The interview: its role in effective selection
It has long since been recognised that conducting interviews in isolation from other selection tools is a poor way of choosing the right staff. However, even its harshest critics recognise that the interview has a vital role to play in the overall selection procedure. It allows both the candidates and the decision-makers the opportunity to check certain details, establish the degree of fit and begin negotiations regarding the contract. Due to the social aspect of the interview, it also marks the beginning of the relationship between the interviewer and the interviewee.
Indeed, if executed correctly, there are few - if any - selection methods that can offer such an insight into an individual on a number of different levels. There are few more complex, intuitive, intelligent or sophisticated information processors than a competent and confident interviewer.
The costs of making the wrong decision are too high not to aim to get it right first time, every time. By the time the final interview stage is reached, there will have been a significant investment on the part of the employer, in terms of time and money involved in advertising the position, sifting through applications or CVs, developing an interview schedule, preparing for interview and conducting the interviews themselves.
There will also have been a substantial investment made on the part of the interviewees, and this should be recognised. The interview as a tool to provide favourable impressions of the organisation should not be underestimated. Also, the interviewer must try to impart a positive yet realistic picture of an organisation that an individual would wish to work for.
Below, we discuss the different tools available to assist those involved in interviewing individuals, and highlight the advantages and disadvantages of each. We also mention the biases and errors that can creep into the interviewing process, both consciously and unconsciously, and discuss ways of minimising them. We also refer to a recent study that we conducted looking at cost-effective selection, containing interesting information on the role of the interview in the overall selection process.
This is the first in a series of features looking at different elements of the recruitment and selection process. A future feature aims to explore the training issues surrounding those involved in appointing new members of staff, an issue that is particularly relevant given the increased involvement of line managers in recruitment and selection.
A feature looking at another recruitment mainstay, the application form, is also planned. The main aim of these pieces is to revisit such stalwarts of the recruitment and selection procedure, and provide an update on current and future developments, while also acting as a useful reference point for those involved in the process.
THE INTERVIEW
Making the right choice
Interviewing should be included in the selection procedure if it offers an extra dimension to the search for the best candidate.
When making a decision to use selection interviewing, the cost implications of preparing for and conducting interviews need to be considered, as does the interview format that will best meet the needs of the organisation and the position available. A one-to-one interview - where one selector interviews one candidate - may be suitable for a particular vacancy or as an initial screening exercise. Panel interviews - where two or more interviewers will take part - might best serve a more in-depth interview (see box 1 for more information).
The role the interview will play in the overall decision-making process also needs to be considered. There may be just one stage of interviews, and this may act as an initial screening exercise, or the interview may form the central plank of the selection procedure - in which case there is likely to be several interview stages involving key personnel.
Once these decisions have been made, then developing the format and interview schedule can begin.
A recent research study conducted by and published in Employee Development Bulletin1 indicated quite clearly that interviews remained the most popular selection tool among respondents (made up of 60 organisations of all sizes across a variety of sectors). Of those who provided information, all were using interviews for some staff. This reinforces work conducted by the Institute of Personnel and Development2 in its selection survey. What is perhaps more illuminating is that nearly three-quarters (74%) of those who use interviews do so as a selection tool for every member of staff.
However, as our previous research has also shown3, employers no longer believe that interviews alone are the recipe for selecting the most suitable candidates. Just three-quarters (76%) felt that interviews have the most influence on employers' selection choices. It is when recruiting for employees in clerical/secretarial positions that interviews really come to the fore as the most influential selection method.
Some researchers and commentators believe that interviews on their own offer little more reassurance than plucking a name from a hat with regard to making the correct selection decision. However, there is much that can be done to improve this tool as a selection method, moving it beyond the level of social interchange to the position where it can provide a good insight into the candidate and an opportunity to match them well to the person and job specification (see box 1 and box 2 ).
One of the keys to maximising the effectiveness of the interview process depends on ensuring those involved in the interview process have been properly trained in both delivering the questions and interpreting the answers.
Setting the scene
Those conducting interviews also need to be very much aware of other factors that will improve their selection decisions. First, it is important to create a controlled environment in which to conduct the interview. This is widely recognised as being an important foundation for an effective interviewing process, and involves such issues as ensuring a temperate climate in a room and no disturbances, unless in the case of an emergency.
