7 Data-Driven Ways to Design Candidate-Friendly Video Interviews

Key Drivers of a Positive Candidate Experience 

Top employers recognize the importance of creating a positive candidate experience to strengthen their employer brand, hire better, and secure the best talent. 

 

46% of candidates who believe they have had a negative overall experience say they will take their alliance, product purchases, and relationship elsewhere.

 

69% of candidates who have had a negative candidate experience won’t apply again. 

 

The problem? As recruiters, we all have different opinions and intuitive feelings about what makes a great candidate experience.  

But when it comes to asynchronous video interviews (AVI), new academic research is enabling us to move beyond intuition. AVI refers to a video interview where job candidates pre-record their responses to a set of defined questions, and then the evaluators review the responses at a later time. In other words, the video is not live.  

The research provides insight into a number of best practices organizations can use to build an AVI process that candidates enjoy. Both incremental and progressive approaches have been found to influence employer attractiveness, improve completion rates, and increase positive recommendations and peer-to-peer reviews.  

The industry insights and evidence-based best practices in this eBook will help you tailor your AVIs. In turn, your organization will be better positioned to positively influence the candidate experience and win your fair share of top talent. 

The right mix of empathy, psychology, and technology  

The candidate experience is more than just web pages, click-through, and application rates; it is the combination of thoughts and emotions candidates experience during your hiring process.  

Technology forms part of this experience. Empathy and psychology from the other. Putting ourselves in candidates’ shoes will help us understand the complete candidate journey from their perspective.  

In this eBook, we tie asynchronous video interviewing market research from around the world, including North America, Australia, and Europe, to strategic recommendations you can implement today. We’ll share how to drive the candidate experience through empathy, psychology, and technology: from best-practice communication to the types of media and evaluation tools candidates prefer. 

 

What factors influence candidate perceptions? 

Before diving into the research about creating a positive AVI experience for candidates, let’s outline the five factors that influence candidate perceptions. 

1. Procedural Fairness 

Procedural fairness is when candidates perceive that the procedures you use to make selection decisions are fair. Traditional interviews are notorious for being inconsistent. Sometimes we stray from the scripts, or ask some people to elaborate but not others. We can’t help it – we’re not robots after all! 

One advantage of AVIs is that candidates can be certain they’re all being asked exactly the same questions.  

Additionally, consider the following:  

• Are you asking candidates for information that seems job-relevant?  

• Are all your candidates getting a fair chance to show what they can do?  

• Are all your candidates getting the same treatment?  

• If something goes wrong, does a candidate get a second chance?  

Fair procedures level the playing field. They not only make assessments easier for recruitment teams and hiring managers, they align with candidates’ needs too. 

 

2. Interpersonal Fairness 

In addition to fair procedures, candidates also want to be treated fairly on an interpersonal level. Candidates look for organizations that treat them with respect, provide two-way communication, and don’t ask questions that seem improper. 

Tip: Recording video questions of your team members showcases your company’s diversity, giving candidates a glimpse into your company culture and improving interpersonal fairness. Candidates respond to how they are treated in an otherwise automated process. 

 

3. Equity and equality  

Candidates are looking for outcomes that match equality, equity, and needs-based criteria. Video interviewing platforms are a great way to meet these needs and provide candidates with increased flexibility. For example, your platform should allow you to make reasonable adjustments for diverse and neurodiverse candidates, and candidates with visible and non-visible disabilities. 

Tip: Consider using video interviewing technology that allows you to make reasonable adjustments, such as extending answer preparation times and deadlines and offering multiple retakes. 

 

4. Individual preferences  

When it comes to the candidate experience, there are always going to be some things outside of our control. Candidates’ personal qualities, expectations, and history can all impact their perceptions.  

Consider this: if a candidate is anxious, this may influence their perceptions about the fairness of your process. Or, if you ask candidates to complete a work-related task as part of the screening process, this will shape their perception of the role itself. If their expectations aren’t reached, this can cause issues down the line. 

