4 ms·

I am living in a country where photos on a resume are the norm and for me it is the other way round. I am interviewing a lot of people at the moment and having

I am living in a country where photos on a resume are the norm and for me it is the other way round. I am interviewing a lot of people at the moment and having a picture with the resume really helps thinking of the applicant as a human being, rather than just a character sheet with skills and abilities. It also helps to remember and associate resumes, it's easier to relate a portrait to a set of skills and a CV than tens of names. You don't have to be a super model, just any professional picture will do that. It's also an illusion that not having pictures on the resume will reduce Bias in favor of attractive people. It will only push it to a later stage of the interview process.

seunosewa 4y ago
I think most less attractive people would rather get to the later stages of the interview process where they'll get a chance to advocate for themselves. It's better than being screened out early and not knowing whether it's because you're ugly or because the qualifications listed in your resume aren't impressive.
JCharante 4y ago
In a merit based process shouldn't applicants be thought of as just character sheets?
- eru 4y ago
  Depends. Someone will have to work with those people. They don't just interact with a computer or a machine.
  - paulryanrogers 4y ago
    Right but is their name or physical appearance really that important in working together? I've worked with people I never met, never saw their photo or real name or heard their voice. As long as they communicate somehow and produce work needed, isn't that enough?
- dustymcp 4y ago
  It should be, but humans are humans.
jameshart 4y ago
Honestly I'm surprised it's acceptable for resumes presented to me as a hiring manager to even have names on them, let alone photos. Humans are hardwired to make snap judgements about people based on a first visual impression, and a photo at the top of a resume will massively color the rest of your assessment.
- spacexsucks 4y ago
  No names and photos on resumes is the way to go. I dont need to see who you know kn LinkedIn either.
- specialist 4y ago
  Emphatic agreement. Ages ago, I witnessed the execs toss resumes with "funny sounding names". One of those anecdotal experiences that made a huge impression on me. Having grown up surrounded by immigrants and misc POC -- people are just people -- chucking resumes based on non-whiteness really pissed me off. This issue always reminds me of symphony auditions. To remove bias, candidates perform behind a screen. The caveat that gives me pause is the burden of filtering out "spam" resumes. It was such a chore the last time I helped with hiring. I can only imagine it's gotten worse. Perhaps resumes should be deanonymized by HR. Two step process. First, potential applicants are authenticated. Next, PII is stripped before the hiring team gets the bulk of the resumes. But what do I know? Hiring and interviewing is snafu everywhere these days. Adding more hoops and friction will probably fly like a lead zeppelin.
skeeter2020 4y ago
> It will only push it to a later stage of the interview process. Isn't this preferable though, when there's hopefully other, more meaningful, evidence that can potentially mitigate these easy but weaker biases?

seunosewa 4y ago

I think most less attractive people would rather get to the later stages of the interview process where they'll get a chance to advocate for themselves. It's better than being screened out early and not knowing whether it's because you're ugly or because the qualifications listed in your resume aren't impressive.

JCharante 4y ago

In a merit based process shouldn't applicants be thought of as just character sheets?

eru 4y ago
Depends. Someone will have to work with those people. They don't just interact with a computer or a machine.
- paulryanrogers 4y ago
  Right but is their name or physical appearance really that important in working together? I've worked with people I never met, never saw their photo or real name or heard their voice. As long as they communicate somehow and produce work needed, isn't that enough?
dustymcp 4y ago
It should be, but humans are humans.

jameshart 4y ago

Honestly I'm surprised it's acceptable for resumes presented to me as a hiring manager to even have names on them, let alone photos. Humans are hardwired to make snap judgements about people based on a first visual impression, and a photo at the top of a resume will massively color the rest of your assessment.

spacexsucks 4y ago
No names and photos on resumes is the way to go. I dont need to see who you know kn LinkedIn either.
specialist 4y ago
Emphatic agreement. Ages ago, I witnessed the execs toss resumes with "funny sounding names". One of those anecdotal experiences that made a huge impression on me. Having grown up surrounded by immigrants and misc POC -- people are just people -- chucking resumes based on non-whiteness really pissed me off. This issue always reminds me of symphony auditions. To remove bias, candidates perform behind a screen. The caveat that gives me pause is the burden of filtering out "spam" resumes. It was such a chore the last time I helped with hiring. I can only imagine it's gotten worse. Perhaps resumes should be deanonymized by HR. Two step process. First, potential applicants are authenticated. Next, PII is stripped before the hiring team gets the bulk of the resumes. But what do I know? Hiring and interviewing is snafu everywhere these days. Adding more hoops and friction will probably fly like a lead zeppelin.

skeeter2020 4y ago

> It will only push it to a later stage of the interview process. Isn't this preferable though, when there's hopefully other, more meaningful, evidence that can potentially mitigate these easy but weaker biases?