Why or why wouldn't you use an automated phone screening application like voicescreener.com to pre-screen applicants?
As a side project, I was thinking of building a web app for HR professionals like the one found at VoiceScreener.com. The way it works is that you basically you set up some interview questions, and then the system calls job candidates (or they call in, I'm not sure which) and they complete an automated phone application. It works like voicemail. The responses are saved and you can view and rate them at your leisure, and then schedule follow-ups as you like. One advantage is that it could save you massive amounts of time. Some disadvantages are that it's sort of impersonal and you can't do follow-up questions.
If you are someone who hires others, do you think would you give automated phone interviews a shot? Why or why not? For bonus points, take a look at VoiceScreener and share what you like and what you would change.
If you are interested, I wrote a dead-simple sample app that does an interview and emails you the results: http://interview.bkendall.biz/
Clarification added October 29, 2009:
Wow! I have to thank everyone for their interesting and even passionate replies so far. Clearly this has hit a nerve. I have extended the question another week to keep this great discussion going. Be sure to check out VoiceScreener developer Kris Gosser's answer below for some good details and further insights. Also, really please try the phone interview yourself for the sake of balanced argument (either my demo linked above or contact VoiceScreener); I think you'll find it's not nearly as bad as you think. There is probably some way to help applicants to feel good about this, and I'm anxious to hear your ideas.
Clarification added October 29, 2009:
Obviously a system like this wouldn't replace the rest of the hiring process, only give some direction to it. Is there any company in the world that would rely solely on an automated system to pre-screen candidates? I highly doubt it. The important person-to-person work that can only be done by a seasoned pro will not be replaced any time soon, just augmented.
I really do appreciate your opposing points of view. Keep 'em coming! I have summarized a few of your reactions here, hope you don't mind: http://bkendall.biz/2009/10/learning-about-hr/
Answers (17)
Sahar A.
Diversity& Inclusion|Leadership training|Social Media Marketing|Social Media Training|Public Speaker|Culture Competence
Best Answers in: Using LinkedIn (883), Business Development (26), Professional Networking (23), Career Management (22), Job Search (14), Event Marketing and Promotions (14), Staffing and Recruiting (14), Education and Schools (13), Internet Marketing (11), Communication and Public Speaking (11), Organizational Development (10), Small Business (10), Public Relations (9), Advertising (8), Ethics (8), Mentoring (7), Planning (6), Starting Up (6), Blogging (6), Hotels (5), Travel Tools (5), Personnel Policies (5), Sales Techniques (5), Business Dining and Entertainment (4), Writing and Editing (4), Professional Organizations (4), Wireless (4), Certification and Licenses (3), Freelancing and Contracting (3), Occupational Training (3), Conference Planning (3), Exporting/Importing (3), Internationalization and Localization (3), Events Marketing (3), Viral Marketing (3), Search Marketing (3), Change Management (3), Professional Books and Resources (3), Computer Networking (3), Web Development (3), Air Travel (2), Resume Writing (2), Economics (2), Government Policy (2), Work-life Balance (2), Direct Marketing (2), Guerrilla Marketing (2), Lead Generation (2), Business Analytics (2), Social Enterpreneurship (2), Supply Chain Management (2), E-Commerce (2), Telecommunications (2), Customer Service (1), Car and Train Travel (1), Conference Venues (1), Risk Management (1), Health Care (1), Public Health and Safety (1), International Law (1), Offshoring and Outsourcing (1), Criminal Law (1), Contracts (1), Employment and Labor Law (1), Corporate Governance (1), Nonprofit Fundraising (1), Nonprofit Management (1), Philanthropy (1), Project Management (1), Wealth Management (1), Market Research and Definition (1), Interface Design (1), Positioning (1), Green Business (1), Energy and Development (1), Green Products (1), Information Security (1)
The hiring process is already de-humanized why add more humiliation/ tortire to it, resumes are already scanned by machines do you also to pre-screen by machine or automated voicescreener, what if a very good candidate got anxious talking to a machine
I am not looking for a job but even if I was and I feel a company that is looking to hire me doesnt have the time for me do I really need to consider them?
I am sorry I dont mean to rain on your parade but I think the more human we get specially in the hiring process the better candidates we will get as at the end we will work with human beings and not machines qualified people, by the way I am very pro-technology
Since I never have the luxury of being overwhelmed by candidates, I wouldn’t have a need for this system. Also, I can’t imagine interviewing my candidates via an automated voice system. It’s far too impersonal and I think many of them would find it insulting. This isn’t the greatest way to build a relationship with your candidate.
I suppose it could work if you had lots of applicants for a part time or seasonal call center job.
