Hacker News Reader

Comment by logshipper | Hacker News Reader

> Users can post a TikTok video resume to the site rather than a traditional resume. The idea is for users to give an elevator pitch or work experience summary via the video in a unique way.

Genuine question. Can anyone tell me how recruiters intend to parse through thousands of videos without some level of automation or software-based filtering?

I understand that there are AI systems that can pick up keywords and sentiment, but we all know they are far from perfect. Plus we end up with all sorts of issues where some accents might be under-represented, leading to exclusion etc.

For all the flaws in text resume-based hiring, automated systems can, at least to _some_ extent, help sift through thousands of candidates.

I'm not saying that the present system is perfect, just that the proposed video-based system could be worse in terms of scale.

View on HN

It's actually very easy to go through thousands of TikTok videos. The app is very fluid and as soon as the algorithm begins to get what kind of content you like, the cognitive load of going through videos becomes very low. It's very different from the Spotify algo that assumes you are all into Japanese music just because you liked one song or YouTube that will show you how deep the rabbit hole goes in anything.

I like the idea of elevator pitch style TikToks where you can quickly express yourself and show your creativity. I would imagine the algorithm can start showing the recruiters through the job relevant hashtags and work its magic from there.

The creativity tools of the app can prove very useful, the simplest idea that comes to my mind is a recruiter creating a TikTok video and says something like "Show me something that you learn in your career as X that isn't taught in school" and have the TikToker's quote and reply to the video. The recruiters then can go through the replies and pick candidates for interviewing.

I don't think that anybody will hire through click of a button like shopping for employees, that doesn't happen on LinkedIn, on Indeed, on HN or anywhere. CV or Video, it's just a lead and I bet a few second of a video can tell much more than 2 pages of written CV.

> as soon as the algorithm begins to get what kind of content you like

I have to assume this style of algo-generated feeds wouldn't apply for an actual hiring platform, because otherwise this is ripe for "inadvertent" discrimination.

Seems like the point? Add a bit of bias laund^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^Hmachine learning and you're good to go! It's not your fault if "the algorithm" is doing the discrimination, after all.

I'm not sure how it could fly in the US where putting a picture on your résumé is more or less illegal.

Certainly would help the state plonk you down when your social score gets too low too.

> where putting a picture on your résumé is more or less illegal

How does it work for models and actors?

That’s actually a really interesting question. Models and actors usually explicitly include a headshot.

I’ve never heard that putting a picture on a resume was a legal problem for an applicant. Employers have a the burden of running a fair hiring process. Some firms even remove race and gender signifiers from resumes before the initial hiring manager screen.

It was a big deal when they stopped making hotness a requirement for airline stewards, and for most jobs it’s totally illegal to require a particular ethnicity, but for performing arts they explicitly hire people for physical appearance. What’s the difference, legally?

A few possibilities:

- performing arts (film, stage) are artistic expression, and thus protected by the first amendment. (But then why is the physical appearance of an airline steward not free speech of a brand’s image?)

- appearance is “inherent” to acting (but I’m sure people have argued that whiteness is inherent to staffing all kinds of things, and that’s not tolerated)

- actors are rarely employees, but instead sign independent contracts with short lived, project specific LLCs. Thus “casting” is not “recruiting” and actors don’t have traditional employment protections. (Most film jobs work this way though - is it permissible to apply appearance standards to the Key Grip?)

Even if we had a demographically ‘fair’ recommender, a normal recommender is super top heavy. Telling 1000 companies person x is great is not very useful to them or the rest of candidates. I would expect this system to need some heavy limiting of amount of companies a candidate sees for it to be useful. Very different than typical recommendation where a great video can be thousands or millions of views.

Ya, a perfect recommender for the "best" candidate on some qualitative set of metrics would not be discriminatory (unless the underlying metrics were).

It definitely wouldn't be useful. Hiring isn't a popularity problem as much as a matching problem.

> Telling 1000 companies person x is great

That’s the beauty of TikTok. the rich don’t necessarily get richer. You will often be presented with fresh people, AFAIK they spread out new content to measure response.

