WSJ Careers released an article on recruiting Web 3.0 style. Libraries may be using these methods to recruit librarians--though we seem to be happy with the e-mailed resume, how 2001 of us!--and some of these tools, like the video interview are just an updated version of the telephone interview, a staple in libraries since the eighties. At least, for me, 1/2 of my interviews included a telephone screening interview.
The article did make me think of something (which sprang from my love/hate relationship with my own web camera): but can a technological interview gone right give you a "tech halo"? You might have heard of the halo effect. Halo effect in action: you look like the person who was in the position, who was stellar, and because you evoke fond, apple-pie-in-the-oven feelings, the interviewer just decides to hire you, regardless of how well you shake your schtick. Conversely, you can also have a "horns effect", where the interviewer prefers meringue to your apple. But what happens if you have mighty tech mojo but the next candidate has felt the evil eye of Logitech? The person suffering under the evil eye may be a better candidate than you but because the their camera wobbles and fades, you get the job and they get "better luck next time".
Could the quality of transmission be unfairly influencing our interviews?
No comments:
Post a Comment