 

5. Causal Attributions 

Lastly, there are some causal attributes (both positive and negative), which candidates can attribute to your organization, outside forces, or themselves.  

For example, candidates can be naturally anxious during interviews. Is this because they recognize this trait within themselves, or do they believe a company made them feel anxious? With these factors in mind, let’s assess current candidate perceptions about AVIs. 

 

 

How do candidates experience one-way video interviews? 

Asynchronous video interviews are known for being scalable, giving organizations a potentially global reach and creating a fairer, more consistent, and convenient hiring process.  

But how do candidates feel about AVIs, and what does the data say?  

A recent study3 of approximately 678,457 virtual interviewees from 46 countries compared their opinions about asynchronous vs. synchronous video interviews. 

 

A similar study measured candidates’ perceptions about asynchronous video interviews vs. two-way video interviews. 

 

There results indicate there is minor difference between perceptions about organizational attractiveness, fairness, and chance to performance. However, they had lower feelings of positive interpersonal treatment, and higher levels of “emotional creepiness” and privacy concerns.  

Note: In this study, candidates were asked text-based questions, without any rich media. (Rich media can have a powerful effect on these factors – which we’ll explore later in this eBook.) 

 

 

What can be changed to improve the candidate experience of one-way video interviews?

• the time you give candidates to prepare a response  

• the time you give candidates to deliver a response  

• the opportunity to retake responses  

• text-based, low-fi (e.g. recording questions on your phone) or hi-fi (professionally produced) video questions  

• how responses are evaluated, such as by a hiring manager or an AI evaluation tool 

Tip: Consider video interviewing technology that provides you with control over these elements to create a great candidate experience. 

How can virtual interviews hurt the candidate experience?

While there are so many ways to design your AVIs, there are two fast ways to threaten the candidate experience.  

The first is asking questions unrelated to the job. The second is not providing candidates with enough response time.  

Think about a common interview question, such as: “Describe a situation in which your initiative produced a win/win result for the company. What were the outcomes?”  

Reasonable, yes?  

It only becomes unreasonable if you provide candidates with 30 seconds to deliver a thoughtful, measured response. 

While recruiters have a strong incentive to make response times short to increase efficiency, this doesn’t give candidates the opportunity to truly demonstrate their skills. When this happens, your organization can lose out on the best talent.  

Both the questions you ask and response times matters in shaping the candidate experience and getting the best evaluator outcomes. 

Which one-way video interview settings are effective vs. Ineffective? 

As a hiring manager, intuition can be valuable. The best AVI processes, however, are evidence-based. The rest of this eBook focuses on research that has been conducted to determine what processes lead to the best candidate experiences. The research uses A/B testing to answer these questions. 

What is “A/B testing”? 

Let’s examine the research to determine the efficacy of seven AVI methods. The following research uses a technique called A/B testing to work out what causes what. A/B testing works by assigning people, at random, to one of two conditions. The two conditions “A” and “B” are exactly the same, except for one thing. So, if you find differences between people’s experiences in Condition A and Condition B, then you know it must be because of the one thing that was different.  

For example, imagine you wanted to test whether giving candidates different amounts of time to respond to an interview question affects their experience with the interview. To do this, you need to set up your “A” condition and your “B” condition.  

In Condition A you give your candidates 1 minute to respond to every question, but in Condition B you give your candidates 5 minutes. But aside from this, Conditions A and B are exactly the same: candidates get the same instructions, the same introduction, the same questions, and so on. The only difference between Conditions A and B is the amount of time candidates are given to respond to an interview question: 1 minute versus 5 minutes.  

So, now that you have set these conditions up, the next thing to do is ask a group of candidates to complete the interview. When you do that, you randomly assign half of the candidates to Condition A, and the other half to Condition B. Then at the end, you ask your candidates how they felt about the interview. If you see a difference in reactions between the two conditions, then you know it must be because of the differences in response time. 

What can you do to create a positive one-way video interview candidate experience? 

Step 1: Email invitations  

What role does messaging play in influencing the candidate experience? 