Anyway, best of luck with your project.
William 'Bill' H.
Marketing / Communications Manager at Max Daetwyler Corporation
Best Answers in: Internet Marketing (4), Advertising (3), Direct Marketing (3), Events Marketing (3), Guerrilla Marketing (2), Graphic Design (2), Writing and Editing (2), Job Search (1), Resume Writing (1), Staffing and Recruiting (1), Viral Marketing (1), Business Development (1), Public Relations (1), Sales Techniques (1), Search Marketing (1)
Quite frankly, if I were to encounter an automated pre-screening system like this, I would hit the off button before the first question is finished.
If an actual person cannot be bothered to talk to me, then that is a company I am not interested in joining.
Tammy C.
SAP Global Template Project - Change Management Team at Gerdau Ameristeel
Best Answers in: Personnel Policies (1), Using LinkedIn (1)
I wouldn't feel comfortable in using a system such as you suggest. I may not want to take the time to talk to many of the applicants that I have my recruiters speaking to (sure - I'd love to get down to the top qualified candidates really quickly!), but when I think of the long-term strategic recruiment / staffing goals - building a relationship with candidates is extremely important.
If we don't invest the time in building a relationship with our "unqualified" candidates now, they are not going to be interested in the next opportunity we have where they are the qualified candidate.
A voice automated system might put off too many candidates to make it worth the investment to get to the qualified candidate a little quicker.
You have to live and work with your future employee for the forseeable here and now. What kind of a person who is interested in ***Human*** Resources would use a machine to perform this work. This type of machine is ideal for checking on your packages and airline arrival time. People are not packages or planes. For more on dehumanization, read how people have felt disrespected and minimized in their job searches. See the link I have attached.
Links:
Yes,I would give automated phone interviews a shot basically as a time saver device
Hello everyone,
First, in full disclosure, I am one of the developers for VoiceScreener. I read through the comments and would like to respond to the concerns brought up. They are all very good thoughts.
VoiceScreener isn't meant to replace the in-person or phone interview. If you have a shortlist of 5 or so candidates, and you can talk to them personally, that is the preferred option. Our idea is that if you have a lot of candidates with similar qualifications, VoiceScreener can be used to to help add more personality and job specific information to the resume earlier in the hiring process. Ultimately this can help you efficiently identify the ones with whom to spend your valuable personal time.
In response to Sahar, William, and others—which is more impersonal: submitting a resume at the beginning stages of the interview process and being rejected based on that (or never hearing back at all), or having the ability to answer a few questions over the phone to help you differentiate yourself from other candidates?
For some of our recruiter clients, a major job requisition can open and close in a 4 hour window. The recruiter wants to submit great candidates as quickly as possible, but they are competing against other recruiters to fill the position. The way they get their candidates placed is to make sure that they match the perfect candidate for the position AND make sure they do it before the competition AND make sure that their submissions stands out. If they are only submitting a resume, the chances of success are lower. Submitting a resume and a phone interview report is good if they can get it scheduled and done in that time. Submitting a resume and a brief VoiceScreener interview seems to be a winning combination because it give the hiring manager better information to decide to hire the candidate. The frustrating reality is that in this hiring environment, very qualified candidates can be left out becasue they didn't stand out, or respond in time.
The de-humanization concerns are valid within the current state of our society, but are not applicable to the root purpose of VoiceScreener, as the tool strives—and succeeds with several of the top staffing and recruiting firms in the world—to add a human element to the most inefficient and inhuman part of the application process. VoiceScreener is not a replacement for the interview process, it is an extension to the resume submission process.
If you are interested in taking a deeper look at exactly how VoiceScreener optimizes the top funnel of the interview process while helping to add personality to it, please feel free to contact me. Or you can check out our blog at http://blog.voicescreener.com or hit us up on Twitter at http://twitter.com/voicescreener.
Sorry for the long response, we are very passionate about VoiceScreener and see it making a big difference to candidates, recruiters and hiring managers alike.
Clarification added November 2, 2009:
Thank you for the feedback everyone. The points being made are certainly passionate, but I feel they are arguing against points easily refutable.
First, I'd like to re-iterate that this is not a replacement for the interview process. It is an extension of the candidate-gathering step. We don't see how adding the ability to correspond via audio when submitting a resume is de-humanizing, an added unnecessary step, or a hinderance to the recruiter. More importantly, we've had testimonials and case studies from candidates ranging from a CFO for a Fortune 500 company to a temporary dock unloader all state the process was a fantastic experience when corresponding with the hiring process. We've had non profits hire volunteers, interns, billion-dollar firms hire executives, and everything else in between with virtually no negative candidate feedback.