Also, those conducting the interview need to think about how much time will be spent putting the interviewee at ease, perhaps asking about the journey to the interview or making banal comments on the weather. This is an important part of the interview as it allows the interviewee the opportunity to become acclimatised to the situation and feel more at ease. They will then have the chance of presenting themselves in the best possible way during the main part of the interview. If a panel or group interview is taking place, then it is important that this part of the process has been discussed and agreed between the interviewers beforehand.
It is also useful to tell the candidate what form the interview will take and what, if anything, will happen directly afterwards - there may be a further assessment taking place or interviewees may have to wait to be given feedback. By ensuring the candidate is as comfortable and as informed as possible, the interviewer is preparing the ground for an effective interview.
It is now that the dedicated interviewing skills come into play - effective questioning, active listening, productive feedback and summarising. More details and examples of each can be found in box 3 . However, regardless of how finely-tuned and well-developed these skills are, there is also a need to recognise and deal with individual prejudice and bias.
Reducing unconscious bias
We have already made the point that interviewers should seek to create a controlled environment wherein candidates feel comfortable so meaningful dialogue can develop and they can present themselves in the best possible way. However, interviewers should also seek to create an environment where only predetermined, objective selection criteria form the basis for the decision-making process. This rarely if ever occurs, as subjective elements will always be present, but it is vital that every effort is made to create such an environment.
We make decisions and form impressions of people based on a personal system of beliefs that we have developed through our lifetime. It is this system that allows us to rationalise the past, understand the present and make predictions of the future. Essentially, this system acts as a source of protection for every individual's physical and mental health and comes into play, consciously or subconsciously, in every aspect of our lives.
It is this process that allows an individual to transfer the behaviour of a stereotype onto an individual when a group of characteristics is observed, resulting in a positive or negative effect on the perception or decision concerning the individual. The selection process is no exception.
It is important to recognise that these messages and signals will be ever present - it is how they are dealt with that will be crucial to the effectiveness of the selection decision. Whether conscious or subconscious, these beliefs or impressions play a role in how people prepare for situations, how they act and react, and how they seek to perform a role so as to be judged or perceived in a certain way. Such developed beliefs also play a role in the way decisions are made, consciously or not4.
Indeed, whether the decision turns out to be the correct one or not is often disregarded by the decision-maker. Instead, "self-serving bias" comes into play, which ensures that only feedback or opinion that affirms the correct decision or choice was made will be taken on board, while any dissenting opinion or feedback is merely ignored or discounted.
Other biases or errors that can enter into the selection process include the "halo effect" and - from the other end of the scale - the "satan effect". Both arise as a result of gross generalisations and oversimplifications of situations, and usually take the form of:
Body language
The issue of body language - including paraverbal behaviour (tone of voice and hesitations in speech) and non-verbal behaviour, such as posture and gesticulation - and the impact it has on the overall selection decision is one that continues to generate much discussion and interest. This subject has something akin to a folklore tradition with various figures and percentages making regular appearances at training days, management programmes or interview preparation days.
Research in this area goes back as far as the 1930s5 - although to date little controlled research of substance has been conducted. What has been completed tends to vary but one thing is clear: such non-verbal and paraverbal behaviour does indeed have an effect on individuals' perception of a candidate. The level of effect is not so clear, although the latest work in this area6 suggests it has less impact than verbal behaviour.
Interviewers who become aware of their judgment being affected due to "a gut reaction" or "instinct" should not seek to ignore such feelings - but rather try to back up their feelings through probing questions or seeking clarification. This is something that can also be addressed at the reference gathering stage. Intuition is a very powerful personal tool and, all other things being equal, there is a strong case for it being taken into account.
Dress sense
The issue of presentation in an interview and the feelings it arouses in the interviewer need to be treated most carefully. The interviewer must seek to create an environment and frame of mind that is essentially non-prejudiced and concerned with equality. Increasingly, smart dress is no longer required in many workplaces and, indeed, some organisations encourage employees to express themselves and their creativity through their wardrobe. It is important to put appearance or dress sense into the context of the vacancy being filled.
Role of memory
Memory is also subjective and unreliable and can often be distorted for a number of reasons. It has been recognised that those people we meet first and last are better remembered that those who are encountered in the middle of a sequence. It is also the case that those who distinguish themselves in some way, either through an outstanding feature or some act out of the ordinary, are remembered more easily than others. However, this does not mean that a decision will favour those who stood out or are more easily remembered, indeed it may have the opposite effect.
