Why are there photos on a resume site, and featured so prominently? It's not Tinder.
US HR used to throw away any photos that people attached to resumes. (Usually someone attaching a photo was a recent immigrant, who didn't know the US convention.)
I've even heard rumors that some companies/screeners had a policy of throwing away resumes that included photos or other gratuitous information that could be the basis for illegal/problematic discrimination.
"Because LinkedIn does it" isn't a good argument, because LinkedIn is pretty awful, and the only things going for it are: (1) the majority of people are on it, and (2) recruiters sometimes search/spam there.
Some social media sites do photos because they pander to the worst. Or, in the case of one prominent social media site, infamously because the original inspiration was to catalog the best-looking women at their college.
Unless you're a headshots site/app for hiring models/actors, best to go with content-of-their-character, and all that.
Yeah, I'd feel uncomfortable receiving a CV with a photo on it. I don't want to be accused of anything if I reject a candidate. Likewise I don't want to see your DoB either.
It is surprising how culturally specific this is though - I've had CVs for hiring in our offshore centre in India where a candidate listed his father's details as a contact.
I am from India and an US based MNC's HR reached back to me and asked me to put a photo, my permanent address, DoB, and passport number. And I did, because the other way was to not go through that interview and possibly being blacklisted by that company. It used to be a norm here (improving but not so much), what wasn't normal was an international MNC demanding that right in the beginning. We are often asked for alternate contact details - it's a field and they must as you fill it! I literally don't have anyone like that so I just add my secondary mobile number.
I think sometimes companies will ask for passports for the purpose of visa checking, but hopefully that doesn't get as far as the hiring manager once the paperwork is all confirmed.
You're likely great at remembering multiple candidates' faces, as the hiring process often spans weeks or even months, with several candidates interviewing for the same position. Having a picture attached to a resume can be really helpful, much like how a LinkedIn profile picture adds value.
Yeah, let's focus on the liability, let's cover our ass. Instead of worrying about what this headshot thing really is about: giving everyone a fair chance by factoring out possible discrimination based on gender, race, haircut...
This is both sanest and fairest: some roles in the UK civil service are blind recruited for the first stages for exactly this reason. IMO it should be standard.
Interestingly, it was a culture shock when I saw that in other countries (that tend to have a more homogenous ethnic population) informally require photos. Not having a photo on a resume almost guaranteed the resume would go into the trash.
Even more of a culture shock was how much more open people are about their biases in those cases. "We can't have someone short doing job X, or they don't have a friendly face for Y, etc."
Several years ago, I had a Dutch girl apply for a traineeship-level position with my business in Australia, and she included a number of photos, including a 'glamour' shot of her straddling a chair. Quite bizarre.
The trainees cost USD$100/week, but for a very small business, ensuring trainees get a good working and learning experience chews a lot of time hand-holding and so I passed.
I believe historically CVs had pictures in Europe, and the "standardized" CV (Europass) still invites you to put one in[0].
Most people I spoke with said if you show up with Europass it's considered a negative flag, but I suppose it may still be useful for some "less modern" jobs.
As I understand it, cause HR don't care about most of it.
It encourages you to put a lot of things in it which are generally not interesting, much like in the old days you'd list the ability to drive a car in your CV, or having finished the mandatory military conscription.
People prefer a one pager with relevant experiences than a five pages which include your id number, birth date and address.
You can of course do a Europass CV with less info, it's just not how people do it generally, according to the people who complained about it (I'm just reporting what I heard, I don't care about the CV format)
I'm not exactly sold on the counterpoint I'm about to share but, one thing I hear frequently at least on Reddit is "they're going to see your face sooner or later, and they'll realize you're old,black or whatnot so what's the point of hiding photos and birth dates?"
For example, and I can only speak in anecdotes from my experience job searching in Greece, I had HR reps asking me my birth date, or when I'm gonna get married (I'm single).
So it's like, people who will discriminate on me exist, and I can only work on my real skills.
