TIIME 2015 Session 28: Privacy and Business

Convener: Raimund Wilhelmer

Abstract: Discussion about business cases for privacy

Tags: Privacy, Business Cases

Notes

We would like to have your ideas/input for this project

1. Touching the privacy project and bringing it to the business level
2. Defining privacy

Looking for job, problem of not finding it - There is a need for support in order to define their own needs (candidates and companies looking for employees)

In a job seeking centre you have to define yourself, in the higher education area it is different.

It is a project about 2 projects, which came together within a discussion, profit for both on a business perspective.

There might be some critical issues:

• Something that user does not identify and it's a misleading direction

I (Raimund Wilhelmer) represent a company from Germany in the discussion

Frank (psychologist) is trained to find people jobs that will suit them for long time - right jobs

In a team there supposed to be a gap that should be defined.

• Personal skills, characteristics that could fill
• If you are the right people for the job, is the job right for us
• The better the evaluation of the data is, the better the outcome
• The relevant information on both part is finding the job descriptions and … on the other part
• It’s all about statistics
• Capabilities in the beginning are the reason for the outcome (getting the job, losing it etc.) -
• Predicting variables try do describe predicting factors
• Trying to automatize a profession
• Pre-screening procedures
• Generated footprints (that we leave online) in 2 min of looking at a Facebook profile it is possible to get a estimate picture of the personality
• You screen out people based on profiles

This brings rise to all kind of biases.

Information based on superficial information.

PhD physician looking for a job - after applying all the answer was: no need - no job

Then he broke it down to what he was doing before, the outcome: he got invited because of his experience in statistics. Working with job seeking centres (example of one for people with no higher education)

The interface therefore is very different, could be a device, job seeking agent, they describe the profession they have, CV etc. and upload it in the system

The idea there is, providing such a system.

Lower educated centres have a problem - a lot of the need a IT lesson, often it’s useless because the do not need it - big amounts of money invested that could be used in a better way

Future bosses have to talk to them, communication is needed.

The job seekers (low educated) are looking for a ‘profession’ - what could I do? The idea is to match these 2 systems. Sensible data with a profile date and there is a matching in the classification. There is a need for them (the candidates) because they do not realize it.

Both sides could have needs of privacy.

Aud1: protection from 3 parties

• People who subscribed for the job
• The company who wrote the job description, intended to find a group of people

The only reason why it came out that Google is building a Google car is because they were looking for people that can build cars. (Apple have found a third party that would find the people for them to do the same)

Legal issue: You provide sensible information and a third party is using this private data. Matching jobs and jobs seekers is essential but the restrictions are problematic. It depends on attributes you cannot really influence.

CV is a tool to present yourself.

What kind of Meta information are giving to the others is what the job seeker does not know. The problem is that after analysis of the information the person gave more out there than he/she probably wanted to share. Matching job and seeker without applying.

What kind of regulation would apply?

Aud2: People identities are being stolen all the time

Aud3: That is the point where you have to be able to assure both parties.

3 perspectives:

1. Company looks for a candidate
2. The candidate looking for a job
3. Matching it automatically

Walter: If you create new information from the “public” information, it is prohibited.

A: it is not reliable. The big problem is that in the whole area of psychological research there is a model, but it’s always a certain ‘guess’. There is not a proper evaluation in the process. From 200 people who apply for a job 90% gets screened out on basis that might be wrong and the company will choose somebody from 10% even though there might have been a person that would be better for this position but they screened it out at the beginning. This what we would like to avoid.

Conclusion

Open for follow-up ideas. We are looking for people who work in this area and would like to cooperate.