Before inviting candidates to complete an AVI, the type of communication you share in advance has an impact.  

A team of researchers wanted to assess whether communicating the benefits of AVIs in an invitation email would influence the candidate experience. In this study4, they invited candidates to complete an interview, using two different types of messaging. 

 

Participants in Condition A received messaging about how AVIs are fairer, more structured, less prone to bias, and evaluated by the same standards. Those in Condition B did not receive this messaging.  

People who received the standardization messaging were more likely to perceive the interview as a fairer assessment, and that they had a greater opportunity to perform, compared to those who did not receive this message in the invitation. 

 

In the second type of messaging, candidates in Condition A were told video interviews offered them greater flexibility and convenience. They could choose a time to complete their interview, no travel was required and they could complete it in a space they choose. Those in Condition B did not receive this messaging. 

While this messaging didn’t influence participants’ perceptions of fairness or performance in Condition A, it did positively influence how they felt about its flexibility and ease of use. 

 

Step 2: Response times and response preparation times  

How does preparation time influence evaluator and candidate perceptions?  

In another study, researchers provided participants in Condition A with 10 seconds to prepare a response to a question, and those in Condition B with 60 seconds to prepare a response. Evaluators were not provided with an indication of which candidates were in each group. 

 

Longer response times yielded positive results. Evaluators perceived participants who were given 60 seconds to prepare their interview responses as having performed better in the interviews than those who had only 10 seconds of preparation time.  

Also, the researchers found when given longer preparation times, the evaluations were more strongly associated with the participants’ cognitive ability. In other words, this study suggests when people have more time to prepare their response, the response will better capture a person’s cognitive ability.  

The researchers do not know why this was the case, but it may be that participants use the extra preparation time to craft more articulate responses – and those with higher mental ability can do so better. 

 

But what about fairness?  

Interestingly, candidates’ perceptions about fairness or the opportunity to perform did not change significantly between the two groups. 

Tip: Consider appropriate response times for your interview questions. For questions requiring longer responses, grant candidates longer response preparation times. 

 

Step 3: Opportunities for retakes  

Should you give candidates the chance to retake responses? 

Some of your candidates might have participated in video interviews before, and are more relaxed and confident in talking to a camera than your other applicants. So giving candidates the chance to practice talking to the camera, loosen up and get more comfortable should, theoretically, allow them to deliver their best answers.  

But what does the research say?  

In one study, researchers compared two groups. The first group, Condition A, were given the opportunity to retake responses up to 5 times. The second group in Condition B were not. 

 

The majority of participants (62%) chose to take advantage of the option to retake responses at least once. But having the opportunity to retake their responses appeared not to affect the participants’ perceptions of fairness nor their reported anxiety levels. Evaluators also did not seem to give higher or lower ratings to the interviewees who had the re-record option. In this study, the evaluators were not aware of whether the re-recording option was available to the participants.  

Also, different video interviewing platforms have different methods for providing retakes. Some platforms delete candidates’ original recording and replace it with the retake. Others allow candidates to choose between original and retake responses.  

It’s not clear why participants didn’t view the opportunity to retake as fairer, but some anecdotal feedback suggests retakes may be a ‘double-edged sword’. On the one hand, candidates may like having the option to re-record a response where something went wrong (e.g., an interruption), but on the other hand, candidates might find themselves agonizing over which recording to submit or whether to record over a ‘good enough’ response. 

 

Step 4: Empathy and Humor 

Can friendly, interpersonal messages increase candidate performance? 

Job interviews are often considered to be one of the most stressful experiences in life. It can be just as problematic for your candidates as it is for your hiring managers. Stressed candidates can’t show you their best side, and this can make it tougher for you to reach an informed decision.  

While a little pressure can be useful during interviews, generally speaking, it’s in your organization's best interest to ensure candidates are as relaxed as possible. It follows, then, that empathy and humor could create a more relaxed interview setting.  

