Phone Screens vs. Video Screens

In This Coffee with Carrie, we will Discuss the Differences Between Phone Screens vs. Video Screens and Determine a Winner.

There is a lot of confusion surrounding the debate between phone screens vs. video screens. In conventional hiring methods, you, as a hiring manager, will usually conduct a phone screen as an initial interaction. Typically, you will have a general set of questions for every candidate and some specific questions based on their resume. But it’s impossible to observe a candidate’s mannerisms or really see how enthusiastic they are about the job. Video screens, therefore, are a better alternative because they can capture these subtle nuances. But the benefits don’t stop there.

Video Screens: 70% Faster than Phone Screens

The debate between phone screens vs. video screens is over when you consider the time saved. Live video interviews allow you to make crucial observations within seconds. Moreover, studies have shown that live video interviews can cut a 60-minute interview down to 24 minutes.

Live video interviews can give you extra insights into a candidate’s character. How many times have you brought an applicant into the office, only to discover they were not a culture fit? You’ll save your time and candidate’s when you use live video interviews. But phone screens vs. video screens isn’t all about time – but also money.

Reduce Cost to Hire with Phone Screens

Any reduction in the hiring timeframe will pass the savings along to the entire company. The average cost to hire is well over $4k. But video chat interviews can reduce the time to hire by 70%, providing companies with an average savings of nearly $2k. This means that ROI from video chat begins with the first hire and will break-even after the second. Therefore, the fight between phone screens vs. video screens is hardly fair at all. Video screens will always clobber the competition every time!

 Check out our latest Live Video Interview ROI Infographic to see the savings in action!