What do you do if your interviews reveal conflicting responses from candidates?

If you get conflict responses, try to understand the candidate perspective, ask follow up questions and examples to understand the response. With behavioral & situational based interviews, you can examine logics, approaches & communication skills of the candidate. Quality of answer is matter, if skills are align with current roles and organisation requirements.

In my experience, using behavioral or situational questions provide the opportunity to understand each candidate’s unique experience and responses, and if these align with your organization’s mission and values. I’ve found it particularly beneficial to “peel the onion” , in other words, ask probing questions when a candidate’s responses are ambiguous or when their ‘STAR’ format answers are confusing. Usually for virtual interviews, you can post the question in the chat for the candidate to refer to. These techniques have helped make interviews effective which have led to great hiring decisions.

In my opinion, when interviews yield conflicting responses, diving deeper through follow-up interviews and clarifying questions is key. Cross-referencing with resumes and references can unveil the truth behind discrepancies. I find that involving a colleague for a fresh perspective often helps in deciphering complex answers. Ultimately, focusing on how well candidates align with the role and company culture, rather than seeking perfectly consistent answers, guides toward making more informed and nuanced hiring decisions.

When candidate responses appear to differ slightly, I take a proactive approach to ensure a complete understanding. By conducting focused follow-up discussions, I delve deeper into specific areas to gather comprehensive insights. This commitment to clarity empowers me to make well-informed hiring decisions based on a complete picture of each candidate's qualifications and experiences.

When faced with conflicting responses from candidates in interviews: 1. Clarify: Ask follow-up questions to understand each candidate's perspective better. 2. Probe: Dig deeper to uncover underlying reasons for the discrepancies. 3. Verify: Cross-reference information with resumes, references, or additional assessments. 4. Assess communication skills: Evaluate how candidates handle inconsistencies and their ability to adapt. 5. Consider context: Understand that differences may arise due to interpretation, memory, or communication styles. 6. Prioritize: Focus on key qualifications, cultural fit, and potential for growth when making decisions.

When you have different answers from candidates during interviews, you can compare their responses to make a decision. Look for similarities: See if there are any common points or themes in their answers. Consider the context: Think about the specific situations and questions that led to their responses. Evaluate against job requirements: Compare their answers to the skills and qualifications needed for the position. Seek input from others: Get perspectives from other interviewers or team members to gain different insights. Look for evidence: Consider if the candidates provided examples or experiences to support their answers.

Usually, I will do a few checklist and from the checklist there will be compulsory part and recommended part. This will allowed us being more selective on the candidate and determine if the candidate is worthy or not

Addressing conflicting responses can involve comparing them using predefined criteria and competencies for the role. Implement a rating scale or scoring system to assign points or weights to each response, allowing for a standardized evaluation process and minimizing bias. Nevertheless, it's crucial to consider the quality and relevance of responses, emphasizing substance over mere quantity or frequency in your assessment.

The reason interview is best to be done with multiple people is to seek for third opinion and avoid unnecessary bias. Different people will have different perspective and view on how to look at the potential candidate

Seeking feedback is like asking for advice or opinions from others to help you improve. It's like getting suggestions on how to be better at something. You ask specific questions to the right people, listen to what they say, and then use their advice to make positive changes. It's all about growing and becoming the best you can be.

Seeking feedback from other interviewers is good. However, it is a double edged sword - if there are disagreements, it can create even more confusion. Hence, there has to be method to it - what are the specific areas you would like to discuss about the candidate? Sticking to pre-defined aspects will allow for a better discussion and will not derail the objective of objectively assessing the candidate.

In the face of conflicting responses, another effective approach is to gather feedback from other interviewers or stakeholders involved in the hiring process. Engage in discussions with them to understand their perspectives and opinions on the candidates. Encourage the sharing of notes or observations, enabling a comprehensive comparison with your own insights. This collaborative effort not only provides additional information but also helps pinpoint any gaps or discrepancies in the overall interview process.

These kinds of conflicts are prominent to situational based questions and the ones which are subjective to ones opinion in such cases,be receptive to understand the perspective of the candidates why there are diverse opinions , it can be bcoz they perceive the question differently, the question is unclear,there are lots of assumptions taken or may be due to experiences or resources they are referring to. If it's subjected to question or assumption, clear it . For experience related reasons try to understand the logic, for factual and resource based conflicts reach out SME in org. Share your thoughts and seek feedback, resources for reference. At times, one should accept there is no right or wrong and but the best or most suitable answer.

To verify responses means to check if the information or answers provided are correct or accurate. It's like double-checking to make sure that what someone said is true or valid. You can do this by fact-checking, researching, or seeking additional opinions or sources. It's important to verify responses to ensure that you have reliable information.

In the case of conflicting responses, a valuable option is to verify the information by checking the candidates' references, credentials, or work samples. Reach out to their previous employers, managers, or colleagues to confirm or obtain additional details regarding the candidates' claims or achievements. Review their resumes, portfolios, or test results to assess their alignment with the provided responses. This thorough verification process aids in validating the accuracy and authenticity of the information, while also allowing for the identification of potential exaggerations or inconsistencies.

Following up with candidates is indeed a valuable option to clarify any doubts or gather more information. You can reach out to them through phone, email, or video call to ask for further details, evidence, or examples that support their responses. It's a helpful way to get a better understanding of their qualifications and how they would handle specific situations related to the role or organization. Taking the time to follow up can definitely lead to making better hiring decisions.

In situations of conflicting responses, a useful approach is to follow up with the candidates and request clarification or elaboration on their answers. This communication can take place through phone calls, emails, or video calls, depending on the urgency and complexity of the matter. Encourage candidates to provide additional details, evidence, or examples supporting their responses, or address any concerns or doubts that may have arisen. Moreover, prompt candidates to elaborate on how they would handle specific situations or challenges related to the role or the organization. Implementing these follow-up steps contributes to a more comprehensive understanding of candidates' responses and aids in making well-informed hiring decisions.

??? ?????? ??? ?????? ??????? ?? ???????? ???? ?????????? ???? ?? ??? ???? ????: ???? ?? ???????: ??? ????? ?? ??????? ???? ????? ?? ???????. ?? ???? ????? ??? ????? ?? ???? ?????? ?? ???? ???????? ?? ?????? ????? ???? ?????? ??? ??????? ???????: ?????? ??????? ???????? ?????? ???????? ??????. ???? ?? ????????? ?? ??????? ?? ?????? ???? ?? ???? ?????????. ???? ?? ???????? ???? ????: ???? ??? ???? ??? ??? ??????? ????? ??????. ???? ???? ??? ??? ?????? ????????. ??? ??? ???????? ?????????: ???? ?????? ???????? ???????? ??????? ????????? ???????? ???????? ???? ??? ??? ?????? ?????.