Each of these biases is part of mankind's human perception and decision-making process. But steps can be taken to ensure that unacceptable prejudices and unfounded assumptions find no place in the selection processes of today. Recognising that these biases exist is important in itself. They can be addressed by structuring the selection process in a way that discourages assumptions and prejudice - on a conscious and subconscious level - and having unambiguous criteria laid down on which the decision should be made.
The right kind of interview
Structured interviews
The main distinguishing factor of a structured interview is that the format is planned in advance. Every section and question has been developed and placed in an order to draw out information that is relevant to the job.
However, structured interviews need not determine the entire content and sequence of the process. They can also allow the opportunity for certain issues flagged up during the conversation to be probed and explored in more detail.
A large majority (87%) of those who responded to our survey on selection methods identified structured interviews as a favoured selection tool. This result implies a growth in the use of such an interview structure from previous research. This work also found that structured interviews are now more popular in selecting individuals across all job types, with nearly three out of five (57%) employers using this method. However, structured interviews seem to be used most when selecting individuals for management positions.
Situational interviews
Situational interviews give candidates the opportunity to display their competence and abilities even if they do not possess specific experience. By using predetermined questions and situations - ideally drawn from a scenario related to the vacancy concerned - candidates can give practical examples of how they would deal with certain situations, even if they have no direct experience. This type of interview involves asking questions such as "What would you do if? …" or "What did you do when? …".
Situational interviewing appears to be popular, being used by nine out of 10 (90%) of those who responded to our selection survey. Almost one in two use this method to select candidates for all job types, but it appears to be used more selectively than structured interviews. Less than two-thirds use such "what if" questions for selecting people for manual positions, whereas more than four in five (81%) use them for selecting individuals for professional or managerial roles.
However, structured and situational formats are probably most effective when used together. Our research showed that nearly nine out of 10 (84%) respondents use both structured and situational methods to interview candidates. Reasons they gave for this include:
Behavioural event interviews
The behaviourally-based interview - or Patterned Behavioural Description Interview - is a relatively new way of focusing the questions in an interview. Unlike situational questioning, the behaviour-based interview concentrates exclusively on drawing information on actual past experience rather than hypothetical situations. This type of questioning is often used in competency-based interviews, indeed the technique was developed to aid the identification of competencies.
Research indicates that this method results in a much better return on the interview investment - more suitable applicants are selected more often7. This highly-structured interview takes much time and effort to develop. The construction of interview schedules requires analysing the job using the critical incident technique, a method where incidents critical to the success or otherwise of the job are collected through a series of interviews with job experts and grouped into dimensions such as technical skills, motivation etc, which represent the major characteristics of the job.
Another group of experts is then handed the set of critical incidents and is asked to identify particular incidents that it feels represent the dimensions. These are then prepared as questions - typically between 10 and 20 - for use in the interview.
Benchmark answers are developed for each of the questions by the job experts and a scale is prepared to score the interviewees' responses. The end result is a benchmark answer and examples of good, average and poor replies, which act as a guide for the interviewer and can help create a framework for standardised assessment.
The reasons that behavioural event interviews seem to produce better results than conventional approaches may lie in the fact that the content of the interview becomes firmly focused on job-relevant topics and is standardised so that all interviewees are questioned according to a common strategy.
Number of interview stages
There are no hard-and-fast rules pertaining to the number of interviews that should be conducted, and this is possibly one of those areas where it really is the quality of the information you receive that is important rather than the number of attempts you make to obtain it. One good interview will be more effective and add more to the selection procedure that several un-focused, rambling dialogues.
However, it has become more common for more than one interview to be held, perhaps with the initial interview acting as a screening process conducted by the personnel department rather than by those who will be directly involved with the individual. It also depends on the nature and seniority of the position. Nine in 10 employers in our research hold more than one interview as part of their selection procedure.
In contrast, some employers are moving to simplify interview stages - our previous survey found that less than 6% used single-stage interviews, compared with 10% now.
This simplification may be due to the changes within the personnel role over the past decade. Line managers with direct responsibility for the applicant are now becoming more active in the recruitment and selection process, and as a result may be conducting the interview themselves.
Another reason for this shift may be the realisation that interviews, while influential, play just one part in the overall selection process.