In one study, researchers wanted to measure the impact of empathy and humor on the candidate experience. Interviewers shared a friendly video introduction message with participants in Condition A, stating: “We don’t expect you to give a flawless performance and you don’t lose marks for any ‘ums’ or pauses.” This was followed by a blooper reel. Participants in Condition B did not experience this media. 

 

Surprisingly, the exposure to the blooper reel and empathetic messaging didn’t seem to have a strong effect on participants’ perceptions about fairness, their chance to perform, or their anxiety levels.  

While these factors weren’t affected, engaging content pieces such as introduction videos and blooper reels could strengthen perceptions of your employer brand and company culture.  

In this study, both groups received rich video media; there was no “Condition C” that only received text-based messaging. So, it may be that video itself could be a strong intervention in the candidate experience. (We’ll explore this in the next section!)  

This study suggests incorporating empathy and humor into your candidate experience may not have the most noticeable impact on the candidate experience. But it doesn’t seem to hurt it either. If you’re a progressive, innovative organization, this type of rich media could work really well with your employer brand. However, researchers note if you have a serious governmental or corporate image, it could confuse candidates. 

 

Step 5: Rich media 

Recruitment is a matter of give and take. While your organization will have its own expectations of candidates during interviews, there can also be an opportunity to give candidates something in return. You can use media to further educate them about your organization, employer brand, team members and the role itself. 

Types of questions to ask in one-way video interviews 

• Text-based questions 

• “Low-fidelity” questions in a more candid style, recorded on a mobile or laptop for example 

• “High-fidelity” questions, professionally recorded, featuring your corporate brand and messaging. 

Does it matter? And if so, which has the strongest influence on the candidate experience?  

Researchers asked interview questions in these three formats7 and measured participants’ responses to perceived social presence, impressions, and anxiety; and evaluators’ ratings of participants’ performance. 

 

 

Social presence is defined as the degree of salience of the other person in the interaction and the consequent salience of the interpersonal relationship. It is related to the degree to which a person is perceived as “real and present” in a given mediated communication.  

Researchers discovered using visual media in your interview questions may add extra value to the candidate experience. In the study, participants who were exposed to videos perceived higher rates of social presence and performance, and experienced lower levels of anxiety.  

The good news: the difference between low-fidelity and high-fidelity videos was not strong. So, it seems you don’t need to invest in professional video production to create a great candidate experience. Whether you use lo-fi or high-fi videos, they’re an authentic way to strengthen your employer brand. 

Tip: Modern technology means there are fewer barriers to providing candidates with rich content. Consider using video interviewing technology that allows you to easily record videos from any mobile device directly into your library as you create a job. 

 

Step 6: Choosing an interviewer 

How does giving candidates their choice of interviewer impact perceptions? 

When setting up an AVI, you have the option to include video-based questions. A video-media question includes a recording of an employee from your organization asking the interview questions to the candidates. In other words, a virtual interviewer.  

But what if candidates are given some choice about their virtual interviewer?  

Allowing candidates to choose their interviewer is an advanced offering not many recruiters consider. But some initial research suggests giving the choice to candidates might have a positive effect.  

In this study, researchers established a fictitious company called CSA Supermarkets. They introduced participants to two graduate employees: ‘Jake’ (Operations Management Team Member) and ‘Steph’ (People and Culture Division Member). These employees would act as virtual interviewers.  

The researchers split participants into two groups. Participants in Condition A could choose either Jake or Steph as their virtual interviewer. Participants in Condition B were not given the opportunity to choose and instead were given Jake or Steph as an interviewer at random. During the interview, all participants were asked the same questions, whether being interviewed by Jake or Steph. 

 

Participants who were given their choice of interviewer reported experiencing lower levels of interview-related anxiety. They also reported they perceived higher levels of fairness and rated the candidate experience more positively overall. 

 

Interestingly, many participants seemed to choose interviewers who are like them. The majority of female participants chose Steph as their interviewer. More males chose Jake as their interviewer; however, two-thirds chose Steph. 