My counter argument to this is that the later in the process your face is shown, the fewer people have the option to discriminate and therefore the fewer arbitrary filters you have to pass through. And ideally the people who are discriminating at that point are the people you'd actually be working with, so their discrimination (however arbitrary) is more relevant bc you might continue to experience it on the job (not to say that jobs where a person is discriminatory isn't one worth taking or possible to work past.)
It's not 0 or 1. You won't be able to remove every bigoted recruiters from their companies, but you can always try to make their job harder, and limit the harm they may cause.
Totally understand where you're coming from — and it's a super fair concern.
We're not trying to turn hiring into a popularity contest or a casting call. The point of video or a photo isn’t to favor looks — it’s to give people a chance to show personality, communication skills, or walk through a project — especially in roles where that matters (e.g. PMs, founders, designers, etc.).
That said, both video and photo are optional. We’ve seen that for many candidates, especially those early in their careers or from non-traditional backgrounds, a short video can dramatically increase response rates — not because of appearance, but because it humanizes them and cuts through the noise of generic applications.
We’re 100% aligned that character and substance matter most — we just want to give people more ways to show that, not perform for it.
Another potential big issue is the community itself. A huge reason why LinkedIn is so hated is the community that's on there, and how the various engineering/design choices made by LinkedIn over the years amplifies and encourages those behaviors. Things like humble bragging, writing styles, DMing patters, etc etc etc.
And I don't know if building another platform with a feed will solve that problem. Because the existence of a social feed itself might be the issue here. But then what do you have if you don't have a feed? Is that a "platform" anymore if all that's on there are peoples' resumes?
I feel that building the next LinkedIn is really building the next LinkedIn community. That can't necessarily be done through computer code. I mean, look at the kind of community building that it took to build out HN.
Things like humble bragging, writing styles, DMing patters, etc etc etc.
This exists because there is limited courage to call this out. There are not many polite ways to tell someone this, you would need people in their life to pull them aside and point it out. It's very similar to being the friend that pulls someone outside and explains they need to brush their teeth (someone has to do this, with love). Maybe more working professionals need to blog about this so the broader community can be educated on behavior when it comes to excess vanity and general manners.
For example, it's simply rude to broadcast your new job when some people are struggling with it (will they ever get one? will they get fired? are they good enough?). Just the very fact that there are "some" should be enough to kickstart one's manners, even if that "some" is not a lot of people.
It's simply rude to continuously market things (anything) when there are people literally ... stressing themselves over the pressure of competition. Again, as an example, a person constantly marketing their looks is putting stress and pressure on many others - this is a simple fact. The same goes for those with wealth and opportunity.
> For example, it's simply rude to broadcast your new job when some people are struggling with it (will they ever get one? will they get fired? are they good enough?). Just the very fact that there are "some" should be enough to kickstart one's manners, even if that "some" is not a lot of people.
To be fair, LinkedIn is nominally a professional networking site. Broadcasting your new job is absolutely in scope for that site.
It’s the “what the death of my dog taught me about viral content marketing” or “how my child losing her soccer game made me a better manager” posts that are out of control.
My personal favorites are people bragging about working during their wedding / funeral / vacation. “Joe is such a dedicated worker! Look he is taking time out from his bachelor party to deploy this database schema change!”
> For example, it's simply rude to broadcast your new job when some people are struggling with it
LinkedIn is a job site. It is completely appropriate to announce you got a job. I want to know that people in my network have a job whether I have one or not. It means that I can reach out to them and ask if the company is still hiring.
If we were in a perfect world, I'd agree, but unfortunately that isn't the case. The cons here are far more prevalent than the pros, as photos and videos will lead to discrimination before the main part of what matters, the resumé, your experience and your actual knowledge, shines through.
There's a reason these things aren't standard in resumés (at least for jobs that don't have a focus on appearance).
>photos and videos will lead to discrimination before the main part of what matters,
We're in such a connected age that anyone wanting to know your face can 99% of the time just google your name. That was an issue talked about even 20 years ago in my grade school days of Myspace.
Unless you legitmately have no photo of yourself on the internet (including LinkdIn), adding a photo here will not give or take much away from a malicious actor.
>There's a reason these things aren't standard in resumés
because companies are so scared of litigation that they won't even give feedback anymore. It's not a particularly good reason if we're being honest.
