When I think back on the interviews I’ve been through, I realize how different they’ve been and how few really felt fair or consistent. Some interviews felt totally random, like the interviewer was just chatting to see if we “clicked.” At the time, I didn’t think much of it, but after reading Bohnet (2018) in Harvard Business Review, I see how that kind of unstructured approach can lead to bias and make it hard to compare candidates. It’s unreliable because every person ends up being judged by different standards.
One of my best interview experiences was when a hiring manager used clear, situational questions like, “Tell me about a time you had to solve a problem under pressure.” It reminded me of what Chamorro-Premuzic and Steinmetz (2013) describe as situational judgment techniques questions that reveal how people actually think and act, not just how they present themselves. That kind of structure makes interviews more valid because the questions connect directly to real job skills.
If I could go back and give those employers advice, I’d tell them to borrow ideas from Buckingham and Coffman (2016), focus on talent rather than personality. Ask questions that uncover someone’s strengths and natural patterns, not just their résumé answers. And like Laszlo Bock (2014) wrote about Google, use structured scoring rubrics so decisions are based on data, not gut feelings.
Looking back, I realize the most effective interviews weren’t about charm or “fit.” They were about giving everyone the same chance to show what they can do. Fairness, structure, and clear criteria don’t just make hiring better they make it more human.
References
Bock, L. (2014). How to Get a Job at Google. The New York Times.
Bohnet, I. (2018). How to Take the Bias out of Interviews. Harvard Business Review.
Buckingham, M., & Coffman, C. (2016). First, Break All the Rules. Gallup Press.
Chamorro-Premuzic, T., & Steinmetz, C. (2013). The Perfect Hire. Scientific American Mind, 24(3), 42-47.