May times candidates are submitted with a phone interview report, we offer the ability for the hiring manager to hear the initial interview. It's a way of adding a human review element to an otherwise inhuman reviewing process.
And to reply to responder asking why add another step if you have a good resume: We don't refute that. We help add a human element when you have dozens or more of resumes that all blend together. Remember, we are about efficiency and quality, so if you can accomplish those goals and land the right candidate before VoiceScreener, that's fantastic.
We agree with the responder who realized that people fear change. Recruiters and HR managers railed against email too as a way to correspond with candidates. The progressive minds in the hiring industry have identified our tool (but more importantly our purpose) as a way to add efficiency, ubiquitous practicality, and a human quality to the most inhuman, inefficient step of the interview process. It's an evolution, not revolution.
An automated system cannot screen for soft skills - which is a major part of the prescreening process.
Linda F.
Recruiting Specialist at RFT Staffing
Best Answers in: Staffing and Recruiting (25), Job Search (9), Using LinkedIn (9), Career Management (4), Ethics (4), Organizational Development (3), Mentoring (2), Compensation and Benefits (2), Employment and Labor Law (2), Internet Marketing (2), Manufacturing (2), Communication and Public Speaking (2), Professional Networking (2), Resume Writing (1), Personnel Policies (1), Business Development (1), Sales Techniques (1), Business Analytics (1), Corporate Governance (1), Nonprofit Management (1), Project Management (1), Biotech (1), Web Development (1)
Why on earth would you want to dehumanize an already stressed out sector of the population?! As an employer, I would never insult my potential employees by using a system as such. As an employee, I would never subject myself to such an impersonal introduction to a company.
I would hang up if I were asked to talk to a robot. I would think "This company doesn't even have the time to talk with me. Why would I want to work for them?"
I have been on a few phone screens where my response were recorded, but a human being asked me the questions. Honestly even that made me feel a little uncomfortable.
Pam C.
Marketing and Technology Recruiter
Best Answers in: Staffing and Recruiting (8), Using LinkedIn (1)
As a recruiter I really strongly dislike this idea. I would never use it. And I think it adds another layer of torture for both candidates and recruiters.
Also, I think this would slow things down, not speed them up. I would never in a million years submit a resume and an automated interview. Clients are paying ME to interview candidates, not to submit a pre-recorded tape. Not to mention, I would never have the patience to sit through a pre-recorded interview like this. When time is of the essence, it's ten times faster to pick up the phone, call your best candidates and screen them.
I'm sorry, I know you're excited about this idea, and hate to burst your bubble, but as someone who has been on both sides of the fence, corporate and agency recruiting for many years, I don't see a need or desire for a product like this that will just further dehumanize the process.
Naunnie B.
Professional Recruiter
Best Answers in: Staffing and Recruiting (5), Job Search (1), Health Care (1)
I have read all the comments so far and admit that I shudder at the prospect of dehumanizing the job search and interview process even more.
However, I wonder which is better never hearing from a live person about your resume or getting a call from an automated service? Some might say that at least some type of recognition is better the black hole.
The problem I find is that like most automated or computerized systems or applications...it takes quite awhile to get the kinks out. Therein lies the opportunity for many people to get lost in those kinks.
I am sure we were just as insulted when voice mail came into being. I know that when I worked in banking, an officer in the Private Bank division was outraged over his high net worth clients having to get voicemail when they called instead of a live person. Being his recruiter and having more than once sat on the phone counting the rings before anyone answered....I asked him if his clients had a different number for his department than I had. He said no. and then I explained how many times the phone actually rang more than 20 times before someone answered...They installed voicemail shortly after that.
I agree strongly with the recruiter who said..my clients pay me to interview my candidates and not send an automated tape. Today, I spoke to one of my clients to present a different option that could avail me of more business and allow them to pay less. After hearing the proposal, she said...Well, Naunnie, what sets you apart and why I love working with you is because YOU know what we want and what works with us. We are not a cookie cutter operation...so, if I lose that part of you and your service, then even though we may pay less...even that is too much if we don't get results.
So, there is something to be said for the human touch, insight, gut feeling, call it what you will.
Because you automate a list of questions and they are all standard as you present them to each candidate thereby treating them equally - will be fine when we start hiring robots who are equally cold and distant.
Some strategic person will think this is a good idea especially when he or she is trying to find a way to streamline the interview process and save money by downsizing more HR staff, but I still think the measure that stands the test of time is the human element.
Ronny W.
Entrepeneur, Hobby-Philosopher and much more.