 

Participants who were assigned an interviewer at random reported experiencing similar anxiety levels no matter who their virtual interviewer was. So, it seems giving people the choice may reduce experiences of anxiety.  

However, among the group who did not get to choose their interviewer, fairness perceptions and the chance to perform showed some marked differences depending on who their interviewer was. 

What effect did this have on employer attractiveness? 

Participants in this study were also asked to rate their perceptions about CSA Supermarkets as an attractive employer, right after they had viewed a job advertisement for a graduate role. These ratings were collected before the participants knew they would be interviewed for the role, and before they knew whether they would be able to choose an interviewer. After they experienced the video interview, participants were again asked to rate CSA Supermarkets as an attractive employer. Researchers compared the results. 

 

The researchers found participants who were given the choice of interviewer rated the employer more positively after the interview than those not given the choice. Those who were not given any choice rated the employer as slightly less appealing as a place to work after the AVI.  

If you don’t have the option to allow candidates to choose their interviewer – due to time constraints or constraints within your video interviewing platform – having different people asking interview questions could have a positive effect and make candidates feel more comfortable.  

Even when you ask the same questions, your choice of interviewer matters. 

 

Step 7: Automated evaluations 

How do candidates respond knowing their responses will be evaluated by AI/machine learning? 

As recruiters continue to drown in applications, many rely on AI algorithms to make more informed assessments. After all, they can help you measure key data points that predict successful job performance more effectively.  

But how do candidates perceive these assessments in terms of fairness and employer attractiveness? 

How AI would be used to evaluate video interviews: 

• Reactions 

• Expressions 

• Speech 

Despite providing information about how the tool would be used, participants’ perceptions were not overly positive. The study did demonstrate, however, that emphasizing higher levels of standardization can improve perceptions of consistency. (Think personalized statements like: “This evaluation tool provides you and all our candidates with greater fairness and consistency.”)  

Another study communicated an organization's intentions to use AI evaluation in a job advertisement. In a similar trend to the explanation study, potential job seekers perceived lower levels of employer attractiveness when an employer communicated an intention to use AI as an evaluation tool. 

Remember: AI can produce consistently better or worse outcomes, depending on how it is deployed. Well-considered AI assessments do not take into consideration physical appearance or other demographic factors to avoid bias. 

 

 

Final thoughts 

You can use all or some of these practices to design effective AVIs and create a positive video interview experience for candidates. Choose the ones that work for your organization and processes.

How to create an effective one-way video interview process in 7 steps

• STEP 1: Share messaging with candidates prior to their video interview. Establishing email templates is a quick, easy win for recruiters. Inform candidates about how video interviews (a) grant them more flexibility and (b) create a fairer, more consistent process.  
• STEPS 2 & 3: Preparation time and retakes don’t seem to strongly affect candidates’ perceptions about fairness, according to early research. However, these factors may impact the type of information candidates communicate during their interviews. Give candidates adequate time to deliver responses – particularly for questions requiring more nuanced explanations. Provide candidates with longer preparation times (60 seconds works well) to enable your evaluators to make informed recruitment decisions.  
• STEP 4: Decide if humor and empathy are in line with your employer brand. While elements like blooper reels don’t seem to impact perceptions about fairness or anxiety, they may strengthen your employer brand as part of your video introductions.  
• STEP 5: Use video-based questions. Candidates prefer rich media over text-based questions. Both unbranded, low-fi and branded high-fi videos are highly effective.  
• STEP 6: Choose your video interviewers carefully. If your system permits, allow candidates to choose their interviewer, or include a diverse representation of interviewers. Also, consider conducting some internal evaluations of any video-media interview question footage, to see whether it is generally perceived positively, before incorporating it into your AVI.  
• STEP 7: When using AI evaluation tools, communicate the value of standardization to candidates to improve perceptions of fairness.  

Use these best practices to put your best foot forward, gain a competitive advantage, and capture the best talent. Even incremental ways to positively influence candidate perceptions translate into meaningful outcomes for your organization.

 

Get in Touch