“Good On Video” Is The New “Good On Paper” With HireHive (YC S10) • Hacker News Board

Re: “Good On Video” Is The New “Good On Paper” With HireHive (YC S10)

#31

Post by ktsmith » Mon, Aug 02, 2010, 7:47 PM UTC

nicholasjbs wrote: post #21

warpwoof wrote: post #7

My initial response is definitely skeptical. If I'm asked to record a video for an interview question, I'm going to write down my answer first, and then read it in a casual way. You're going to be judging my skill at speaking into a little square at the top of a computer. I hope this isn't treated as a tool to judge interpersonal skills. What value is added, beyond making it easier to dismiss people based on appearan…

I appreciate your skepticism :) We think there's actually a lot you can learn about someone by watching and listening to them speak, particularly when they're talking about what they're passionate about or why they want to work at your company. Another advantage is that, for some people at least, it's a lot easier to just record yourself speaking for 60 seconds than to write a cover letter (which have become engineer…

There's also the exact opposite issue for some people. I don't really have a problem opening up or making a personal connection in person. I cringe hearing or seeing myself on video. I can't stand it, even if I'm seeing a video of my son and I playing which I love. A company requiring a video recording as part of the application process would be an instant pass for me since you wouldn't be getting me, you'd be getting the extremely uncomfortable self conscious version of me.

Re: “Good On Video” Is The New “Good On Paper” With HireHive (YC S10)

#32

Post by nicholasjbs » Mon, Aug 02, 2010, 7:50 PM UTC

dannyr wrote: post #27

There is a startup called SayHired.com that does something similar but just audio. They found a niche with call center agents. I'm not entirely sold yet that this is good for hiring developers since some of us are probably not comfortable talking on video. Maybe the niche for this service is for hiring receptionists or sales/marketing people.

We're still figuring out the full range of positions HireHive works best for. We agree that receptionists, sales/marketing people, customer service, etc are good fits for the service and have had positive feedback from them so far.

Thanks for the pointer to SayHired!

Re: “Good On Video” Is The New “Good On Paper” With HireHive (YC S10)

#33

Post by rdl » Mon, Aug 02, 2010, 7:54 PM UTC

coryl wrote: post #26

kiba wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Bad discrimination will cost the company lot of money. Good discrimination will make the company lot of money. If a company discriminate based on race, they will get the kind of performance they deserve.

I'm perplexed by your statement about there being "Good" and "Bad" discrimination. In this context, discrimination means judging someone based on their looks or other visible features from their video. If nobody believes they should be judged by whether they're male/female, minorities, religious, attractive/ugly, etc., why would there ever be "Good" discrimination?

I can think of some (admittedly contrived) scenarios where being allowed to discriminate on illegal-in-the-US traits would be beneficial to the company. For instance, I think women would be much more willing to buy undergarments from women than (especially, unattractive) men. There are definitely people with a preference about the sex of their doctor. There are lots of documented studies about attractive people being more successful in management and sales, so especially if the hire is viewed as a long-term career move, hiring an unattractive person might be objectively inferior.

There are specific, legal, questions you could ask which would be ok ("how many years of experience do you have with bras?", various technical questions, etc.) which might correlate highly with certain physical characteristics.

I think there is a moral argument against discrimination on these grounds, but there's also an argument for letting companies make their own decisions.

Even without legal prohibitions on discrimination, I wouldn't want to create a workplace where this kind of discrimination happened -- even if it were good for a specific job, it would also drive away other candidates for other jobs, and I think the net loss would be greater.

Re: “Good On Video” Is The New “Good On Paper” With HireHive (YC S10)

#34

Post by rdl » Mon, Aug 02, 2010, 7:57 PM UTC

nicholasjbs wrote: post #29

rdl wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have hired for or at 5 companies so far. I've never used video, and I have hired people based solely on phone conversations, or IRC conversations -- but usually phone/irc followed by an in-person interview. I can't think of any value of recorded video over realtime chat for anything except "create a video clip for me!" For a sales job involving in-person meetings with clients, a realtime video chat might be a bit b…

The response we've heard so far is that companies have found the videos to be quite helpful. We don't see them as a replacement for the entire hiring process, and certainly for hiring developers it's still important to do in-person interviews, have them write code (which they can also do using HireHive, since we support multiple types of responses, not just videos), etc.

If you could be a framework for any kind of question/response (and I think timed and interactive would be a plus), that would be great. If you could then make the "grading and evaluation" workflow on the employer side support routing through subject matter experts, a prospective team, manager, etc., based on either employer-specified rules, or some kind of policies which you suggest and which can be tweaked, I would probably use this, even without ever using the video portion.

Re: “Good On Video” Is The New “Good On Paper” With HireHive (YC S10)

#35

Post by fatguy » Mon, Aug 02, 2010, 8:07 PM UTC

I am skeptical. Personally I am still in college, and want to get something going before I graduate so that I never have to work for another company, but if a company asked me to record a video clip as a response to their interview questions, I wouldn't do it. (Its a personal decision). I think it is really impersonal, and though I wish you guys good luck, and it seems it like the idea might catch on with big corps/YC-start-ups to screen candidates, it really reminds me of "Up in the Air" (a movie released earlier this year), wherein the company that the protagonist works for replaces live people with videos, and they just take the personal element out of the equation.

