My interviews through Wells Fargo, have ranged from horrendous to good. In all honestly, my hiring was a bit of a fluke (due to outside circumstances), after giving one of the worst interviews of my life, I was offered a position as a part-time teller. Gradually, I moved upwards through the company, and also became more attune to the structured hiring process Wells Fargo had established. From this, I came the realization, that interviews themselves are not the best indicator of job performance. I tend to agree with the chart on the Perfect Hire document where interviews are to good to assess the interviewee face to face and their general social interactions, but low predictive validity (Tomas Chamorro-Premuzic and Christopher Steinmetz). I gave an absolutely terrible interview, yet through my diligence and work ethic, I have received several promotions, and obtained several financial licenses. The work speaks for itself when considering promotions, not necessarily the interview itself. I will say though, that becoming integrate through socialization and the norms of the company did assist in my understanding of the operations, which was extremely helpful in my development (Swift, Lecture Week 5).

While I do think the interviewers and interviewees need to meet in person, I do believe companies need to conduct further assessments for an informed decision. While I appreciate the accuracy of utilizing social media accounts like LinkedIn for assessing work ethic, I do think this method can pose several privacy and integrity issues, like the timeliness of the like or post, or who posted what, and who was tagged (Tomas Chamorro-Premuzic and Christopher Steinmetz). I like how similar to my experience with work, this provides a more comprehensive vision of the candidate and their activities and interests, but I do think this does omit some imperative information like on the spot problem solving. If I could suggest, I would probably utilize publicly available information in thier professional life, but maintain the privacy of the interviewee’s personal life as much as possible.

In many respects, the interviewer is trying to get the best perspective of a candidate in a short amount of time, which is big reason I believe interviews carry very little selection validity (Swift, Lecture Week 5). In the long run I believe the best reflection of the candidate is the evaluation over the course of an elongated time period, rather than an immediate question-answer format, as this would force the interviewers to make decisions based on the information at hand, and possible draw from past experiences to help make a decision. This here, is where I think implicit bias could come into play, as the interviewer is trying to reason with incomplete information.