It’s not really the type of platform that everyone watches the same most popular people.

It’s refreshing that doesn’t push for “more from the same” .

I used to work at tiktok on recommendation. While we definitely do better exploration than some places there’s still a very clear top heavy bias. Part of that is just content quality. A lot of content is worse than others for any form of media. But while we are better at showing small things than say youtube, there remain very clear tiktok stars. Even for smaller areas you will still have some creators lead in that area.

I get quite a bit fresh content in the sense that it’s fresh for me(but popular otherwise) or fresh content that has a very few views and likes.

In contrast, twitter is horrible because I’m in a bubble and everyone I’m exposed to is there to push their agenda.

Instagram is fine but it’s essentially place where people I know and I don’t know pretend to be living the good life. It’s boring. The content discovery never worked for me.

Youtube is actually great in terms of content but the discovery revolves around the “more from the same” which makes discovery of something fresh pretty hard.

TikTok is not perfect but it’s the only platform that actually seems to create a stream of stuff that I like and are not the same.

So , congrats.

"The creativity tools of the app can prove very useful, the simplest idea that comes to my mind is a recruiter creating a TikTok video and says something like "Show me something that you learn in your career as X that isn't taught in school" and have the TikToker's quote and reply to the video. The recruiters then can go through the replies and pick candidates for interviewing"

This sounds like the very worst parts of LinkedIn, but with more video and far more social pressure.

> Show me something that you learn in your career as X that isn't > taught in school" and have the TikToker's quote and reply to > the video.

> a few second of a video can tell much more than 2 pages of written CV.

These are -different- things though, one is an interview the other is a CV.

I agree with you. When I'm reading resumes, I might give each one five seconds before moving on. I'd probably do the same with Tiktok applications and I'd probably have an order of magnitude fewer applications to go through in the first place.

I don't think this will be the primary way most companies take applications. I think it may be a short-term, alternative method of applying to a job where the less volume is more likely to get you noticed.

However, I'd bet companies will be more averse to this due to the fact you get a video of someone initially, rather than their resume, so it may make it easier to employers to quietly discriminate or unconsciously discriminate.

I also see it as a huge vehicle for hiring discrimination.

Introverted? Neurodiverse? Ugly? Differently abled? Have a regional accent? Too bad, your video resume is disqualified for not being as “good” as the charismatic member of the cultural/ethnic majority.

I think it’s especially important for employers to make their evaluations as blind as they can be for as long as possible, including things like removing names from resumes before presenting them to hiring managers.

In my view this is an incredibly lazy way for TikTok to launch a new revenue stream while engaging in a bare minimum amount of product development. They see how LinkedIn can charge a hundred bucks a month to recruiters and they want in.

Every hiring is a discrimination in some way.

Discrimination towards being able to do the job is different.

You're not entirely wrong, but why make it even more obnoxious and entrenched?

I can see this kind of stuff useful for applying for jobs in the (traditionally) "creative" fields; a well crafted TikTok can show the recruiter a sense of the applicant's editing skills, taste in art/music, and general presentation skills, after all. For a cookie-cutter desk job? Not sure what gap this fills that isn't already occupied by the venerable Curriculum "Resume" Vitae.

Its not that discrimination doesnt exist, but it isnt TikToks job to solve it. If the amount of discrimination remains the same between traditional job seeking and Tiktok, then i dont see an issue.

It is our jobs to call out the discrimination this creates for minorities. Tiktok isn't being asked to end discrimination. Selling a product who's main feature is discrimination is unacceptable.

A normal jobs finds keywords on resumes, filters by experiece and education. Tiktok filters by looks and race and then calls people in for an interview.

My argument is that TikTok is making it worse, not better, not the same.

The status quo is that a paper/PDF resume is the initial screening method. An employer committed to removing hiring bias could have the recruitment department strip personal identifiers like the name before handing the resume to the hiring manager.

Now, instead of that, you have a video of the person. Now you’re subconsciously judging everything: how the person looks, speaks, dresses, and even the decorations in their house.

