When experts in a scientific field want to know the true effectiveness of a certain procedure, what they usually do is put that method to the test in carefully controlled situations and, after observing and recording its action in practice, its value for science is confirmed or discarded. and society.
Now, is a procedure as widely used in personnel selection as the interview backed by extensive tests that assure us a high probability of success if we use it? The answer to such a question is positive.
There is already research material that can guide us around the validity or effectiveness of the job interview.
The conclusions of these studies are based both on direct observations by their authors and on detailed accounts and analysis of research already published by others. Below I review some convictions that, based on facts, are shared by students of recruitment.
The most successful job interviews have been based on a thorough analysis of the position offered. Consequently, the topics to be addressed in an interview must respond to those aspects related to the specific job in question. And this will only be fully known after the development or updating of your profile.
The type of interview that has yielded the most reliable results is the one known as structured. That is, one that has a structure, scheme or format previously developed and that guides the interviewer's performance.
On a variety of occasions and contexts, the structured interview made it possible to extract more and better information from the candidates for a variety of jobs. It has also raised the quality of the interrogator's work.
In fact, it has been better than the unstructured interview or informal conversation.
The structured job interview has proven superior, in terms of its anticipatory power of the performance of an applicant, to the unstructured interview. In fact, one research found 87% reliability for the structured interview, compared to only 15-30% for the unstructured interview.
Even this structured interview format would be more reliable than some psychological tests. Additionally, those interviews in which the interrogators had access to test results obtained by the applicants previously lost accuracy and predictive power.
Their opinions were apparently influenced and their judgments lost objectivity.
The interview carried out by a panel or group of interviewers has shown to be superior, in terms of collection and analysis of information, to the interview carried out by a single interviewer.
By looking at a series of selection processes, it was found that highly attractive men and women were rated higher than their less attractive peers.
To make matters worse, very attractive men were more recommended by their interviewers to be hired than female applicants.
An investigation revealed that the first positive impression on a subject affected interviewers in such a way that it made them go out of their way to inform applicants about the advantages of the company and, more seriously, they gathered less information about the candidates.
On the other hand, it has been known for decades that the best interviewers are not the most experienced without formal training or self-taught. On the contrary, the most accurate are those who have received systematic training.
It has also been shown that a fairer evaluation of the interview is achieved if the interviewer took notes during the interview. Thus there will be reliable data to qualify the subject.
The most used interviews, in various studies, lasted between 30 and 60 minutes and contained between 15 and 20 questions.
This seems like a reasonable use of time.
The researchers emphasize that objective criteria must be established to qualify all applicants at each stage of the process.
In this regard, it is important to make previous bosses or other personal references provided by candidates also objectively rate their past performance in specific tasks.
Another valuable piece of information is that interviews that inquire about past events and / or experiences help to more accurately predict the performance of a potential employee than interviews that pose probable, hypothetical or future situations.
I will end this note by highlighting that the interview and other procedures widely used in personnel selection have a solid support in scientific research and various tests, unfortunately little disseminated.
However, to increase success in finding and admitting people, we must be careful to use such methods so as not to misrepresent them or harm our businesses.
