Week 5 Blog

While I have had more jobs than I have had interviews, I can attest that many places that do interviews have them as an often semi-ceremonial practice. Undoubtedly the more senior the position you are being hired for the more likely you are to experience a more formal and rigorous interview, but for many places that are hiring, especially for lower level positions, they only do the interview because they want to confirm you exist and because it is required by “corporate”, as it is typically described. Suffice it to say the interviews I have had were conducted by people who had definitely done it before but were clearly only going through the motions, hoping to ask their stock questions and receive their stock answers within some short time frame. Though in one case I was asked to do a math test to ensure I and any other candidates could properly operate a cash register or otherwise handle transactions.

Even when many of the questions I was asked in the interviews I have participated in were not particularly engaging or informative, I think the test I was given is a good example of a way a recruiter could select candidates in a more useful way. This week’s lecture Introduction to Selection talked a lot about whether a selection method could be considered reliable, valid, and still have selection utility. I believe a basic math test such as what I was given likely would have qualified for three criteria as it was a consistent way to test an essential skill to the job in a cheap manner. That being said, the actual Q&A part in both interviews I have been in were very basic. The lecture Improving Interview Effectiveness recommends things like follow up questions, scorecards, and establishing rapport with candidates but all my interviewers did was run through a list of questions, waited for me to finish my response, and then move on to the next question on the list.

Were I to make a couple recommendations based on what I have learned about interviews to those conducted with me in the past, I would first suggest making an effort to build more fluidity into the process. More dynamic interviews can usually produce more informative responses. A second point I would stress is that it is important to open and close the interview process with a sense that each candidate, and their answers, matters. This would include taking the time to talk with the candidate before and after the interview in order to smoother over communication and concerns with both parties.

References:

Myers L., Lecture 2 Introduction to Selection Withdrawal, https://canvas.oregonstate.edu/courses/1936538/pages/week-5-learning-materials?module_item_id=23510028

Myers L., Lecture 4 Improving Interview Effectiveness, https://canvas.oregonstate.edu/courses/1936538/pages/week-5-learning-materials?module_item_id=23510028