Thinking back on an interview process I went through for a local Drywall in my hometown, I found that the process had significant shortcomings in terms of structure and effectiveness. It appeared as if they were asking very personal and specific questions that were quite answer based, in the sense that one question’s answer would lead to another related question, which in return wouldn’t provide very reliable information. The inconsistency within the questions would make it hard to assess candidates fairly and objectively. In contrast, having more structured interviews, like the ones referenced in the google article, would help to enhance the reliability and reduce bias.
Additionally, there could have been issues pertaining to validity within my interview process. At the time I was in high school and I had no prior work experience, so I remember them asking me about how my grades were or what my GPA was. While I have no way of knowing how much that played into me getting hired it still hints toward a lack in the validity of their methods. This is highlighted within the google article as they emphasize the point that metrics like GPA can often be an ineffective measure for job performance. Rather it would be better if they implemented more measures to help gauge problem solving ability or adaptability.
Overall, from my experience the interview process wasn’t very efficient, therefore this reduced its utility. They weren’t able to gain very good comparable information on candidates. They were potentially gauging job performance on methods with low validity. Therefore, the time spent during the interview process wasn’t proportional to the value it provided in assessing candidates.
Sources
Swift, M. (n.d.). W5 Lecture 2 – Interview Selection. HRM. MGMT.
Friedman, T. (2014). How to Get a Job at Google. The New York Times.
