Against Job Interviews

Fascinating piece in the New York Times this weekend, titled “Against Job Interviews“.

The problem, according to author Jason Dana, is that employers like to use free-form, unstructured interviews in an attempt to “get to know” a job candidate.  But interviewers typically form strong but unwarranted impressions about interviewees, often revealing more about themselves than the candidates.

In all candor, as a general rule I encourage my candidates to simply answer the questions asked of them.  Most interviewers feel the interview went well when they did most of the talking.

According to Dana’s research, the problem with interviews is worse than irrelevance:  They can be harmful, undercutting the impact of other, more valuable information about interviewees.

The solution?  “One option is to structure interviews so that all candidates receive the same questions, a procedure that has been shown to make interviews more reliable and modestly more predictive of job success.  Alternatively, you can use interviews to test job-related skills, rather than idly chatting or asking personal questions.”

Food for thought…

 

---

In Articles