Methods-of-Interviewing

Job interview

The job interview is one of the most critical steps, if not the most critical, toward gainful employment. It is during the interview that the employer cements their impression of the candidates based on appearance and interactions. For this reason, it is crucial that people are as prepared as possible going into their interviews. One of the ways that a job-seeker can prepare is to understand that there are various interview styles that they may confront. Some of the most common styles include the structured interview, the non-structured interview, and the semi-structured interview. Understanding the difference between these can help the job-seeker to adapt and give the best interview possible. Knowing the differences between styles can also help the applicant determine which is the most likely interview type that they will face based on the industry that that they are interviewing in. Understanding interview styles is equally important for employers, as choosing the right one can help them glean enough information to choose an employee wisely. Structured job interviews are often seen as the more professional and safe interview type. It allows the interviewer to ask targeted questions that pertain to the job at hand. Structured interviewing has become a popular method of assessing the employability of job applicants. It is considered by both applicants and employers to be one of the more effective and fair interview styles due to its focus on the job and the skills needed to perform the job. Questions and the scale that is used to rate the interview are pre-determined prior to the actual interview. Additionally, questions are the same for each candidate and are typically presented to each of the candidates in the same order. This creates not only a more structured interview but also a more objective one as well. Additionally, both the pre-determined and job/skill-related questions reduce the chance of discrimination accusations. Jobs that rely heavily on skill use this interview style, as do employers who wish to avoid any discrimination lawsuits.  He is widely credited with pioneering the modern temporary help industry.

Unstructured interviews differ greatly from structured interviews, primarily due to the fact that they lack just that - structure. They are informal and conversational in nature. With this type of interview style, the interviewer typically does not prepare a list of questions in advance, nor is there a predetermined method of rating the interview. Often, an interviewer may ask the interviewee to "tell me about yourself" and might have different open-ended questions for each applicant interviewed. This type of interview allows the candidate to take the lead and does not rely on a comparison of skills or job qualifications. It may be useful to use this type of interview when candidates are equally qualified or for jobs where personality is crucial, such as entertainment jobs or even some sales or customer service positions.

The semi-structured interview is a type of hybrid that combines both the structured and unstructured interview styles. It allows for more flexibility than the structured interview but is not as casual as the unstructured type. For this style, the interviewer asks a series of formal questions in addition to questions that are tailored specifically for the candidate. Typically, there is an interview "guide" that is followed and that contains both open- and closed-ended questions. The interviewee is a participant in that they do more than simply respond to the questions asked, but they do not lead or carry the conversation. A semi-structured interview allows both the applicant and the interviewer to exchange questions back and forth. The interview may be conducted by a single interviewer, or a panel interview may take place. This flexible form of hiring is acceptable and useful in any field of employment where both skill and personality are important.

Getting a job is increasingly competitive. When looking for employment, people must make the best impression possible. One of the ways to do that is to make an impression during the interview process. Understanding the different types of interviews can help a person successfully prepare for and outshine the competition.

The employer or his representative conduct interviews /trade tests in order to select workers finally. The Man Power Services provides necessary logistic support such as issuance of interview cards, arranging interview & Test jointly with MP Technical Training Institute (MPTTI). At times MPS may also select workers if they are entrusted to do so by the employer.

Structured vs Unstructured Interviews

Employment interviews as a selection method are so ubiquitous that it is virtually inconceivable that a company would conduct a hiring process without using them. However, the research clearly shows that interviews are a poor predictor of job performance: In any case, candidates typically rate interviews more favourably than other selection methods (such as objective psychological testing, which the job seeking community views with particular contempt) and for these reasons, and from the perspective of legal defensibility, it’s probably a safe bet to assume that interviews are here to stay. One of the big breakthroughs of the last century has been the emergence of structured interviews, shown to be superior to unstructured interviews by almost every measurable standard*. (*candidates sometime prefer unstructured interviews which can lead to an increase in job offer acceptance rate… but I suggest that this is only really an issue if you’re identifying the right candidates, which you’re probably not if you’re using unstructured interviews.)

