Difficulties with arriving at a consistent and objective decision on a candidate is hampered by a long list of irrational but understandable tendencies by interviewers who have the following.
■ Different views on the person they are looking for. The person specification may be too vague or ambiguous so interviewers have different ideas on what would be the success factors in the position. One interviewer may place great importance on the candidate’s previous experience, another may be
Figure 5.5 IPD guide on psychological testing (Source: IPD, 1997)
The guide aims to ensure that:
■ Proper consideration is given to the appropriateness of using tests. ■ Tests are used in a professional manner which is relevant to the
employment context.
■ Equality of opportunity is ensured throughout the process.
■ Test results are scored, interpreted and communicated by appropriately trained individuals.
■ Individuals taking tests are informed of the reasons for the test and the conditions under which it will be used, how the information will be used and stored, and are given the opportunity to receive feedback on the test results.
influenced by a candidate’s perceived inflexible ideas. In one research programme, a group of interviewers who were aware of the person specification and were in possession of the application forms, were shown a group of video-taped inter- views and yet there was still a variation in the recommended candidate for the position. This was despite having identical information.
■ Decide intuitively. Despite repeated calls for interviewers to base their decisions on the objective evidence which they have collected, there remains a constant temptation to make over- all judgements based on intuition. The ‘I have a gut-feel’ school of interviewing still has a number of ardent supporters, who usually also subscribe to the ‘I can spot them as soon as they come in the door’ association!
■ Make decisions before the interview takes place or early on in the inter- view. Studies show that the average length of time between a candidate entering the interview room and a decision being made is just under 4 minutes. This ‘expectancy effect’ arises from a study of the CV or application before the interview. All the subsequent information is recorded but adjusted to fit into the decision that the interviewer has already made.
■ Prefer candidates like themselves. The so-called ‘clone factor’ indicates that interviewers give higher ratings on some traits to candidates who are similar to themselves, rather than matching the candidates against the person specification.
■ Continue to stereotype candidates. Despite the illegality of judging candidates on the basis of their sex, ethnic origin, disability or marital status, interviewers, often unknowingly, will allow such considerations to cloud their judgements. This can extend to areas such as age, geographical origin, accent, height and even their attire.
■ Cannot take on board all the information provided. The brain can only assimilate a certain amount of information. Each candi- date provides a wealth of data and even 30 minutes of inter- view time can be transcribed into more than 10 pages of written text. A recommended interview period therefore should not extend beyond 1 hour individually or 4 hours in a day and certainly not beyond five or six candidates. Notes need to be compiled during the interview, and compared and agreed after each one.
■ Influence candidates’ behaviour. How an applicant behaves is partly dependent on how the interviewer behaves. Particular
interest has been focused on non-verbal behaviours (signals such as nodding, smiling and eye-contact) during the inter- view. In one study it was found that where interviewers had already decided to reject the applicants, they talked less and were more cold and critical; the candidates in this trial reported that they were more uncomfortable and became more hesitant in their replies. However, where interviewers were warm, had good eye-contact and nodded their head more frequently, candidate became more relaxed, acted in a more friendly way themselves, became more talkative and generally were found to be more effective in creating a good impression.
■ Raise their ratings if they feel pressurised to select. After all the time, effort and cost involved in recruitment, there is considerable pressure on the interviewers to come up with a successful candidate. Knowing the delay that would be incurred if the position needed to be advertised again, interviewers may panic and allow the pressure to influence their decision. A candidate that is close to meeting the specification may be upgraded and candidates rejected for good reasons may be wrongly re-considered.
■ Believe that they are good at interviewing. Interviewing is not regarded in some circles as a skill that can be learnt and devel- oped. Many line managers see it as an inherent managerial trait that they possess, chiefly because it is never pointed out to them that evidence indicates the contrary is true.
■ Influence the candidates’ responses to the offer. The interviewer represents the organisation. The candidate will judge that organisation on how they are treated and how the interviewer has behaved to them. It has been shown that up to 50% of can- didates change their minds about their likely acceptance of a potential job offer as a result of their experience in the inter- view, irrespective of the benefits and attractiveness of the post. These are pretty serious criticisms of the interview process. They indi- cate that the whole process is so flawed that it ought not to be operated at all in such an important area as selection. There is an alternative view, however, which goes someway in explaining why the interview is still the most popular aid to selection decision-making. This view is that, par- tially flawed as it is, it has some distinct advantages and serious attempts can be made to overcome the flaws through training and specifically through utilising the more systematic and objective method of struc- tured interviews which will be dealt with shortly.
The general advantages put forward in favour of interviews are:
■ It is a relatively low-cost exercise, with additional expenses limited to the time of the participants and any travelling and accommodation expenses.
■ No decision on selection should be taken without an inter- view of some sort being carried out. At the basic level, it is a pure courtesy, an introduction both to the organisation and the people involved.
■ Used properly, valid judgements can be made on a number of items of behaviour, especially inter-personal behaviour. Sociability, verbal fluency, social confidence can all be compe- tencies detailed in the job specification and measured effect- ively in the interview process. The interview can be viewed as a type of ‘work sample’ of these behaviours and should give some degree of prediction about future behaviour and performance.
■ The interview is important in selling the job to the applicants and this is vital in certain high demand, low supply occu- pations, such as information technology or accounting. If the interview is handled positively and carefully, disappointed candidates will still feel good about the experience and the organisation.
■ A degree of negotiation can and often should take place before an agreement is reached between the organisation and the selected candidate. The interview allows informal negotiation to take place on the nature of the job together with the terms and conditions.