Re: “Good On Video” Is The New “Good On Paper” With HireHive (YC S10)

#36

Post by nicholasjbs » Mon, Aug 02, 2010, 8:08 PM UTC

rdl wrote: post #34

nicholasjbs wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The response we've heard so far is that companies have found the videos to be quite helpful. We don't see them as a replacement for the entire hiring process, and certainly for hiring developers it's still important to do in-person interviews, have them write code (which they can also do using HireHive, since we support multiple types of responses, not just videos), etc.

If you could be a framework for any kind of question/response (and I think timed and interactive would be a plus), that would be great. If you could then make the "grading and evaluation" workflow on the employer side support routing through subject matter experts, a prospective team, manager, etc., based on either employer-specified rules, or some kind of policies which you suggest and which can be tweaked, I would…

We support questions with a few different types of answers (video, short, medium and long text responses, file uploads).

We're working on the grading/evaluation features on the employer-side right now. This is something we're excited about, because it allows for more people to give input in the hiring process and opens up the possibility for coordination among companies as we're doing with the YCommonApp.

Always happy to hear what real people find useful :) Feel free to email me (nick [at] hirehive.com) if have you any other suggestions or questions if you try out the service.

Re: “Good On Video” Is The New “Good On Paper” With HireHive (YC S10)

#37

Post by old-gregg » Mon, Aug 02, 2010, 8:10 PM UTC

I don't know either this is good for employers/customers but one thing for sure: this makes me feel even more terrified of failure, of becoming a "candidate" again. This company is making the world even more hostile for people who need jobs for reasons stated here by others.

Let me explain: my wife is looking for a job now. She's not an engineer so the progress has been slow: hundreds of resumes emailed, no response, constant thoughts like "something's wrong with my resume??". Now you're telling me that she needs to sit down and film herself hundreds of times and then stare at the empty inbox and think "something's wrong with the way I look/talk?" That's just disgusting.

Re: “Good On Video” Is The New “Good On Paper” With HireHive (YC S10)

#38

Post by nicholasjbs » Mon, Aug 02, 2010, 8:14 PM UTC

rdl wrote: post #34

nicholasjbs wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The response we've heard so far is that companies have found the videos to be quite helpful. We don't see them as a replacement for the entire hiring process, and certainly for hiring developers it's still important to do in-person interviews, have them write code (which they can also do using HireHive, since we support multiple types of responses, not just videos), etc.

If you could be a framework for any kind of question/response (and I think timed and interactive would be a plus), that would be great. If you could then make the "grading and evaluation" workflow on the employer side support routing through subject matter experts, a prospective team, manager, etc., based on either employer-specified rules, or some kind of policies which you suggest and which can be tweaked, I would…

Also, we currently let you set a time limit for a questionnaire overall (e.g., expire 30 minutes after page load). Is this useful to you, or did you mean timed on a per-question basis?

Re: “Good On Video” Is The New “Good On Paper” With HireHive (YC S10)

#39

Post by coryl » Mon, Aug 02, 2010, 8:21 PM UTC

old-gregg wrote: post #37

I don't know either this is good for employers/customers but one thing for sure: this makes me feel even more terrified of failure, of becoming a "candidate" again. This company is making the world even more hostile for people who need jobs for reasons stated here by others. Let me explain: my wife is looking for a job now. She's not an engineer so the progress has been slow: hundreds of resumes emailed, no response,…

Interesting way of looking at it. Although this problem is more of a self-concious/insecurity issue. Rejection is simply a numbers game; there's tons of applicants applying for single job openings.

On the other hand, if your wife has a sparking personality and an average resume, video response might actually help her stand out of the crowd.

Re: “Good On Video” Is The New “Good On Paper” With HireHive (YC S10)

#40

Post by rdl » Mon, Aug 02, 2010, 8:25 PM UTC

nicholasjbs wrote: post #36

rdl wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you could be a framework for any kind of question/response (and I think timed and interactive would be a plus), that would be great. If you could then make the "grading and evaluation" workflow on the employer side support routing through subject matter experts, a prospective team, manager, etc., based on either employer-specified rules, or some kind of policies which you suggest and which can be tweaked, I would…

We support questions with a few different types of answers (video, short, medium and long text responses, file uploads). We're working on the grading/evaluation features on the employer-side right now. This is something we're excited about, because it allows for more people to give input in the hiring process and opens up the possibility for coordination among companies as we're doing with the YCommonApp. Always happ…

Time limits per question or per questionnaire would be useful. There are really two reasons: 1) Intelligence (and often job performance) is measured by how fast a problem can be solved. Within limits, it doesn't matter, and often a better solution that takes slightly longer to come up with is better overall. However, for a problem which is bounded in difficulty (such that a normal job applicant willing to put 2 hours into the interview could answer everything), being able to solve the problem in 24h vs. 2h is not really a good thing.

2) It's a lot harder to "cheat" on a realtime exam, especially on video. The purpose of the interview is to evaluate a candidate, and it's unlikely that candidate's much smarter (or paid) friend would be part of the long-term package, but it's entirely possible someone could be getting assistance during the interview. (it's basically like when a law or consulting firm sends a partner to win the business, and then has summer associates doing the actual work once they're engaged...)

Assuming remote-interview-only, this would be a problem. Also, I view in-person interviews as fundamentally somewhat random. If you really like a candidate on paper (or on video), and he shows up and is close but not necessarily 100%, a lot of interviewers are willing to explain away problems as "he was nervous" or "having a bad day". Once an interviewer emotionally bonds with a candidate, it's a lot harder to be objective -- this is why I like to do early-stage objective/automatic screenings to determine basic competence.