I feel like video will help mitigate this, as personalty and soft skills are communicated better that way. But if a company is going to discriminate based on a video, then they are going to discriminate when they interview you in person, no?
Do you have any guesses as to how much the photo/video on a resume site is used for legitimate purposes, vs. how much it's used/influencing in illegal, unfair, or inappropriate ways?
Right? Photos and video? Why would I ever want to post video on my resume? Why would I ever want to watch someone’s video if I was hiring? Are we trying to land tech roles or screen time on reality TV?
Hm. Never felt that way. Would be curious to discuss more though!
Now - I'll 1000% agree, and speak from long years of work, that adhd and autism likely make it harder. But it's also quite hard for most people, just for different reasons, so I don't find it a filter with enough specificity.
(Perhaps I'm sliding onto the dark side of the force, I certainly wouldn't have thought so 20 years ago, but as I learn more about the massive scope and mandate of senior execs, and the time crunch they operate under, I am starting to understand a bit better than I used to, the value of speaking in orderly and well summarized fashion. Still struggle with it mind you, but do see there's more to it than just neurotypical filtering.)
No trolling: Is it possible to be a good/qualified executive if not neurotypical? In my view, executive-level positions are mostly about communication.
There is a lot that you can do to learn these skills and succeed in organizational roles. It’s different to be a CEO where the job is primarily politics and face to face discussion, and being a VP where you just need to make your org work.
I think with Musk/zuckerberg/gates you are seeing a giradian duality. They simultaneously appear charismatic and awkward. It’s either extremely context sensitive or you are unable to accurately perceive it.
Depends on what they're selling. Elon is a bit awkward but has/had a cult following.
Edit: It's about communication but also hype/motivation. Be it for the team, shareholders or customers.
And communication can be done in many ways. It doesn't have to be political speak, sometimes the directness some smart awkward people bring can be good and being awkward gives them the right to be direct without coming off as rude professionally.
A glib answer would be "depends if you consider sociopaths to be neurodevergent".
More seriously though : Most big companies these days teach some variation of a 4 quadrant personality model such as DISC or equivalent. Scientific validity of these aside, today there's a fairly broad acceptance in North America that leaders come in different types, each with strengths and weaknesses.
I was personally shocked how many executives around me, with extreme client relationship management and people skills, are some kind of neurodevergent. One thing I've observed, and others may disagree,is that they can be much better teachers. A person who is "born leader" will struggle how to convey their skillset to others. A person who on the other hand had to themselves learn these skills the hard way, can much more easily decompose and relate them.
My wife has jokingly been called the most neurotypical person in the world :-). She's extremely emotionally intelligent. She intuitively does things which I had to learn on a very rational, conscious, intentional level. She's better at people skills than I am, but wouldn't even know where to begin to teach them, it's just too "obvious" for her to do or say the right thing.
Anyhoo, my answer to your question is "absolutely yes, but it'll take dedicated hard work " :-)
I never put my real headshot on LinkedIn even before it was scrapped for AI training. LinkedIn still bugs me to put a picture to "increase engagement".
Putting headshot in resumes is not expected and even cringe in my country, but some countries expect headshots and other highly personal info. No thanks.
This ain't a resume. You'd still need to apply for jobs. This is probably closer to your blog but hosted by someone else. A way to build connections outside of the recruitment process.
> Eine Bewerbung ohne Foto zu verschicken, ist in den vergangenen Jahren zu einem regelrechten Trend geworden. Bei vielen Personalern genießen Lebensläufe ohne Bewerbungsfoto daher eine hohe Akzeptanz [...]
Disclaimer: I’m bad about remembering faces. Every photo with a name below helps me a lot.
We shall not copy everything from America.
And the site goes on…
Trotzdem ist die Bewerbung ohne Foto nach wie vor eher die Ausnahme als die Regel. Denn ein sympathisches Bild erweckt einen guten ersten Eindruck. Somit wird Deine Bewerbung mit einer positiveren Grundeinstellung gesichtet, was zum Vorteil werden kann.
