews of high performing hires and compare those to videos of low performing hires. This analysis may lead to the discovery of factors that can increase the number of great hires and reduce the number of poor hires. If this intriguing promise pans out, then improved quality of hire may prove to be the single biggest payoff from video interviewing. Disadvantages of video interviewing By far the most common complaint survey respondents made about video interviewing is that technical glitches could get in the way of a good interview. This is more likely to be a problem when using a free service than with a dedicated platform. Other concerns included: Some managers were uncomfortable with video Some candidates were uncomfortable with video Some candidates find the pre-recorded interviews impersonal Some candidates did not have access to a PC, tablet or smart phone that could do video interviewing Some candidates will not complete a pre-recorded video interview Of these, the biggest worry is the last bullet: that just maybe the best candidates were dropping out before completing the video interview. This is a question that can and should be answered with evidence (see sidebar Are we losing the cream of the crop? ) I ve found that video interviews results in more technical issues. I once had a Skype interview and the interviewer encountered issues with connectivity. In the end we used phones and it didn t give the best impression for the organization. Are we losing the cream of the crop? One organization implemented a rigorously designed multi-method assessment to both educate and screen candidates. An advantage of their technology-based candidate experience was that it dramatically reduced the time spent interviewing poor-fit candidates. However, there was one data point that bothered recruiters. Ten to twenty percent of candidates would drop out before completing the assessment. Were these dropouts the cream of the crop? The approach of practical rigor is straightforward: instead of arguing, you seek data. Recruiters kept an eye on those who dropped out and followed up with phone interviews. They found that far from being the cream of the crop, the dropouts were either poor fits or the realistic job preview content had helped them self-select out. While this story is a vote of confidence for assessment technology, the bigger lesson is in how practical rigor works. There is a potential trade-off between the candidate experience and the effectiveness of an assessment. This trade-off is faced squarely and resolved by gathering evidence. Excerpted from Practical Rigor: Evidence-Based Management to Improve Hiring in High Population Jobs by Joseph P. Murphy and David Creelman Most Common Complaint Technical glitches 7
Finally, one important detail is that companies should be clear about whether they can download archived videos in the case they decide to switch vendors. If the company can t then that could be a problem. Return on investment There are four main ways video interview platforms deliver a return on investment: Reduced travel costs Savings in administrative and managerial time Faster time-to-fill vacancies Improved quality of hire The most direct savings from video interviewing arise when it is used instead of flying a candidate to an interview. Some of the very large companies in the survey responded that they saved more than 1,000 flights per year thanks to video interviewing, a saving that will likely be in excess of $500,000. The most common response was saving 11-49 flights per year, which would be in the ballpark of a $12,500 saving on average. It is relatively easy for a company to estimate how much they will save by looking at their actual spending on interview-related travel. Figure 7: Number of flights avoided per year thanks to video interviewing 1,000+ 3% 500-999 1% 250-499 3% 100-249 5% 50-99 17% 11-49 38% Less than 10 34% 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 50 Another important source of savings is in administrative and managerial time. One respondent commented, When we use video, recruiters spend only 1/3 of the time that it takes without it. A number of respondents in our survey had calculated the savings video interviewing had generated simply from saving managers and recruiters time. The bulk of responses fell between $250 and $800 per hire with the median figure being $600 per hire. Nicest feature for recruiters: No need to book travel or schedule interviews with multiple managers 8
One on the biggest, but hardest to quantify sources of return on investment is the payoff from reducing time to fill. It s possible to estimate the value of cutting the time to fill for a sales role; it s harder to make that estimate for a senior marketing manager. So while respondents did not put a dollar value on reducing time to fill, they did give an estimate of how much faster they were filling vacancies. The most common impact of a dedicated video interviewing platform was a reduction of 2 to 4 weeks (Figure 8). Figure 8: Reduction in time to fill No difference noted 25% Less than one week 19% 2 to 4 weeks 46% One month or more 10% Changes in quality of hire are even harder for most companies to estimate, and in any case improving quality of hire is not usually the main impetus for deploying video interviews. However, to reiterate the results of Figure 6, some 46% of respondents felt the process had improved quality of hire and a further 28% strongly agreed it had done so. In the comments sections most companies reported they hadn t estimated an ROI for video interviewing; some guessed it was small while others said they saved Big money or that the savings were Astronomical from every angle. The takeaway from the survey is that companies should do their own estimate of likely savings when considering video interviewing; in some cases the ROI is very high, but it really does depend on the specific situation. Conclusion Survey respondents showed high satisfaction with video interviewing along many different dimensions (cost, convenience, quality of screening, time to fill, etc.) The areas of concern were relatively few and almost always manageable. It s far easier to coordinate the schedules of multiple interview panelists and candidates. Each only has to dedicate that small window of time to the interview rather than trying to coordinate common blocks of time when all are available to travel to a set location to conduct the interview(s). It is an amazing tool and I am certain that we will never turn back. None of this will come as a surprise to Millennials who have grown up using video to communicate with their friends. For this generation, it is talking on the phone that seems odd, not talking by video. The biggest barrier to companies adopting video interviewing is simply that it s a relatively new technology and HR hasn t gotten around to evaluating the options. The results of this survey suggest that HR should move video interviewing up the priority list as it appears to offer a quick win for any company doing a large number of interviews. We often run into candidates that wonder where this technology has been all along! 9
Appendix: About this survey This report is based on data from 1,775 respondents. The respondents were HR professionals from a wide range of industries and from companies of all sizes. 10
VIDEO INTERVIEWING Video interviewing is a cool technology, but is it a tool for the future or something that s ready for prime time today? We answer that question in this study drawing on the results of survey of nearly 2000 HR professionals about their use of video interviewing. The key finding: in just a few years video interviewing has gone from being an interesting idea to an important part of the recruiting process. Call Outs Are companies using video interviewing? Quotes Biggest Misunderstanding: That video is meant to eliminate all face-to-face interviews Nicest feature for recruiters: No need to book travel or schedule interviews with multiple managers 46% Use free Skype Calling 11% 43% Don t use Video Use a dedicated video platform We do not require video interviews for all of our positions, but have given it as an option to hiring managers. Those who have participated using the system have been our biggest advocates and have helped in encouraging other hiring managers to do the same. It has allowed us to offer a new alternative to our recruitment process. Many who we hire do not have active email addresses and therefore it would be hit and miss with this process for our company. Most obvious quality improvement: Video is far superior to phone interviews Most obvious cost saving: The pre-recorded interviews allow you to cast the net wider than you otherwise would be able to do. It also takes travel off the table as an obstacle. Reduced travel costs Most Common Complaint It has been very helpful in weeding out people that would be a waste of time to interview in person. Technical glitches It improves not only the efficiency, but also the interview quality. It forced our hiring managers to think further before going to an interview. 57% companies do some video interviewing 58% use video interviewing to improve screening 84% of hiring managers are satisfied or highly satisfied with their dedicated video interviewing platform $600 per hire savings due to increased efficiencies. 56% of organizations reduced time to fill by more than 2 weeks. 11