Since I get to do a little recruiting in between my full load of HR duties, I sometimes read the email newsletters from Recruiter.com as they come out, and I saw an infographic that made me laugh recently. It was comparing the costs of phone and video interviews. Check it out.
Apparently video interviews are even better than sliced bread.
The points I contend with:
- Scheduling difficulty: Easier to schedule a video interview than a phone interview? Really? Not everyone totes a laptop with a webcam and microphone around with them all day. Most people carry a phone.
- Ethical/moral issues: The example they provide is “taking time off work to interview.” So you’re saying someone can do a video interview without taking time off? If there’s another point I’m not seeing it.
- Average time spent per candidate: It takes just as much time to set up a video interview as it does a phone interview. If you are substituting one video interview for both the phone screen and in-person interview, then it will take just as long as the in-person interview, and it might take multiple interviews to confirm the candidate as the primary choice.
I’m not saying video interviews are not an option or are even inferior, but I am saying that they aren’t head and shoulders above the traditional recruiting and selection methods. As long as the hiring process involves recruiters and hiring managers making educated guesses based on resumes and interviews, there will always be some level of inefficiency and poor decision-making.
Would anyone else like to discuss? Do you agree with me that these points are stretching the truth when it comes to video interviewing costs, or am I off the mark?
Ben is an HR Generalist for a private defense contractor located in Huntsville, AL. Wish a passion for leadership, straight talk, and social media, he blogs at UpstartHR and is a co-founder of HRevolution. Ben is also an active SHRM volunteer in the state of Alabama and has written an eBook on HR certification study strategy (Rock the PHR).