From the research we conducted, we found that the highest incidence of single interviews conducted by single interviewers occurs in organisations that employ more that 1,000 people.
Conversely, the highest number of interviews stages is held when selecting candidates for professional and managerial positions. Nearly four in 10 (37%) situations where there are four or more interviews are intended to aid the selection of professionals and managers. Nearly one in five (18%) employers say they interview applicants four or more times when selecting graduates.
Number of interviewers
Selection interviews involving a single interviewer raise many difficult issues. There are problems with recording answers while looking for areas to probe in depth (see box 4 below for further details). There is also the more serious problem of the safety of the process. The sole interviewer is very open to accusations of malpractice and, without another party present, it can be a difficult to put up a defence. There is also greater opportunity for candidates to be exposed to malpractice and illegal discrimination.
Our research has shown that employers recognise the implications of conducting interviews with just one interviewer present. Almost half of every interview situation in our research was conducted by two interviewers. The highest number of interviewers feature in the selection of professionals and managers where usually more than three interviewers are involved.
It has been suggested that three interviewers is the ideal number, and should include the person to whom the candidate will report. It is this person who should also make the final selection decision, on the advice of the others. It is felt that if only two people are involved in the final interview stage, it might prove difficult to reach agreement, but this should be made easier with a third person. Any more than three is felt to be intimidating for the candidate, but this may differ depending on the level of the post concerned.
Reflection
Selection decisions can be greatly enhanced by using reliable, valid selection tools. The interview, long since recognised as having many faults, but equally as many benefits, can be very much improved by applying some of the techniques that are used in other areas of recruitment and selection. Reducing bias and prejudice and trying to create a controlled environment - using techniques and skills that can be found in those who operate assessment centres, for example - are not impossible to achieve and certainly help to improve an interviewer's confidence and competence. Decisions - irrespective of what area they are taken - by their very nature carry risks. Giving time and thought to preparing and planning the interview process, continuing to question and avoiding the temptation to make assumptions can only help to reduce this risk.
1"The business of selection: an IRS survey", Employee Development Bulletin 117, September 1999.
2"IPD survey report 5 - recruitment", Institute of Personnel and Development, May 1999.
3"The business of selection: an IRS survey", Employee Development Bulletin 117, September 1999.
4"Successful recruitment and selection: a practical guide for managers", Margaret Dale, Kogan Page, pp. 162-165, 1995.
5"A study of the expression of bodily posture", WT James, Journal of General Psychology, vol. 7, pp.405-37, 1932.
6"The employment interview: a summary and review of recent research", RD Arvey and JE Campion, Personnel Psychology, vol. 35, pp.281-322, cited in "Effective interviewing", Robert Edenborough, Kogan Page, 1999.
7"Can behavioural interviews produce results?" Guidance and Assessment Review, February 1988, vol. 4, no.1.
8"Successful recruitment and selection: a practical guide for managers", Margaret Dale, Kogan Page, 1995.
1. Choosing the right interview approach
Before the interview:
During the interview
After the interview
3. Skills required for effective interviewing
Questioning
The most effective types of questions are those that encourage the candidate to open up and respond at length. This then facilitates two-way dialogue. Open-ended questions - prefixed by "how", "what", or "why" - encourage the employee to think carefully without being prompted by the content or phrasing of the question.
It is useful to begin the interview with questions that are positive and encourage the candidate to talk about themselves. Also, questions that do not require too much thought initially are useful so that the candidate will have an opportunity to begin to feel comfortable in the surroundings, without immediately feeling under pressure.
More complex questions should be introduced in the middle of the interview and final questions should seek to clarify any areas that were raised during the interview. Queries should be resolved prior to the close of interview so that assessment of the candidate can be properly completed.
Questioning techniques that should be avoided include closed questions which elicit only a "yes" or "no" response and do not encourage further discussion. However, they do have a role in clarifying particular points. Examples of such a question include:
"Are you ready to start straight away?" or
"Do you like working with people?" or
"Are you happy working with people?"
Questions that prompt or lead candidates should be avoided. Such questions normally give strong indications of what the required answer should be. These include questions like:
"You would be happy to do that, wouldn't you?" or
"That would be the wrong thing to do, wouldn't it?"
