How do you adjust your interview style for different roles or seniority?

The true first step is to have a interview timeline. Do you conduct and provide the coding test, or does a hiring manager; do you hire to line or does a director + have the final say. Candidates invest into the process when it is transparent and outlined before the initial screening. Once you have an interview timeline you have to connect with a hiring manager to truly identify the skills required to perform the role. For technical roles, what languages or frameworks are being used (i.e Java, Javascript, Spring, Python) if managing technical teams, how technical does the candidate need to be. For sales roles, assessing past performance and providing sales numbers that are shareable. Past performance often dictates future behavior.

If your organization has core values or a solid mission/vision, base the core skills off of those values and the mission. Those core skills should be universal, at every level - which means the same interview question that you ask an entry-level prospect can be asked to a candidate for a C-Suite role.

Before interviewing, a candidate must consider the organization's culture, the role that are interviewing for, and what type of leader the organization is looking for in a senior-level role. For those type of roles, a candidate's competency in their skill set is not enough; interpersonal skills are being evaluated, as the wrong move in front of external clients and internal employees can cost the organization and its value in the marketplace. My advice for candidates are to: Take the time to understand what interpersonal personal skills that you are easily able to achieve, and the interpersonal skills that you can improve on. Also, make sure to have detailed examples exceeding goals and examples of how you have handled conflict.

When I tailor interview styles based on seniority, I prioritize depth for senior roles, delving into intricate technical and strategic questions. Leadership dynamics and alignment with our company's culture are paramount for senior candidates, given their potential influence on our organizational ethos. For entry-level positions, I emphasize foundational knowledge, adaptability, and eagerness to integrate into our team. Ultimately, my approach ensures that we holistically assess candidates, aligning their skills and values with our organizational needs.

From my years in the workforce industry, I've found that interviewing is truly an art. It's never a cookie-cutter process. Here’s my two cents on tailoring your interview approach: Entry-Level: Focus on potential. Discuss school projects to gauge problem-solving and teamwork. It's about attitude and fit. Mid-Level: Dive into specifics. What value did they add previously? How did they tackle challenges? Senior-Level: Discuss leadership, long-term vision, and their impact on business growth. Tech vs. Non-Tech: Technical roles may need a skills test, while non-tech roles hinge on interpersonal skills. Culture Fit: Ensure they align with company values.

A formula that a previous team of mine leveraged was a 30-minute interview + 15 minutes for every 5-year block of experience. Then the number of interviews should not exceed the number of 'levels' of the organization reporting to them. A line manager or lead would have 2 interviews, whereas a senior manager with managers as direct reports would have 3. For technical roles, this had some flexibility to allow more time to assess technical skills or to allow an assessment to be given.

Considering the seniority level can be beneficial but also consider that you may think that you need a senior develop then realize later in the interview process that you need a junior developer. I think being open to different levels at the beginning or even posting 2 different seniority levels can be helpful. You may find that others on your team are wanting to elevate their role so you could start hiring a senior developer then find that you need that junior one since you will need promote internally. It is good to have varying questions for different levels but even though someone has Senior in their title. Senior at a different company may be Junior level experience at yours. Have those questions but be able to pivot if needed.

I would also recommend adjusting the interview length depending on the seniority level. When interviewing executives, I schedule 45-minute calls rather than 30-minute calls because they will likely have a few more questions of their own and as a recruiter, I want to ensure I can fill in any knowledge gaps they might have about the role or company.

In my experience, every interviewer would have a standard interview assessment to be made for different roles. Most importantly it depends on the kind of candidate where the interview would be behavioral based to engage and understand the core competencies, skills and handling situations.

Most companies will follow a "standard" interview structure, except in the public "Civil service" sector. Where they assess and adjust to the requirements for the individual. If you can tailor each interview to the candidate to demonstrate their strengths, this is a fantastic interview because everyone has different strengths. If companies can be more "open" minded with these sorts of interviews, then you will attract a lot more people. If you have long winded process from the beginning, for example, long application forms, long wait times, the candidate will lose interest very quickly from the start. When this interview actually makes it to the candidate, they actually might be shut off from it all. You may lose all of their personality.

To ensure equity, you should always have the same 'decision-making' questions for a given role. However, an interview should be conversational, and allow for nuanced adjustments to personality, syntax, experience, etc.

Interviews should be structured so that all applicants are asked the same core questions, ensuring a fair foundation from which to evaluate them. Interlaced with those core questions, interviewers should be afforded a certain level of flex (and spontaneity) to ask follow up questions that allow insights into softer skills, approach and values base. Interviews are not meant to be gruelling - for either party - more an opportunity to enquire and gain insights and knowledge about an individual as well as assurance that they are the person for the job!

I completely agree in having different structures for different roles but there are some questions that should remain the same no matter the position or seniority. These are questions usually surrounding company culture and communication. Have different approaches yes but keep the same format for each role that has the same title, no matter who the interviewer is. This will avoid bias and allow you to evaluate the interview process and make adjustments effectively and efficiently. Being flexible is helpful but going off script can lead to unfair advantages or disadvantages.

Also, be careful to not just recruit for culture fit, look for candidates who bring new skills or perspectives and can add to the culture. But balance that with also setting up that new hire for success. What are the technical skills and soft skills this person will need to be happy long-term on this team or at this company? Gleem as much information as you can about the hiring manager and their team environment in your intake and check-in meetings.

Culture makes or breaks a company. Be very thoughtful when hiring. I have a candidate culture survey and a client culture survey I have published in a book by Random house I am willing to share. Melanie Kirk [email protected] 469-332-9400

Create a feedback form or survey and share it to the candidate immediately after the interview for their feedback on the process. Use that data! You can get valuable insights and identify opportunities to coach & develop interviewers early on to make a better overall candidate experience.

Iteration and a constructive feedback loop would be a great benefit to both the candidate and the interviewer. Realistically, this doesn’t happen anywhere near often enough and as a result there comes several key issues. First, there is seemingly a disconnect in information from HR to hiring manager, which affects the candidates sourced and selected for interviews. There are often, as mentioned above, changes to the needs of the role and the type of fit that would work. From the other side of the table, interviewers need training to understand how to conduct solid interviews, asking good questions and getting to experience the person and their skillsets. Often times people interviewing forget they too were once on the other side.

Not every interview is the same. The amount of people that do not prepare for an interview astound me. That is both candidate and interviewer. I always research the previous companies the candidate was at. Pick 2-3 key achievements from their resume to discuss and chat about why they chose a particular field of study. I will map out the competencies for each position individually and assess candidates against them. I always spend time to discuss push and pull factors and motivations. Finally we discuss expectations and I provide the candidate with a clear action plan moving forwards.

Interviewing should always be about getting the individual to talk about themselves and get past some pre-canned responses. I would hate to hire someone who is going to hate the role; so we have to get to the point of really knowing the following: - if the role is self-directed, does this person have the skills required to do so already - if the role is junior - does the person have aptitude and can they be coached? - Does the level of their experience with a skillset match what the position requires? - Will this person enjoy the position or will they be miserable working for the current hiring manager, with the current team, or doing this portion of the role day in and out? This requires truly listening and even changing our questioning.

Totally agree, the interview should be the chance for the applicant to express and share key information about their skillset that make them valuable to the organization.