Cyber-vetting is vetting potential candidates for employment using the Internet (Wilcox et al., 2022). The Cyber-vetting process entails searching an employee’s online presence, searching for references and reviews, and even checking out any possible criminal record. Interviewers use this cyber-vetting process to explore more information on someone’s reputation, character, and qualifications. In most cases, this process is popular with political opponents, corporate employers and even in journalism. In this era of wide internet coverage, employers have found it easier to conduct the process of cyber-vetting. Since a wealth of information is available online, the wide internet coverage has made it easy for anyone to successfully and credibly conduct cyber-vetting on any possible candidate. However, it is also critical to note that the wealth availability of information online can be used maliciously. This is because malicious people can use the same information for false and misleading purposes and can spread easily and quickly.
As to why I, as an interviewer, should be concerned about the cyber-vetting process, it is such a valuable process that will yield several advantages in searching for qualified and employable candidates. Some of the benefits I stand to get as an interviewer from the cyber-vetting process entail authentic behavior analysis, prediction of future actions, confirmation of qualifications, and identification of candidates with the appropriate cultural fit. In the authentic behavior analysis, the online space will enable me to discover the authentic self of the potential employee. This is because most people have high professional standards in professional environments but are more willing to let loose on their respective online platforms. Therefore, this will enable me as an interviewer to gain knowledge of the candidate’s real personalities (Gruzd et al., 2020).
With the prediction of future actions from employees, as an interviewer, knowing someone’s authentic self will enhance my prediction of their future behaviors. I also understand that personal branding is one-way interviewers can use it to predict future actions. In this sense, using social media platforms and online search engines can be an appropriate approach to indicating an employee or applicant’s brand (Gruzd et al., 2020). For example, as an interviewer, I could be considering two candidates for a position, and both were professional in an interview setup. In conducting cyber-vetting for both, I found that one applicant regularly posts unappealing messages about their last job on social media platforms. The second candidate’s social media messages are contrary, hence maintaining a professional attitude on social platforms. At this point, I am more inclined toward the second candidate, who presents a more professional attitude on social media platforms. This is because how people portray themselves on social media directly correlates to how they represent the organization upon hiring.
The third reason I should be concerned about cyber-vetting as an employer is to confirm some information an applicant might present in the physical interview. My confirmation of a candidate’s information would take the approach of looking for the applicant’s qualifications through references on social networks. For example, LinkedIn is one of the popular social media platforms that can enable me to do that successfully, as it has a feature that allows recommendations to be viewed publicly on a profile. The fourth reason I should be concerned about cyber-vetting as an employer is to identify candidates with the appropriate cultural fit. As an employer, I would like someone who will fit in my organization. Therefore, the process of cyber-vetting will enable me to identify some parameters of potential employees that will perfectly coincide with the culture at my organization.
Now that the process of cyber-vetting issue, there are many aspects as an interviewer I will be interested in. For instance, it would be critical for me to ensure that I fully understand the process of cyber-vetting potential applicants. This cyber-vetting process entails conducting a Google search for an applicant and researching the candidates on social media and online platforms, spending ten to fifteen minutes per candidate (Wilcox et al., 2022). Conducting a Google search for an applicant would be the first thing I would do as an interviewer. Sometimes, I would get the chance to access useful information without a deeper dive, although this is only sometimes the case. For instance, if an applicant has a common name, it would be ideal for me to include some distinctive information in the search. This will enable me to focus on the correct candidate and not someone else. Secondly, I would ensure that I use the most reputable social media platforms like LinkedIn. This being a credible platform to pinpoint how applicants conduct themselves professionally, I can get credible information on any applicant as an interviewer. Moreover, I will respect other socials like Twitter, Instagram, Facebook, WhatsApp, YouTube, Discord, TikTok, Spotify, and Pinterest as they are both common to usage and hence critical to accessing information (Wilcox et al., 2022).
One popular incident of cyber-vetting that I can remember as an interviewer is when I preferred an applicant who had posted numerous community service activities on her Twitter and Instagram platforms. Considering most organizations acknowledge community service as an emphatic character, this indicates that candidates of this attitude are passionate about volunteer work, making their community a better place.
In conclusion, cyber-vetting is paramount for any interviewer as it allows for further information regarding an individual for better decision-making. I therefore fully agree with this practice of the recruitment process.
References
Gruzd, A., Jacobson, J., & Dubois, E. (2020). Cybervetting and the Public Life of Social Media Data. Social Media.
Wilcox, A., Damarin, A. K., & McDonald, S. (2022). Is cybervetting valuable? Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 15(3), 315–333. https://doi.org/10.1017/iop.2022.28
write