No More Resumes?

[Giggly]

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203750404577173031991814896.html

Union Square Ventures recently posted an opening for an investment analyst.

Instead of asking for résumés, the New York venture-capital firm—which has invested in Twitter, Foursquare, Zynga and other technology companies—asked applicants to send links representing their "Web presence," such as a Twitter account or Tumblr blog. Applicants also had to submit short videos demonstrating their interest in the position.

Union Square says its process nets better-quality candidates —especially for a venture-capital operation that invests heavily in the Internet and social-media—and the firm plans to use it going forward to fill analyst positions and other jobs.

Companies are increasingly relying on social networks such as LinkedIn, video profiles and online quizzes to gauge candidates' suitability for a job. While most still request a résumé as part of the application package, some are bypassing the staid requirement altogether.

A résumé doesn't provide much depth about a candidate, says Christina Cacioppo, an associate at Union Square Ventures who blogs about the hiring process on the company's website and was herself hired after she compiled a profile comprising her personal blog, Twitter feed, LinkedIn profile, and links to social-media sites Delicious and Dopplr, which showed places where she had traveled.

At this point in time, I see this as something small companies and internet start-ups can/are doing, but not large corporations. What do you think?

 

[kelric]

Honestly, I was pretty horrified when I saw this. I mean... blogs and even Twitter (!?!) being necessary to apply for a job? Now, this is a company that's heavily involved in "social networking" (even typing that makes me feel dirty), so it's much more understandable than if it were someplace like IBM, but still... ugh.

The thing that bothers me the most about this is that it pretty much obliterates the compartmentalization of your personal life and work life. I'm pretty private about my personal life. This forum is really the only place I've exposed anything online at all, and it would be unlikely for a prospective employer to find me here based on well... anything. I don't want to advertise my personal life (boring as it may be ) online -- at all. To be required to do that in order to get a job I find pretty objectionable. I mean, specific career-sites like LinkedIn are one thing... I mean, you could basically use LinkedIn as a resume-publishing service. But the rest of this -- the presumption that employers should be privy to details of your personal life before hiring you is a step towards required conformity (especially given that social networking sites often have tags for you that *other* people have entered). Want to get to know me? Invite me in and talk to me.

 

[Tallulah]

Honestly, I was pretty horrified when I saw this. I mean... blogs and even Twitter (!?!) being necessary to apply for a job? Now, this is a company that's heavily involved in "social networking" (even typing that makes me feel dirty), so it's much more understandable than if it were someplace like IBM, but still... ugh.

The thing that bothers me the most about this is that it pretty much obliterates the compartmentalization of your personal life and work life. I'm pretty private about my personal life. This forum is really the only place I've exposed anything online at all, and it would be unlikely for a prospective employer to find me here based on well... anything. I don't want to advertise my personal life (boring as it may be ) online -- at all. To be required to do that in order to get a job I find pretty objectionable. I mean, specific career-sites like LinkedIn are one thing... I mean, you could basically use LinkedIn as a resume-publishing service. But the rest of this -- the presumption that employers should be privy to details of your personal life before hiring you is a step towards required conformity (especially given that social networking sites often have tags for you that *other* people have entered). Want to get to know me? Invite me in and talk to me.

Me, too--every word of this. I don't even have a Facebook account, and I don't want one. To think that in the future one's job would depend on one's "social media presence" is horrifying. Furthermore, I don't even want everyone I know following me on Twitter. I don't want my employer following me. But meh, kelric covered everything and said it better, so I'll just say, ITA.

 

[FDG]

The video seems like a good idea. You can manage to perceive the "vibe" of the applicant before the interview, something which isn't easily done via resume.

Facebook and twitter, no way, unless someone has a work-only account.

 

[Giggly]

Yeah it sounds like a nightmare to me too. I think there are a lot of companies out there who want you to BE your job.

The video seems like a good idea. You can manage to perceive the "vibe" of the applicant before the interview, something which isn't easily done via resume.

I could see the rationale of this but I keep thinking about how many videos they would have to watch. Not only that, it's unfortunate if someone doesn't do well on cameras but does better live.

Facebook and twitter, no way, unless someone has a work-only account.

Your employer wants to know what you are doing every minute of the day and night!!!

 

[iwakar]

The videos aren't an issue... but personal blogs and updates? I understand why jobs become a large part of our lives, but I am NOT okay with a large part of our lives becoming subject to our jobs. This is a scary precedent. I hope it fails with flying colors.

Union Square says its process nets better-quality candidates —especially for a venture-capital operation that invests heavily in the Internet and social-media—and the firm plans to use it going forward to fill analyst positions and other jobs.

And of course it's a more accurate view of an individual's character. It's highly invasive. One day employers could also demand a colonoscopy and genetic testing to determine our health and factor how it may impact future job performance etc., but do we want that becoming routine? I sure as hell don't. And unfortunately, as social networking and online presence becomes more ubiquitous, up-and-coming generations will have a weaker sense of what separates private from public. It may not seem strange to them at all. This could conceivably become the norm.