Obviously, there’s potential for bias as soon as you see a person in real life or hear them speak. That’s going to happen at most jobs at some point.

However, this TikTok service introduces new methods of bias to the initial screening process that didn’t exist previously.

I'm sure we have that, but it's the second filter, after the resumes have provided the first filter. Moving it to step one seems like it would exacerbate the problem.

That is, you'll get better results (in terms of hiring competent employees) if you find out whether the person is physically attractive after you've already anchored on whether they're qualified in a more objective manner. Resumes aren't great at giving you an accurate anchor, but better than nothing, imo.

I'm reminded of a recent study on speed dating that found that higher physical attractiveness increased people's perception of ones intelligence: https://psyarxiv.com/ewvny/

(Just to note, I'm not particularly opposed to TikTok's service as a new avenue to try, but I do agree with the OP that it could make various discriminatory biases worse, and we should be aware of that risk.)

> Introverted? Neurodiverse? Ugly? Differently abled? Have a regional accent? Too bad, your video resume is disqualified for not being as “good” as the charismatic member of the cultural/ethnic majority.

This already happens, in interviews. There are vanishingly few jobs that will hire you without meeting you, because there are some basic things that are difficult or impossible to convey without meeting. Most white-collar jobs don't have to spend much thought assessing whether a candidate is likely to show up to work everyday", or whether thy can handle workplace conflicts without screaming or violence, but this is unfortunately a legitimate concern that eg hiring for some McDonald's locations must consider. L

I really hope this doesn't catch on, I hate the idea of the social mediafication of resumes.

Not that I support tiktok, but I feel the opposite. Resumes aren't really that useful for determining whether or not you'd want to work with that person. A short video is a lot better at that, before moving to something more detailed like a resume. How we handle resumes in general is just very outdated and archaic.

Videos introduce bias towards young, attractive candidates and bias away from shy people or those without a lot of confidence or experience talking at a camera. Which makes peoples' objections understandable.

However, there are a lot of jobs for which being young, confident, and attractive are pretty valuable skills. So I'm sure that it will enjoy fairly wide adoption.

"young, attractive candidates and bias away from shy people or those without a lot of confidence or experience talking"

Is this not exactly the same for regular interviews today? Ageism is a huge problem. People who lack confidence won't do as well, etc.

Most people have an online profile, so what's preventing the interviewer/hiring personnel from just looking them up online?

> Most people have an online profile, so what's preventing the interviewer/hiring personnel from just looking them up online?

Citations needed. What % of currently alive humans have an 'online' profile, how are you measuring that statistic? Are they engaging actively? How many have never had a smartphone, how many do not use social media at all?

Without sources and actual numbers it's hard to take your point seriously. MOST people do this on Hackernews, claiming "most" or "everyone" or "the majority of..." without actual data to back that up.

I've never bothered to look up pictures of candidates online. I read through the resumes on greenhouse can click proceed or reject. Eventually I see them, but not until the actual interview.

But you were probably not hiring for roles were being attractive, friendly, used to being in front of a camera and (possibly) extroverted were important, right?

> Videos introduce bias towards young, attractive candidates and bias away from shy people or those without a lot of confidence or experience talking at a camera.

Regarding young candidates: it's specifically targeted at Gen-Z.

Regarding attractiveness, confidence and experience talking/acting in front of a camera: there are a lot of jobs where that's important.

I doubt the intention is to hire senior engineers via tiktok.

Yea, I think a lot of the criticism being posted here on HN is because this would be, at best useless, at worst counter-productive, for hiring software engineers in particular. But there may be other careers where a short video would be helpful. So I'd be willing to give the idea the benefit of the doubt.

Just please don't use it to try to hire me in tech! I have enough disadvantages, I don't need my monstrous looks and obvious signs of old age to put me at a greater disadvantage. Written resume for me, thankyouverymuch. At least a written resume helps you get your foot into the door before the onsite interview happens and looks-based biases start making their way in.

