After, experiencing many interviews these past seven years, I realized they aren’t all the same. While some are structured and felt meaningful, others felt as if it was just another thing on a checklist for managers to do. Overall, it came down to the topics covered which are reliability, validity, and utility.
When Interviews went well
The best interviews I had were put together in a way for both parties to understand each other and see if there was a cohesive fit. Those typically involved open ended questions that asked stories about times I dealt with certain challenges and how I overcame them. Questions like those improved the validity of the interview because it got to actually measure my candidacy. Same goes for the opposite perspective, where I was able to ask questions and understand more about the company and team to see if the culture was a fit for me.
When Interviews didn’t go well
On the other hand, I’ve had interviews that weren’t exactly the most productive. Either they felt too much of a casual conversation and didn’t have structure, or it seemed like a mere questionnaire with no depth. These interviews lack utility because the information exchanged doesn’t really help either party when it comes down to the hiring decision. Also, it lowers reliability of the interview because candidates aren’t being evaluated in the most consistent way.
Improvements for Employers
If I could give feedback to employers to better their interviews, I’d treat it more like a system than a simple conversation. Having a consistent, standardized structure helps to lower bias and improve the overall reliability and validity of the interview process. Also, implementing scoring guides or scales can help to lower bias. Plus, training on recognizing bias can be helpful to train interviewers not to hire people based on having similarities,
The Bottom Line
Overall, a good interview doesn’t just boil down to getting to know a candidate. It’s about actually forecasting whether or not a person is suitable for the job, company, and culture. The more structured and consistent the process is, the better the result of who’s welcomed in.