It is difficult for the interviewee to answer a question that addresses two issues or covers more than one topic. In this situation, the interviewee will probably choose to answer the last question or the easiest one. An example of this type of question would be:
"How did you enjoy that experience, was it good, or would you have preferred to do something else, did your colleagues think it was a good idea?"
The last stage of the interview should give the candidate the opportunity to ask questions about the organisation or the job or, indeed, how to claim their travel expenses.
Active listening
People think faster than they speak, and this skill can be used effectively in an interview situation as it allows the interviewer to concentrate on what is being said and try to pick up the underlying message. Active listening allows the interviewer to manage the interview situation effectively without unnecessary repetition or dwelling too long on one subject. A good active listener will also help to make the interviewee feel comfortable and believe what he or she is saying is something of worth.
To ensure constructive active listening, avoid:
Feedback and summarising
Body language plays an important role in letting the interviewee know that their message is getting through and that the interviewer is listening and absorbing what is being said. Nodding of the head to indicate agreement, leaning forward to indicate interest in what is being said, smiling to encourage more information and make the candidate feel comfortable - each of these things can encourage the candidate to give more information or become more comfortable so the quality of the information is improved.
Positive feedback also encourages the candidate to feel good and offer more information. Summarising what the candidate has said is one way of offering feedback. It is also effective to reflect the feelings that the candidate has been expressing as well as the facts. This has the extra advantage of giving the interviewee the opportunity to clarify the statement if it has been misinterpreted.
4. Interview formats at a glance
One-to-one interviews
One selector is involved in interviewing a candidate alone. There are many implications for the selection process from using this format. One of the primary problems lies with the fact that a lone interviewer will find it more difficult to concentrate on remembering fully what the candidate has said while also thinking ahead to consider points to probe. Another disadvantage with one-to-one interviews is that the interviewer is open to all the biases and errors of perception. A lone interviewer does not have the advantage of checking perceptions or assumptions with another interviewer.
The interviewer in this type of situation is also left open to accusations of malpractice. The interviewer is in an extremely vulnerable position without someone else being present, and this isolation will make it difficult to rebut any allegations made by a disgruntled candidate. The candidate can also find themselves exposed to illegal discrimination and malpractice.
However, one of the few advantages of a one-to-one interview is the casual atmosphere that can be created. Candidates may be much more at ease if there is only one interviewer and thus more open.
Time constraints often create a situation where one-to-one interviews become necessary. It is very time consuming for more than one individual to be present at each interview stage, particularly if selection is still at the initial stages.
One way to ensure as many pitfalls as possible are avoided is by asking each candidate the same set of pre-prepared questions.
Informal interviews
Informal interviews adopt an unstructured format and, when part of a broader selection process, tend to take place between the candidate and two or more interviewers who then go on to relay their impressions to the final interview panel or appointment board. The main advantage of this type of interviewing is that it allows topics to be explored and a two-way dialogue to be developed. However, this type of interviewing can be confusing for the candidate and, indeed, those involved in the selection process. The lack of structure can mean that other factors - such as group dynamics - come into play.
This type of interview can be advantageous for the candidate as it can give them a clear picture of the organisation's culture and help them decide whether they are likely to fit in.
Panel interviews
This method uses two or more interviewers, but is distinct from a two-person interview. In this arrangement, there may be a clear division of labour with different interviewers exploring different aspects of the candidate's suitability. Studies* show that unstructured board interviews produce higher levels of validity than unstructured individual interviews.
The most important factor affecting the validity of this selection method is good planning and preparation to ensure a consistent approach to interviewing based on the prepared person and job specifications. It is also important that the mix of people who are put together to conduct the interviews is such that the dynamics of the group adds something constructive to the process rather than overshadowing the interview itself.
Telephone interviewing
Given the rise of telecommunications and the introduction of more distance-based communication, it is perhaps unsurprising that telephone interviewing has become increasingly common. Organisations are now using the telephone to conduct initial screening interviews, and usage may grow further in the future. For now, potential candidates are sometimes taken through a menu system on an automated telephone system. Another option includes an operator taking an individual through a menu on a computer screen. A more informal use of this method relies on someone involved in the selection procedure calling up a candidate to clarify some points on their application form.
* "A meta-analytic investigation of the impact of interview format and degree of structure on the validity of the employment interview", Wiesnar and Cronshaw, Journal of Occupational Psychology, vol. 61, no.4, pp.275-290, 1988.