I fully agree with you, but I think a missing piece is that the resumé-oriented system has biases as well. Writing resumés and cover letters is a skill that many people don't have. There are mountains of jobs for which resumé-writing ability is a needless barrier that's not very useful (or common), and a video app is likely a _less_ biased filter.

I used to work at a co building a chatbot to filter candidates for low-skill hiring (restuarant, retail, etc). These hiring processes are sometimes little more than 1) do you meet a basic list of requirements and 2) are you "okay" -- ie not going to be slovenly, violent, rude to customers, dumb, etc. Step 1 is trivial enough that we automated it away, and step 2 is crucial enough that we _always_ scheduled an interview once a candidate was qualified. The same bias exists towards young, energetic, and socially-savvy people, but 1) it seems unavoidable, given how expansive and inaeticulable the goals of the interview are and 2) it's fairly relevant to many of the jobs, particularly customer-facing ones.

Funnily enough, we actually had a feature requested by a couple of companies to make candidates upload videos, for exactly the reasons I described above. This is the niche that Tiktok is trying to operationalize. While going through videos is slow and expensive, going through interviews is much more so.

What about the racial bias this creates where people get judged on their looks or race as the filtering for deciding who comes to the interview?

It sounds like a bad idea.

If it were a “down to earth” video that’s fine but TikTok culture encourages polished, professionally-lit quirky and provocative performances while being sexy and dressed like a LA yoga hipster. I assume that will carry over to this video resume culture which IMO will be kind of a disaster. I want to hire capable people not quirky sexy hipsters with on-camera TikTok skills.

What makes you think hiring managers will suddenly prioritize "quirky sexy hipsters" if those traits aren't desirable for the role? You seem to be assuming users on the hiring side will use it the same way the average TikTok user browses through average TikTok content

Assuming a TikTok-typical video length of one minute, you can watch 1000 videos in about 16 hours, or two work days.

Of course that's a rough first estimation. Most videos wouldn't be watched to the end, but on the other hand additional time is needed for reflection on noteworthy candidates, and for reaching out. But overall I don't see the need for automation here.

Seems like someone watching a thousand videos in 16 hours would burn out pretty quickly. I imagine after the first hundred or so all the videos would start to look the same.

> without some level of automation or software-based filtering?

Sort by likes?

So based on how Tik Tok currently works, underage girls wearing yoga pants and shaking their butts will be the only ones getting hired?

While sex appeal works, thirst traps have a limited shelf life. Comedy, ingenuity, and creativity go viral.

Also, Remember how the tiktok algorithm supposedly works: if a brand only watches / likes / comments on tiktokers who build things, the "hiring" feed will be full of people building things.

The FYP algorithm is extremely accurate. If that is what you see on TikTok, that’s more reflective of you than anyone else. I don’t think I know a single person with an FYP with that sort of content.

This reminds me of a friend who said he’s surprised tiktok is as popular as it is, because it’s filled with right-wing conspiracy videos.

I couldn’t help but laugh a little.

I actually don't have a TikTok account, was thinking of this comedy sketch: https://youtu.be/l8LJYeeorhc

Until AGI recruiters simply will be limited in number of seconds they can spend on each video. And applicants will be taught to optimize for "first N frames" impression. /s

I could picture a scenario where both video and written approaches co-exist and support one another. There's been a number of times where I'm left wanting to see more of a person's voice in a hyper-templated piece of paper.

If I was hiring I would prioritize someone who took the time out of their day to have a 60 second pitch than someone who just has a resume. There is no automated way to have someone parse through the videos because the point is to get a sense of who they are through the video which might be hard to get a face to face interview. Reading the article the jobs board would have the ability to add a TikTok video to your submission (although I guess you could this already through an unlisted YouTube video but then the selling point for this would be to make that process easier).

What would you be hiring for that you would priorize the 60 second sales pitch over experience data?

The easiest way would be to filter or simply rank by metrics of the user’s profile, for example likes, followers, hashtags, number of videos, etc.

Ugh, the notion of gamifying my resume on social media sounds like a nightmare. Especially because I want to keep my professional and my personal life separate.

They will probably try to license out their existing analytics to companies as the only way to comb through applicants.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com