People will start working earlier and earlier to establish a 'life resume' by generating a substantial online presence so they can get better jobs, get into better colleges etc. What if academic institutions take this up? Parents will start pushing kids to generate a public profile on tumblr and twitter and Facebook by the time they're 12.

Yikes!

 

[1487610420]

The videos aren't an issue... but personal blogs and updates? I understand why jobs become a large part of our lives, but I am NOT okay with a large part of our lives becoming subject to our jobs. This is a scary precedent. I hope it fails with flying colors.


And of course it's a more accurate view of an individual's character. It's highly invasive. One day employers could also demand a colonoscopy and genetic testing to determine our health and factor how it may impact future job performance etc., but do we want that becoming routine? I sure as hell don't. And unfortunately, as social networking and online presence becomes more ubiquitous, up-and-coming generations will have a weaker sense of what separates private from public. It may not seem strange to them at all. This could conceivably become the norm.

People will start working earlier and earlier to establish a 'life resume' by generating a substantial online presence so they can get better jobs, get into better colleges etc. What if academic institutions take this up? Parents will start pushing kids to generate a public profile on tumblr and twitter and Facebook by the time they're 12.

Yikes!

It's called Timeline @ FB, soon to cease being optional.

 

[violaine]

My knee-jerk reaction is also one of dismay. How ridiculous. The world of work cannot have my personal life. It's bad enough that people can google you upon learning your full name. (Aliases are the best!)

But in actuality, media types and the social media "whores" I know, (I mean that lovingly), get quite a lot of their work through these channels. I guess the employer referenced in the article is formalizing a process that's already pretty popular in certain industries.

As an employer or employee, I would never ask for nor submit anything from the personal world to be raked over. Anyone who needs that from me would not be a good fit. I don't want to know that much about anyone I'm working with either.

 

[FDG]

Anyway, this is an investment analyst position, not social media web developer, publishing PR, or such things. So I don't really see the rationale for requiring your FB timeline, except control over your life.

 

[figsfiggyfigs]

That's horrifying.

 

[Lark]

It is how recruitment will take place when there is no longer any distinction between work and private life, some people really do live their work rather than work to live and managers in some firms will want to recruit them, either because they want someone who will work themselves to death for them or because they are someone who is inclined that way and want someone like themselves for the firm.

The whole education and school system isnt as exclusive as it once was so its no way to determine competence and merit now, so other sorts of things are considered important, also the instances of people being academically or professionally credentialled but socially or emotionally incompetent is also on the rise. In the UK at least. Its led to some really daft stories in the press about companies or business personalities saying they would only employ people older than thirty, which to me is just as ridiculous as the earlier hippy ethos is lampoons or mirrors about trusting no one over thirty years of age.

 

[Such Irony]

If people don't want to use social networking sites or do blogging, that shouldn't count against them unless they are applying for a job for Facebook or something similar. Companies shouldn't pry so much into our personal lives, checking our Facebook or Twitter accounts. Don't the hiring managers have better things to do with their time? As long we are good, reliable workers and get the job done who cares what we do outside of work as long as its not harming others? Okay, end of rant.

I do see a positive side to this. If you keep a blog online, that could work to your benefit. It may demonstrate your writing skills and internet savvy. Plus it can be a good way to communicate ideas to lots of people quickly. Same with Facebook groups, especially if you are the one who manages it. Think of it as something to enhance your portfolio.

 

[Meaning]

I understand where the employers are coming from with this. In one way they are realizing that resumes these days have been pretty much gamed and are fairly worthless, and in another way they are trying to be hip and "safe" by looking into new ways to scope out a candidate, and also by looking into the candidate's representative self (reflects on the company no matter what is said) more thoroughly.

On the other hand, this doesn't bode very well for me, as they'd simply find out I speak my mind with what little I say, have no friends, and couldn't give a fuck else about "social." The long and short of it is that they need to find other ways to supplement this information, or they'll have to be very aware and balanced when looking through a prospective employee's online presence. If that doesn't happen, then we will have the formation of the underground, or have a group of suffocating employees walking around (ooh, might make it easier to get laid-- "ease my pain, baby"-- we all know these corporate women are starving ).

 

[Lateralus]

Yeah it sounds like a nightmare to me too. I think there are a lot of companies out there who want you to BE your job.



I could see the rationale of this but I keep thinking about how many videos they would have to watch. Not only that, it's unfortunate if someone doesn't do well on cameras but does better live.



Your employer wants to know what you are doing every minute of the day and night!!!

Even if I did live for my work, I'm not the type of person to talk about it on Facebook. I make maybe 2 Facebook posts a year? That might be overestimating.