Best Answers in: Green Business (2), Advertising (1), Direct Marketing (1), Sales Techniques (1)
you should ALLWAYS interview all of the applicants, and NEVER hire someone because "you like them" or because "you really hit it off with them". the reason for the first, is that your phone-thingy would have to be incredibly complex with lots and lots of questions to cover all the angles, as you don`t want to let a perfect employee fall through the cracks because (s)he happens to hate voicemails or something, and you should treat the applicants with respect even though you know they`re wrong for that particular role as they might be perfect for a job you'll have in the future, so I think you should put just the basics on this system (basically a resume, where they went to school and where they`ve worked etc), and then call all of them up and ask the other questions like "what is your biggest failiure?" and "what did you learn from that?" as those say alot about a person, perhaps even more about the person if you ask "what is your biggest flaw or shortcoming?" as they might answer "that I`m a perfectionist" if they`re trying to be funny and/or have never thought about anything like that.
the reason for the second one, is that you don`t want a person that you like, you want the person that is very good at the job that you can work with and get things done and so forth. its also very bad for buisness if you hire someone you like alot and you figure out that they`re actually really bad at their job, because you'll probably use alot of time to figure out how not to hurt that person, and time is money, especially when its not just your time but your bad employee's time and those the employee work with's time etc.
Damayanti G.
Talent Scout at Yahoo!
Best Answers in: Personnel Policies (1), Staffing and Recruiting (1)
One of the aspects of a Recruitment Professional`s job is to give a "very good candidate experience " The moment a candidate receives a call from the company, the candidate starts to build an image in his mind about the company. The presentation skills of the recruiter - the content or she speaks in other words the candidate pitch starts taking effect.The Recruiter screening involves judging on the part of the recruiter , deciding on the soft skills of the candidate - finding the gaps if any. Even if a candidate pauses or takes time to answer a question - it can lead to more probes from the Recruiter.To qualify or validate a candidate and really contribut to the quality of the Hire the human competencies - of thinking , rationalising, judging , are needed.
An Automated system can execute and process high volume in the interview process, but the basic function of filtering and getting the right match may not be achieved. It may lead only to a very basic level screening and what ultimately the Hiring Manager or technical team needs is to get a very good resource " as of yesterday"
A simple eg - We may get 50 resumes for one open requirement.All resume matches the requirement criteria , the automated system validates all the information the candidate provides and let us say we get 25 shortlisted for interview. We interview them and select 5 finally. Ultimately we find out the top two candidates have the wrong attitude for the job, or is not really fitting into the team or lacks in any soft skill. Conclusion -Those resumes should not have got into the system. It definitely affects the Cost of the Interview Process and the time of every body involved in the process - the recruiter, technical managers, offer specialists.
I rest my case by saying that I may be consider to try out an Automated system at the very very basic level of screening and with very very high volume of candidate applications , and for very general skills ,but if hiring for a Key Position / Niche skills then I would not be comfortable.
Susan S.
Oppenheimer & Co. Inc., financial marketing writer.
Best Answers in: Government Policy (27), Using LinkedIn (23), Ethics (22), Career Management (21), Education and Schools (15), Job Search (10), Mentoring (10), Writing and Editing (9), Communication and Public Speaking (8), Staffing and Recruiting (7), Professional Networking (5), Change Management (4), Organizational Development (4), Planning (4), Government Services (3), Compensation and Benefits (3), Public Relations (3), Wealth Management (3), Air Travel (2), Business Dining and Entertainment (2), Freelancing and Contracting (2), Event Marketing and Promotions (2), Public Health and Safety (2), Work-life Balance (2), Internationalization and Localization (2), Treaties, Agreements and Organizations (2), Advertising (2), Business Development (2), Corporate Governance (2), Philanthropy (2), Manufacturing (2), Quality Management and Standards (2), Personal Investing (2), Retirement and Estate Planning (2), Green Business (2), Energy and Development (2), Facilities Management (1), Purchasing (1), Regulation and Compliance (1), Travel Tools (1), Certification and Licenses (1), Resume Writing (1), Personnel Policies (1), Health Care (1), Environmental Health (1), Corporate Law (1), Property Law (1), Customer Relationship Management (1), Sales Techniques (1), Business Analytics (1), Labor Relations (1), Bond Markets (1), Currency Markets (1), Hedge Funds (1), Nonprofit Fundraising (1), Social Enterpreneurship (1), Personal Real Estate (1), Biotech (1), Web Development (1)
Why would you want to add an extra step? If someone's resume is good and if you need to fill a spot, why keep that person at a distance and away from hiring managers any longer than you need to?
This doesn't sound like direction, but another hoop to jump through.
