Looking back at the interviews I have had, the difference between those that were effective and ineffective was how they were set up. I haven’t been in many interviews, but looking at two of them, they were very different. One of them felt like it wasn’t serious and was more laid back, but the other felt the exact opposite. Why did they feel so different?
Effective interviews are structured and are based on the job. They feel more serious and that the questions that are being asked really to matter. According to some of the lectures from this week, interviews that are structured improve reliability and eliminate interviewer bias (Lecture 4 – Increasing Interview Effectiveness). To go along with this, when asking behavioral questions, it improves the validity and is the best way to indicate job performance (Outline – Selection).
Ineffective interviews are unstructured and feel more casual. Because of this, reliability is down and creates a bias from how long you can get along with someone rather than how well they will do their job. Unstructured interviews have lower validity versus more structural interviews (W5 Lecture 2 –Introduction to Selection).
With that being said, structured interviews work best. Utility adds onto this. Interviews that add other tools like tests or work samples tend to lead to finding the right fit for the job. Using more than one predictor improves the decision quality (W5 Lecture 5 – The Selection Decision).
If I could go back into that casual interview that I was in, I would tell them to add structure, ask better questions, and use more tools to make a better decision. The hiring process would be a lot easier and more clear!
Citations:
W5 Lecture 2 – Introduction to Selection
W5 Lecture 4 – Increasing Interview Effectiveness
W5 Lecture 5 – The Selection Decision
Outline – Selection