 

[ygolo]

I have mixed feelings about this. As somebody who has been on the hiring end of things, I know that resumes are often not very informative. So I understand the motivation regarding this. Also, evaluating someones "personality" has always been part of the interviewing process (Not a part I am very fond of, but nothing new).

But it does seem incredibly invasive. Also, I do think it will lead to more conformity. If this becomes common place, those with the best "image management" will be the ones getting jobs (even more so than now). Job hunting will be like political campaigning (more so than it is now). We wont be getting those best suited for jobs in their positions, but rather the ones who can present themselves the best (again, much more so than now). I think it will lead to a point where no technical work can be accomplished as the work world will be filled with people managing their images (again, more so than now).

 

[garbage]

and online quizzes

Cool!!!! Great idea!!!!!!!!!! Let's use someone's OkCupid "Which of the 'Mane 6' are you?" quiz results to vet them.


As an employer and an employee, I must reconcile my desire to know more about my employees with their right to privacy. I lead by example, though--I connect with and establish trust in them by revealing bits about myself first. I establish upfront that I'm not perfect, and that allows them to be comfortable admitting that they aren't, either. It works.

But if a company wants such honesty from me, they should release their corporate tax records and all of their VPs' email exchanges amongst each other to me so that I know whether they're the sort of company that I want to work for. I am being halfway snarky with this, but not entirely.

I've been trending toward segmenting areas of my life less and less nowadays anyway. I have two employers each with several different contracts and projects, and I and am also self-employed; if I weren't 'myself' everywhere, I'd lose track of who I'm 'supposed' to be.

But it does seem incredibly invasive. Also, I do think it will lead to more conformity. If this becomes common place, those with the best "image management" will be the ones getting jobs (even more so than now). Job hunting will be like political campaigning (more so than it is now). We wont be getting those best suited for jobs in their positions, but rather the ones who can present themselves the best (again, much more so than now). I think it will lead to a point where no technical work can be accomplished as the work world will be filled with people managing their images (again, more so than now).

I wholeheartedly agree with you, but I am hoping for exactly the opposite--that trends like this just make us more honest about who we are, which in turn makes 'being who we are' more acceptable. That, for example, we wind up accepting that everyone has the occasional drink over the weekend and so Facebook photos of me with a bottle of alcohol isn't a dealbreaker.

 

[garbage]

I shared this article with my brother and came up with some more thoughts. Here they are, distilled:
--
From a business standpoint, an employer would be doing themselves a disservice if they didn't gather as much intel on an employee as they could. On the other hand, privacy, or whatever. I don't want to give an employer my Facebook password, for instance, but.. yeah, if I've posted a bunch of dumb stuff publicly on my wall, I have goofed majorly. [My brother compared posting dumb information publicly to wearing shorts to an interview.] There is no way around it--candidates like those you described have acted dumbly.

What we must ask is this.. What do employers really want to know about an employee? Does a resume tell them all they need to know? What about an interview? Employers have traditionally valued competence and experience, which a resume definitely can provide. But more and more, employers are looking for people to 'mesh' with their team, and whatever media (Facebook, Google search, etc.) highlights someone's personality will give hints to the employer as to whether they mesh or not.

But what about the company who hires me? What about my manager? I should ideally have near-equal rights to know what they are about as well. I do not want to work for someone who is overly controlling, arrogant, or isolated, for instance. I'm all for breaking down barriers, but the sentiment would ideally carry both ways.


Take me, for instance. I have so many roles nowadays that, if I weren't just 'myself' in all of them, I couldn't keep them all straight. My website presents me, my mission statement, and a wide range of hobbies. It even has a twitter feed where I keep my little humorous observations, but not some of the more politically-charged or offensive ones. The door on my office has articles written about my work, articles I've written, screenshots of my software, and even screenshots of my personal software projects. If people--including my employers and my employees--seek me out, they will find out exactly who I am--a versatile, analytical person who is at least a bit of a humanitarian at the core.

 

[FDG]

What about people who aren't so clear cut nice or clear cut bad. What if someone is a great employee with peculiar political convinctions. What if someone feels like doing drugs while he's on a trip abroad where they are legal and has such pics on facebook. What if an employer acquires the knowledge about someone loving sports and decides to think that it means he won't have time for overtime.

There are just so many things that could go wrong and that could completely hinder my freedom, I could list a million of them. Of course it might have to do with my enneagram fixation (me being a 7), but I really think companies will lose a lot of the more indipendent-minded employees if they try to enact such policy on a wide scale.

If your HR department can't understand someone's personality via multiple interviews, then you need to fire everyone in your HR, rather than ask future employees their facebook wall or twitter feed.

 

[garbage]

If your HR department can't understand someone's personality via multiple interviews, then you need to fire everyone in your HR, rather than ask future employees their facebook wall or twitter feed.

Wait. Yeah, this sums it up. I was going to just leave a rep for you, but it's worth emphasizing.

 

[ReflecTcelfeR]

This is when streamlining becomes scary.