Search-Process

The Pitfalls of Unstructured Interviews

Unstructured interviews typically have no set format or predetermined questions and lack a process for scoring candidate responses. Since these interviews are conducted in an idiosyncratic way, the interviewer has discretion over what questions to ask and how to evaluate the answers. This in turn shifts the focus toward the interviewer’s implicit theories about what should be assessed, instead of focusing on those signals that we know are the best predictors of success. Unstructured interviews provide low reliability and low validity in predicting job performance and therefore greatly diminishing the likelihood of the right candidates being selected. Additionally, humans make terrible interviewers by being plagued by a myriad of biases and judgment fallibilities. And humans make even worse candidates, by being more likely to lie in an interview than to only tell the truth. Interviewer Biases Unstructured interviews are highly susceptible to a variety of biases, including gender, race and disability. These biases typically arise when interviewers gather and evaluate non-job-related information about candidates. In simple terms, unstructured interviews will likely result in you hiring middle-class white males instead of the best candidates.

Structured interviews, on the other hand, are far more resilient to biasing factors. By linking assessment to job-related factors, structured interviews place constraints on the influence of extraneous information. Though biases will always exist in interviews, the research does show that structured interviews can, in certain situations, entirely eliminate their impact. Impression Management Impression management (IM) is a process by which a candidate will attempt to influence the image that the interviewer forms of them. Assertive IM occurs where a candidate proactively constructs a positive image of themselves through self-promotion (claiming responsibility for achievements), ingratiation (using interpersonal attraction) or opinion conformity (claiming values held by the interviewer). Deceptive IM, which involves describing non-existing accomplishments (i.e. outright lying), was found by some studies to be used by a majority of candidates. Nonverbal IM was also found to be a common occurrence and includes concepts such as emotional contagion, where the emotional state of the candidate might affect the emotions of the interviewer, causing them to be more lenient in their evaluations. The research shows that the use of one or several forms of IM usually results in better candidate performance and that unstructured interviews provide candidates with the best opportunity to engage in IM.

Structured interviews, on the other hand, can reduce IM effectiveness by focusing the interviewer’s assessment on job-related information, such that the influence of extraneous information is minimised. Impression management is extremely common and will occur even in the most structured of interview settings. For this reason reference checking is a valuable tool because it allows for the verification of claims made by the candidate during the interview process. Conducting multiple interviews with different interviewers can also help to identify inconsistencies in a candidate’s claims. In addition, the research shows that IM effectiveness is inversely related to the length of the interview (i.e. longer interviews are better at eliminating IM). Effects of Rapport Building Most interviews start with some form of rapport building used to “break the ice” and put the candidate at ease. But humans tend to form impressions very quickly and the research shows that judgements made by interviewers in the first ten seconds of an interview can predict with remarkable accuracy the outcome of the interview. The plethora of biases at play in the unstructured rapport building stage can negatively affect information gathering and assessment in the main part of the interview. To counteract this problem rapport building could be eliminated or limited. However, eliminating or severely limiting rapport building is likely lead to negative reactions by the candidate who might interpret such limitations as a poor personality trait or lack of interest on the part of the interviewer. Therefore rapport building should mostly involve the interviewer providing information to the candidate, thereby limiting the opportunity for the candidate to provide biasing information. The candidate should only be given the opportunity to ask questions at the end of the interview.

What Constitutes a Structured Interview?

So how exactly do we define structure and what factors constitute a structured interview? Structure is the degree of discretion that an interviewer is allowed in conducting the interview. In other words, structure involves a process of standardisation by establishing and consistently applying predetermined rules. Typically, such rules apply in two dimensions:

1. Content (questions asked)

2. Evaluation (response scoring)

The best study I could find on the subject gives an even greater typology of interview structure (while still using these two dimensions):

Content:

1. Basing questions on job analysis

2. Asking the same questions to each candidate

3. Limiting prompting, follow-up or elaboration on questions

4. Using better types of questions

5. Conducting longer interviews or using larger numbers of questions

6. Controlling ancillary information

7. Not allowing the candidate to ask questions until after the interview

Evaluation:

1.Rating each answer using multiple scales

2.Using anchored rating scales

3.Taking notes

4.Using multiple interviewers

5.Using the same interviewers across all candidates

6.Not discussing candidate performances between interviewers

7.Providing interviewer training

8.Using statistical prediction

By implementing these recommendation you will create structured interviews that are far more likely to identify the right talent. Companies who fail to do this are unnecessarily creating a competitive disadvantage for themselves. I’d love to cover all of the above factors with practical recommendations for implementing each, but I have a pretty time consuming day job :) Instead I’ll dive into a few of them and (probably) come back someday to complete the rest. Base questions on job analysis Before commencing an interview process the role should be clearly defined by performing a job analysis (welcome to Recruiting 101). The job analysis in turn provides the material for creating interview questions. Asking questions related to the role will increase validity by increasing job relatedness and by ensuring that the interviewer neither includes irrelevant information nor excludes relevant information. What’s more, role related knowledge correlates positively with job performance (who would have thought it?). In a section below I talk about the types of questions you should use, and one type is the behavioural question. These involve asking the candidate to give specific examples for their previous roles and provide a great opportunity to base questions on role related tasks. Limit interviewer probing An interviewer will ask follow-up or probing questions when the candidate’s answer to an initial question is deemed to be inadequate or incomplete. One study found that probing increases a candidate’s likelihood of faking, which usually occurs as a means of pleasing the interviewer even when the candidate simply doesn’t have an answer.

Many researches believe that eliminating or controlling probing is a defining element of structured interviews. On the other hand, of course, probing is seen as a valuable tool that allows the interviewer to delve deeper into a candidate’s responses in order to get more information to analyse. The key is to strike a balance. Practical recommendations include probing equally across all candidates, using predetermined probes (i.e. follow up questions related to the original question), predicting areas where candidates are likely to give deficient answers and creating predetermined probes, allowing each candidate the same amount of time to answer questions, and only probing if the candidate misinterprets the questions or if the answer is clearly deficient. Use better types of questions Questions that help evaluate a candidate’s behaviour in previous situations or their intentions in future situations are the most effective at predicting performance. Behavioural questions focus on previous work experience and typically take the following form: “Give me an example of time when you _______?” Here are some examples:

• What is your most significant achievement at your current job?

• Give me an example of a time when you identified a bottleneck in your previous job and fixed it.

• Tell me about a time when you took the lead on a difficult project without being specifically asked.

• Give me an example of a time when you changed a colleagues mind on a decision? How did you convince them? Did you use data? (Predetermined probing questions FTW.)

Situation questions ask candidates how they would act in future situations and typically take the following form: “What would you do if _______?” Here are some examples:

• Imagine it’s your first day on the job and I told you “we need to hire five more engineers immediately and I need you to take charge”. What would you? Specifically, what steps would you take?

• It’s your first week as our newest software engineer and you conclude that the tech infrastructure needs to be completely overhauled, at significant expense. What steps do you take to communicate this to the cofounders and convince us it needs to be done?

• During your first month we have a large potential client scheduled to visit the office for a product demo. Just before they arrive, we inform you that no one else can make it back to the office to meet them as planned. The client is extremely eager to demo the product. You have an ok understanding of how it works. What do you do?

Anchored Rating Scales Anchored rating scales are used to rate answers given by candidates by comparing them to specific examples that are anchored to numerical ratings. Here’s an example of an ARS used by Google for interviewing candidates for a fictional underwater basket weaver role. To evaluate responses, the interviewer matches the applicant’s responses with the written anchors for each question. The research shows that ARS increase reliability and accuracy and reduce biases. By providing interviewers with objective behaviour standards, rating scales enhance the interviewer’s focus on specific relevant job-related behaviours and diminish the focus on non-job-related factors, thereby reducing the effect of biases. Rating scales also provide a framework that ensures responses are rated consistency across different interviewers and candidates.