Great feedback. Thanks.

I buy the domestic violence point. I suppose they could password the video and we could have specified that in the ad. Good point.

With respect to “superb” applicants, I wonder if they would really be very good if they couldn’t overcome the video requirement. If they can’t figure out a way to borrow a webcam, a cell phone camera or something then I don’t feel that they are sufficiently resourceful to be considered. Same goes for age – my 72 year old mother is an avid internet user. I’m confident she could figure out how to get a video made and posted. If you can’t handle the technology you won’t last 10 minutes in our firm. We are paperless, all work requires a computer and even our phones require a computer for the user to answer. If they can’t pull off a video, a relatively trivial technical act, they will drown here.

I’m not sure I “get” the culturally sensitive part of your comment. Help me out with that one if you will. The last thing I want to do is be insensitive about anything. The applicants that did make videos were an incredibly diverse group from an age, gender, economic situation, and race standpoint.

I’m open to an alternative way to figuring out if they are resourceful, technically savvy and willing to go the extra mile. Do you have any ideas?

By the way, the interviews went well and we plan to make someone an offer later today.

Thanks so much for your kind words about the site. I look forward to hearing more from you.

Lee

But I have to say I was struck by your video requirement. Might you inadvertently be barring the door to superb applicants? Not everyone possesses (or in these tough economic times can afford) a video camera or the know-how to upload videos to the web. Many people looking for work, too, have given up high-speed internet access as well.

Additionally, might your policy inadvertently disadvantage someone in a particular age group? What about the cultural impact of this policy – is it culturally sensitive? And what of people who have reasons to protect their online privacy – victims of domestic violence for example who might leave themselves vulnerable, posting a video of themselves to Youtube? These are all questions that occur to me.

I do appreciate the importance of ensuring that qualified candidates respond. And I would ask you, what purpose does this particular requirement serve? And is there an alternate way to fulfill that purpose and avoid barring the way to qualified applicants?

Thanks again, Lee.