Cognitive Analytics: Enabling assisted intelligence in human resources recruiting and hiring by Noel Webb, @CognitiveHR, Karen.ai, #BigDataTO #BigData #AI
Notes from the #BigDataTO conference in Toronto
- He realized that HR teams were spending too much time prescreening resumes before they could even meet with the best candidates
- Recruiters only spend 6 seconds reviewing a resume which means they end up accidentally discarding some of the best ones. Time crunches mean they may only be able to get through 20% of candidates. ML can solve these problems .
- 75% of candidates who apply to jobs do not hear back from the company because there are simply too many candidates and not enough time to do so. NLP and chatbots can solve this problem.
- AI will not steal all jobs but it will automate processes and allow you to engage with potential hires in a more meaningful way.
- Shortlisting is a huge challenge for HR as reducing a huge list of resumes into a screened list takes a lot of detailed attention. Technology such as direct keyword matches aren’t the best option as they eliminate people with relevant skills but not the exact words. For instance, know R is just as good as knowing SAS but a keyword search wouldn’t know that. NLP would work much better.
- Personality insights can also be collected using sentiment analysis to get a functional understanding of the Big 5 Personality traits. [Wow, I can’t imagine how valid it is to do personality assessments with resumes which are often written by third parties and without traditional grammar and style]
- Chatbots can take an applicant through hiring and onboarding processes by answering questions that would normally be asked of an operations officer. [imagine how many stupid questions the chatbot would be asked that new hires are too scared to ask people]
“Are There Perils in Changing the Way We Sample our Respondents?”
Sample and panel providers are always looking to increase their active sample size. In recent years this has taken many companies out of email lists into real time sampling via ad banners or social networks. Research has revealed that panelists recruited by such methods are substantially different than the panelists that opt into online panels. This study addresses the various methods panels implement to generate additional sample, and the tradeoffs these methods require. While there is a clear short term gain of added panelists, there may be long term loss of data stability and panel tenure.
- Inna Burdein, Director of Analytics, The NPD Group, Inc.
- Is there a differences among people who take several surveys in a row versus taking surveys off your website
- Tested data from website survey, email survey, and follow-up survey
- 1400 completes per group
- Website takers are younger and newer.
- Website takers express more interest in surveys and incentives [or they just like clicking a lot]
- Website takers are more online, google a lot, lots of free time
- Completion rates are higher for website takers, and then follow-on surveys. Email takers are last.
- Website takers are more satisfied – easy, reasonable, interesting
- Website takers have more inconsistencies and not following instructions. Follow-ons are more likely to straightline and opt out of responding.
- Website panelists report more purchases, more store visits, more browsing stores, more online purchases, make home improvements, redecorate, go on vacation, invest in stock market
- [More likely to report purchases does not mean more likely to purchase]
- One follow on is kind of normal, but two follow-ons is where the differences happen, more unhappiness, more non-purchase, more straightlining, more use of none of the above
- Significant differences do emerge [but I wonder how many are truly meaningful, would you run your business differently if you got number A vs number B]
- Are there perils in changing the way you sample? It depends. Need enthusiastic responders and more representativeness. Tell people to answer on the website. Possibly balance on channel
- Follow-ons may hurt sample quality if no limit is set – time spent, number of surveys, what is the right rule?
The essence of “TED – Ideas Worth Spreading” comes to the QRCA conference this year.
Kathy – best practices for getting the best participants
- Start with a vivid portrait of a desired recruit
- Where to find millennials? How about starbucks. Where to find moms? How about used kids clothing stores.
- Don’t ask respondents to be dishonest – e.g., tell siblings in the same group that they shouldn’t say they know each other
- You don’t need to put the entire screener online
- Keep it blind if needed. You don’t need to put the client’s name on the screener, etc. Don’t even tell the recruiter.
- Simplify the screener. 12 pages is too long. Don’t burden it with nice to know quant data. Don’t try to find the one armed, one eyed, left handed 21 year old.
- Recruiters are competing for valuable consumer time.
- Rescreening will give you different answers so decide if and when you need specific answers.
- Tell them the date and time up front because they might not be available when you need them
- Have the conversation about focus group participation being a good part-time job. So you can decide if that person really is appropriate for your job.
- Consider your language – physician vs doctor, head of household [that’s a pet peeve of mine because my household has no one person in charge]
- Cash matters. Send the incentives in advance so the recruiter doesn’t have to do it out of pocket.
- Early arrival drawings really work
Manny Schrager – recruiting resources
- Look for experienced recruiters, constantly training and know newest recruiting methods. Don’t tell people why they weren’t recruited so they can’t bias future studies.
- A facility database is the best recruiting resource. Respondents are familiar with MR and have agreed to be there. Higher show rates. Lower recruiting costs. Retain demographic information. Can check for duplicate records and identify potential cheaters and repeaters.
- Email blasts should only go ou twith client permission. Allows for quicker determination of who is available on a particular day. The blast doesn’t need to be the screener, just the date and topic selector.
- Client sample may have higher interest if the client name is revealed. Recruits should be rescreened to ensure they still meet the criteria. Need to over recruit as there is more skepticism.
- Social media can be used but only share date, time, and vague information. Include a screener link but mask the study topic. Those who pass the screener can then go through a telephone screener.
- Craigslist is the biggest no no. Only use it in the worst possible situation, where you really cannot find who you’re looking for. Make sure the people bring verifiable prood – they drive their jaguar, they bring their prescription, they bring identification proof
- If you recruit from a support group, consider making a donation to the group
- Independant recruiters may not maintain the level of database that can identify repeat participants
John Cashmore – relationship management with facilities, recruiters, and clients
- He did a study of QRCs and facilities
- QRCs want proactive, friendly, communication on time, daily updates, responsiveness, professional, respect, welcoming, creative. You need to tell the facilities what you need. He suggests that the bigger the words are, the more that idea is lacking.
- Facilities want communication, partners, respect, responsive, professional, approachable, accessible, understanding, trust, knowledgeable.
- The results together say the top needs are communicate, partner, respect, professional, proactive, friendly, responsive, updates.
- Look for Barbara Rosenthal’s CUPCAKE acronym on facilities.
- Communicate ALL of your expectations with the facility before you arrive.
- Don’t expect the facility to babysit your client.
- In defense of research participants #MRX (lovestats.wordpress.com)
- The Social Media Research Love Hate Debate #MRX (lovestats.wordpress.com)
- Annual Meeting and Town Hall #QRCA #MRX (lovestats.wordpress.com)
- Storytelling by Ted Frank #QRCA #MRX (lovestats.wordpress.com)
- Recipes for Tasty Research Reports: Liz Van Patten #QRCA #MRX (lovestats.wordpress.com)