Theres been a run of start-ups over the last year or so offering a video interview facility. I think the term video interview is on the whole misleading. I don’t see them being used for interview in the way I first used video as a recruiter.
In those days there was no webcams, you tube or flipcams. You had to invest in expensive technology or go to a dedicated facility (usually a business center), and conduct a two-way interview broadcast by satellite. The interviewees could see you and you could see them. Despite the significant lag, you could interact and conduct something that resembled an interview. The candidates were often overwhelmed by the technology (it was so rare to be on camera), and although there were cost advantages, it never quite took over in the way it was predicted.
The technology has now caught up with the concept hence the Speight of product launches.
The majority of products available now should really be described as sitting in the video selection category rather than video interviewing. I think the use of the term “interviewing” is misleading. The real benefit of using video for selection is that with many of the products you can recreate the interview situation by single record, recorded questions and fixing a response time.
Unlike telephone screening, you don’t need anyone at the end of the line. You can pre-record your questions and candidates have a fixed time to answer. candidates don’t need to book a time to record (it’s available 24 hours). The providers all operate secure servers that operate at speeds suitable for real-time video, essential factors in candidate care.
The 4 products I am either familiar with are all slightly different in how they work and the benefits that come with them:
I know the guys from Ovia quite well and I have used it in anger. Ovia allows you to record your questions, store them and organise the running order. You can set multiple questions and choose which ones to use from a simple pick list each time you hire or record new ones. You can also add your employer brand interviews to greet and inform candidates on sign in. They get time to set up and test the tech for things like volume and vision, playing back test answers.
Once they go in to the selection process you can set the time allowed for an answer and the time the candidate has to prepare. It is one take so it is closer to an interview situation and is easy to share among the people in the hiring chain.
The back-end is comprehensive with a consistent ranking system to overcome the discrimination questions and to manage the process. Theres 2 ways to organise candidates. you can either send them an e-mail invite with a unique URL to log in or you can set up a public link on an ad, career-site or fan page. This takes candidates straight in to registration simply and easily. I really like the public link because it takes a step out of the application process, and once in the link is private.
T.O.V. is the oldest of the video selection tools, and less sophisticated in terms of functionality. It’s more of a video capture than video interview, think of it as a closed you-tube channel, it works in much the same way.
You can either send candidates a link by e-mail to record or publish a public link. On registering, candidates can attach documents, so it’s a good place to add resumes for submission in to an ATS, combining video with more traditional selection techniques. The platform is designed for branding, so you can make it bespoke to you. Candidates have the option to record direct or upload video.
It’s not a Q and A system, but a great option for video ad-response direct from the ad or job board. The back-end is simple to organise and share with colleagues.
what I like about T.O.V. is its simplicity and versatility. As well as ad response, you can use T.O.V. for new business generation, branding, marketing, job board video integration and web-site video integration.
Whilst T.O.V. may lack some of the more specific selection functionality, it’s much cheaper to use, giving you a branded, private video channel.
HireVue do things a bit differently. You have the option to use either the video screening functionality, or to use HireVue for screening 2 way interviews and conversations. Think of it as a more reliable Skype.
The big difference with HireVue, (aside from the 2-way interview streaming), is that they send candidates webcams and the technology to conduct the interview. This is probably because they work in Africa and other developing countries as well as the West.
HireVue break the process in to 3 steps:
Interview Manager, for scheduling and organising. They have some great resources to help interviewers structure and schedule interviews, as well as the framework to record questions for pre-recorded selection. I have heard that HireVue have a great customer service team who organise the dispatch of cameras and support candidates. Hirevue also offers the option to use pre-prepared competency based questions for managing the discrimination issues associated with video.
Interview Engine, for setting questions and managing the interview process. Candidates can attach resumes, web sites and links and other supporting documents as part of their application, and the platform is fully integrated to work seamlessly with most A.T.S.’s.
The hiring manager has the choice to conduct either a streamed 2-way interview unrecorded or recorded, or to set up video questions and responses 1 way.
Interview evaluator, which allows for consistent assessment and ranking and sharing for deciding who to bring back. the other benefit of HireVue is that it is fully mobile compatible.
I don’t know Sonru.com well as they are a recent launch out of Ireland, following a big investment. They have been making quite a lot of noise recently and merit a mention.
Sonru is built for simplicity. The system allows you to invite candidates to take part in interviews (there’s no public link option), set pre-recorded questions and set one take response times. You can then view and rank the results in your own time in order to make selections.
The back-end makes sharing easy and gives you control over what is visible and what isn’t.
ZuZu is a brand new one on me and is still in Beta, though launch is imminent any day. I wanted to include ZuZu because they promise a selection process where video is only 1 part.
I can’t say much more about it but i know that you have the option to use a combination of questionnaires, video, essay questions, multi-media based tests and pick lists, audio questions and answers etc. It’s built for versatility, giving you the choice to combine formats.
To new to say how well this will work (or not), but well worth considering as another alternative.
Between these 5 companies there is plenty to choose from to bring your selection process up to date, reduce costs, add consistency and try something different.
What are you using or considering using in the selection process? Be good to hear your thoughts,