Interviews are often treated as neutral assessments of talent. However, my experience as well as information from the readings, suggests they can be surprisingly flawed measures of performance if not designed carefully. Thinking back on interviews I’ve had, I’ve seen both strong and weak practices that affected their reliability, validity, and utility.
In the most effective interviews, employers use structured, behavior-based questions, such as “Tell me about a time when…” rather than engaging in casual conversation. This would increase reliability because each candidate was evaluated using similar criteria, which would reduce interviewer bias. These interviews would also feel more valid because questions were clearly tied to job-relevant skills instead of personality or likability. For example, an employer asked me how I handled a team conflict, which aligned with the role’s collaboration requirements. Arguments that great managers select for talent first and design interviews to reveal patterns of behavior rather than surface traits (Buckingham and Coffman, 2016).
Ineffective interviews I experienced were largely unstructured and heavily dependent on “gut feeling”. I would be asked questions like “Why should we hire you?” which provided little useful information bout my actual capabilities. It was a bit vague. While others would focus too much on minor details in my resume rather than on my underlying talents. These practices lowered both reliability and validity since other candidates likely faced very different questions. These questions would not accurately predict job performance. Caution against this kind of intuition-based hiring, arguing that managers often confuse confidence or charisma with true talent (Buckingham and Coffman, 2016).
If I could recommend anything to those employers, it would be to use a structured interview with a consistent set of questions for all candidates. This would improve reliability. I would also design questions around specific job-related talents and behaviors to enhance validity. I would also train interviewers to recognize and minimize their biases. They should focus on evidence rather than first impressions. The best managers “define the outcomes, then let each person find their own route to excellence.” (Buckingham and Coffman, 2016). This will help have a better selection through more thorough interviewing.
Sources
Buckingham, M., & Coffman, C. (2016). First, Break All the Rules: What the World’s Greatest Managers Do Differently (2020 ed.). Gallup Press.