Richtig gestaltet, drückt das Bewerberbild außerdem Professionalität aus, lässt Deine Persönlichkeit erkennen und verdeutlicht, dass Du zur Unternehmenskultur passt. Grundlegende Informationen wie Dein Geschlecht oder Deine Herkunft lassen sich aus Deinem Lebenslauf ohnehin oft ableiten, beispielsweise aus Deinem Namen. Zudem finden die Personaler im Internet meist schnell ein Foto von Dir, wenn gewünscht.
The company will anyway see you, if you’re lucky. Your name, birthdate, education and address (people often underestimate the address) tell a lot. I don’t care about colors of hair, eyes or skin and the scar across the check is at least something which allows me to recognize a person.
I'd say that depends on the business area, the small "Krauter" around the corner probably requires a photo. But as this is not the target group of this project, I would argue that images are not really required.
Job applications already get inunduated with hundreds, thousands of candidates, of which 90% are bots submitting for canddiates. Some companies are resorting to the dreaded video submissions to filter that out, but even that may not be safe long term.
Photos may not be the final solution to this flood of automation, but it's being dabbled with.
cheap is part of the factor here. Pictures aren't expensive to generate, but are a magnitude more expensive than generating a bunch of text. Meanwhile, pictures are trivial for humans to verify against a simple search.
Internet is rapidly becoming a pile of steaming shit already, captchas were annoying but now it seems the "are you a robot" test is coming everywhere, what a sad state of affairs. I wonder how much of the overall traffic is automated, 80%? 90% ?
Totally hear you — and I really appreciate how thoughtfully you laid this out.
Photos are not required on OpenSpot - We included them because some people want to humanize their profile — but we’re also very aware of the bias/discrimination concerns, especially in the U.S.
The intent isn’t to mimic LinkedIn or create a polished image-centric profile like a dating app — it’s to offer optional ways for people to show who they are, beyond just a list of bullet points. For some, that’s a photo. For others, it’s a project demo or a short intro about their work.
That said, we’re actively listening and learning. If we find that photos do more harm than good — especially around bias or UX — we’re open to evolving that part of the product.
Thanks again for the thoughtful take — this kind of feedback makes the product better.
> US HR used to throw away any photos that people attached to resumes. (Usually someone attaching a photo was a recent immigrant, who didn't know the US convention.)
Don't they recommend having LinkedIn profile picture for better chances of getting shortlisted? Also assuming you are talking about physical resumes. Wouldn't having a photo attached to resume make more sense in terms of identifying the candidate correctly at any given stage of recruitment, before or after the in person interview?
The recommendation I've seen is to include a LinkedIn profile URL on your resume. This was with the intent that those reviewing said resume would be able to verify that a real person was behind it.
I suppose that's reasonable, no?
Hmm, I think I agree with you. I used to not add a picture of myself, because I think my experience and skills are more important. Until I kept hearing again and again that I should add a picture to my resume. So I added a picture, but now I open myself up to be judged by the cover or even get thrown away upfront.
Haha fair — it’s kind of in between a resume and a portfolio.
OpenSpot isn’t meant to replace formal resumes entirely — it’s designed to help people stand out before that stage. It’s public, searchable, and curated — so if a recruiter finds someone interesting, they can reach out directly or request a formal resume.
Photos are optional, but yeah — they can help distinguish one Jane Doe from another, especially in a directory-style setting. Same goes for a short intro, project link, or anything else that brings some personality into the mix.
US HR used to throw away any photos that people attached to resumes. (Usually someone attaching a photo was a recent immigrant, who didn't know the US convention.)
I've even heard rumors that some companies/screeners had a policy of throwing away resumes that included photos or other gratuitous information that could be the basis for illegal/problematic discrimination.
"Because LinkedIn does it" isn't a good argument, because LinkedIn is pretty awful, and the only things going for it are: (1) the majority of people are on it, and (2) recruiters sometimes search/spam there.
Some social media sites do photos because they pander to the worst. Or, in the case of one prominent social media site, infamously because the original inspiration was to catalog the best-looking women at their college.
Unless you're a headshots site/app for hiring models/actors, best to go with content-of-their-character, and all that.