How employers analyze candidates' social networks and what to do about it

Many employers (at least recruiters) review candidates' social networks before hiring them. Is this correct and legitimate? And what should job seekers do with their social networks? Iryna Shostak , CEO and Marketing Director at linza.agency , will give us an insight.

Technology has made checking the digital footprint of potential employees easier than ever. Simply enter a name on any social media platform and, if your privacy settings allow it, you'll have a wealth of information about the candidate at your fingertips.

Most companies are actively using this in their recruitment and selection process. Here are the results of several studies:

• 43% of companies review the social networks of candidates who have responded to vacancies;
• 70% of companies use social media screening when hiring. And 57% don't hire candidates because of what they found in their profiles.

Why do employers need such a check, what do they expect from a candidate's social media, and what might make them wary?

Checking candidates in social networks: pros and cons?

The most obvious advantages

• Checking for a match with the company's culture. Social media can help you get an idea of a potential employee's personal qualities and their fit with the company's culture.
• Preventing potential risks to the employer's brand. This can help employers make sure they hire people who support the company's values and standards. For example, multiple use of offensive language on social media can be a red flag. In the eyes of the public, the employee's behavior becomes a continuation of the employer's behavior.

• Confirmation of the facts provided by the candidate. At the very least, the candidate's Facebook and LinkedIn profiles can be used to check the consistency of information about his or her career. This process helps to ensure that the person is honest.
• A practical and inexpensive recruitment strategy. Often, it is through a search on the pages of professional groups, associations, etc. that highly specialized vacancies are filled.

The most obvious disadvantages?

• Ethics. There is a lot of controversy over the appropriateness of evaluating candidates based on their private life on social media. Ukrainian labor law protects against discrimination based on gender, age, marital status, parental status, political or religious beliefs, and appearance. Candidates usually do not disclose such information in their resumes, and it is considered unethical to ask about it during interviews. However, even a cursory look at a candidate's social media will reveal many of these details. And in case of a job refusal due to something found on social media, it will be difficult to prove the fact of discrimination.?
• Time costs. Given the large number of platforms and content, screening a candidate can take a significant amount of time. Recruiters should be aware of this and decide whether the advantages outweigh the disadvantages before implementing social media screening in the hiring process.
• Potential legal risks. If a recruiter comes across information on social media about a candidate's protected characteristics (such as race, religion, or age) that leads to a candidate not being hired, the company may face a discrimination claim. It's hard to prove, but if you do, the employer will be obliged to pay a fine.

What employers look for in candidates' social networks?

Control of their own statements. Of course, this does not mean that you should limit yourself and your creativity. Rather, it is about being aware of the possible risks and long-term impact of certain content on potential cooperation.

Here is what can be a red flag for an employer:

? intimidation;

? hate speech;

? racism;

? drug use;

? offensive language;

? sexually explicit content;

? violent behavior;

? threatening behavior;

? foul language.

And here's what, on the contrary, will strengthen the candidate in the eyes of the recruiter:?

? professionalism - the ability to maintain a professional behavior and tone;

? communication skills - well-formulated posts and respectful interaction with others;

? confirmation of qualifications and skills - posts related to the candidate's area of expertise, qualifications or training;

? consistency - when a candidate's online presence reflects their work history;

? compliance with the corporate culture of the organization - for example, participation in events that are in line with the company's culture;

? creativity and innovation - unique ideas or examples of creative work.

What employers think about it

I asked some managers I know who are involved in hiring whether they use social media to screen candidates, what they pay attention to, and what they think about it in general.

I look at the candidates' social media pages before the interview. This allows me to check a person according to two criteria: whether they can formulate their thoughts competently and coherently and whether they are in line with the organization's values in their public communication. At the same time, social media screening is almost never a sufficient reason to reject a candidate; it is only a source of additional information that needs to be clarified.

I would recommend that candidates

• remember that everything posted on the Internet can be used by anyone and in any way;
• consider social networks as a tool for finding potential employers and maintain your page with this in mind - talk about your competencies, achievements, aspirations and work experience;
• if the social network allows it, distinguish between public and limited audience posts, and make public only the information that you really want to make available to everyone.

Before hiring, I usually look at the social media of candidates. In the digital age, social media is a kind of business card. Everything published affects the first impression of a person and partly the final decision. For us, this is more true for sales managers and consultants. When hiring production staff, we have a slightly different approach and search channels.

My colleagues and I look at candidates' pages if we have any doubts or if a potential employee is a company trendsetter or holds a position that requires some publicity.?

Social media monitoring helps us understand how the candidate's values align with the company's. Comments under posts can also help you indirectly understand how well a person is able to express their opinions and resolve conflicts, and how they communicate with strangers.

I would advise candidates to analyze the information they post/repost (whether it is true, whether it is an PSYOP), not to share posts with "treason", because, in my opinion, this characterizes the candidate as someone who is not able to deeply analyze the information they consume and is easily influenced by other people's opinions.

What a candidate communicates publicly about themselves can provide a lot of valuable information. We're looking for employees who align with our values, so anything that brings us closer together are pros, and anything that moves us away are cons. Some posts or even data from the profile description can become red flags for us (or, on the contrary, green flags), which will make the selection process easier.

Any manifestations of russian culture or propaganda narratives, cries of "betrayal," socialist manifestations, involvement in anything illegal, or affiliation with oligarchic/shadow businesses are a red flag for me. Whereas volunteering or spreading fundraising, reporting on russian crimes, online activism, or unobtrusive communication about one's experience and professionalism are green. The ability to tell stories and engage the audience is also highly valued in our field, so great content will add to the candidate's advantage.