Mark Lucker reviewed the video resume site WorkBlast and found the concept to be highly flawed. You can read the review here. Phillip Thune, CEO of another video resume site, defends the video resume, and Mark responds.
Have some thoughts on this issue? Email us and we will post along with the letter and response.
We read your review of WorkBlast on the Training Media Review site.
We disagree with your view of the video resume. The main purpose, in our view, is to help both the employer and candidate save time. How often have you determined in the first two minutes of an interview that that the candidate is not going to get the job? When that happens, you either have to be extremely rude and cut the interview short, or you have to waste another 20 minutes with a candidate that has no shot.
While a video resume (or a written resume, for that matter) is not enough to decide whether to hire someone, a video resume can help determine that the person is not qualified and that can save the recruiter a lot of time. I think the candidate would rather learn that she is not getting the job after submitting a video resume than have to get dressed up, travel to an employer's office, wait for the interview, go through the interview, travel home, follow up, and then find out.
We also don't think that a candidate needs to spend serious money on doing the video resume. On our site, registered users have access to all kinds of help on creating a video resume, including sample video resumes (both good and bad) and scripts. All of the samples were shot with an inexpensive camcorder in front of a blank wall.
As for discrimination, we have consulted with top employment attorneys, who feel that video resumes do provide employers with valuable information about a candidate's qualifications for a job--including their communication skills, energy level, career highlights and skills, and knowledge of a particular industry or occupation. These are all things that an employer notes from an in-person interview and can legally be used to make a hiring decision.
With respect to WorkBlast--first, the site is not free. It is free for job candidates to post a video resume, but employers have to pay WorkBlast to post a job and get access to the database of candidates. So a WorkBlast candidate's video resu me can only be seen by a very small number of WorkBlast registered companies.
I know we're biased, but we feel HireMeNow.com is the best place for a candidate to...