The Structured Interview
In a rapidly changing and highly competitive business environment, getting the right candidate at the right time, in the right place, is key to success within any organisation. A well-structured interview is paramount to achieve this success.
According to the Harvard Business Review, the employee turnover rate due to bad hiring decisions is as high as 80%. On top of that, the monetary cost of replacing a poor hire is anywhere between 50-150% of that candidate’s annual salary, depending on position. Not only is there a financial cost to a bad hire, there is also the risk of damage to the reputation of the company. Many of us have personally experienced or know somebody who had a bad experience with interviewing. These stories are often shared with others, which reflects poorly on the company. Let us not forget that the interview is the chance to prove the professionalism of your organisation. The challenge is, leading a quality interview is easier said than done.
“Not only is there a financial cost to a bad hire, there is also the risk of damage to the reputation of the company.”
I have spent more than a decade conducting, observing and taking candidate feedback on job interviews and witnessed some hilarious but also shocking interview questions. These questions ranged from, “Ah, you just got married recently. Do you have kids or are planning to have any?” (It is illegal to ask candidates about their private/family life in an interview.), to “If you were to be an object in a hotel room what would it be and why?” to define candidates’ level of creativity. Other bad examples used to measure candidates’ suitability include Zodiac sign, date and time of birth, sexual preference, ethnicity and religion.
The above examples might sound dramatic (Trust me, the worst have been left out.), but I have heard these stories far too often. Nonetheless, many of these questions don’t come from bad intentions, but are the result of an inability to effectively question and a lack of knowledge on how to conduct a structured interview. Going back to the, “Do you have kids?” example; what the interviewer wants to know is if the candidate can travel for work. However, he or she is unable to state or find evidence to that question correctly. In all fairness, most of the interviewers, which could be anyone from the HR department to senior hiring managers, are rarely provided with the necessary training that develops and prepares them to conduct an effective interview.
Besides effective questioning, being biased is another major obstacle in determining the suitability of candidates. It is a natural human condition and something we all have. Your biases are influenced by your personal experiences. They can be based on learned associations with various qualities and social categories, including race, gender, age, schooling and even former employer. To name a few common biases:
Similar-to-Me Effect: individuals get along with people who tend to look and think as we do. Halo Effect: someone reminds you of someone who was good. Horns Effect: opposite of the Halo Effect. Social Stereotypes: a fixed, over-generalised belief about a particular group or class of people. Contrast Effect: in the interview process, an error caused by the effect of previously interviewed or appraised applicants on the interviewer resulting in a conscious or subconscious comparison of one applicant with another and tends to exaggerate the differences between the two. Pressure-to-Fill Positions: let’s take the first one available as we need to have someone ASAP.
To prevent making poor hiring decisions based on bias, we need to be aware that we all have them and adhere to a structured applicant screening procedure, such as the behavioural/competency-based interview.
A behaviour/competency based interview follows a structured approach to gather and assess information about a candidate’s ability to do the job based on certain key criteria. The criteria need to be set with all the stakeholders involved in the interview process. Having set criteria is the beginning of a successful recruitment process, as it prevents finding out at a later stage in the hiring process that one interviewer was looking for different skill sets than the other. To put it plainly, it prevents wasting the company’s and the candidate’s time. Saving time is not the only advantage; a well-structured hiring process also saves money that is spent on actual man-hours, and lowers the opportunity cost of time spent that should have been allocated to the business itself. Not to mention the output generated of having the right employee performing the job as soon as possible.
A structured behaviour/competency-based interview starts with a pre-interview Preparation, where the CV is read, the key criteria to test the candidate on are agreed, and the format and objectives of the discussion clearly defined. The interview should begin with an Introduction, starting with engaging the candidate, and presenting the outline of the conversation. Followed by the Probe part of the interview, where the candidate is asked to answer questions based on the agreed key criteria. These questions should allow the interviewers to identify the candidate’s skill sets, personal and organisational matches, as well as to evaluate their experience, motivation, competencies and values. It is advisable to take notes during this stage and use a “cheat sheet” to make sure you have covered everything that will help with the candidate selection process. Upon gathering all the information from the candidate, the interviewer may then proceed to the stage where they “Sell” the organisation and the role the company is recruiting for, based on the needs and motivations of the candidate. Doing so will position your organisation as an “employer of choice”. The interviewer should Close out the interview by checking if the candidate still has any questions that have not been addressed previously and explaining the next step in the hiring process. The interview can then be finalised by the generation of structured feedback to be used by subsequent interviewers/HR.
The quality of the information gathered from the candidate depends largely on the questions asked, which is why it is crucial to ask the right questions. That information should be factual and display evidence of the candidates’ capabilities, motivation and experience. To obtain that evidence, one should look at past behaviours of the candidate, as they provide the best prediction of possible future behaviour. “Human recollection” (storytelling), is one of the most reliable methods of assessing truthfulness and conveying understanding to validate evidence. The S.T.A.R. approach provides the format to get a factual recount of an experience. Situation: understanding the circumstances, “Describe a situation where you were …” Task: “What was your role in this?” Action: “What exactly did you do?” Result: “What was the outcome?”, end with a Close “Thanks for that.”
A common mistake made by interviewers is asking candidates hypothetical questions like what would the candidate do in certain situations - the “what if ” questions. By asking these hypothetical questions, you are essentially asking candidates to make up something, offering no value or any evidence of displayed capabilities, motivation and experience other than, if lucky, an epic fictional story.
Let’s say we would like to test a candidate on their out-of-thebox thinking capability using the S.T.A.R questioning technique approach;
“A common mistake made by interviewers is asking candidates hypothetical questions like what would the candidate do in certain situations - the “what if” questions”
S -> We would start with understanding the situation; “Please describe a situation where you experienced that something was not going well within your project/department, and how did you go with it?” followed by delving deeper into the provided example by follow up questions:
S -> “Why was the solution important?” T -> “What business needs were you hoping to meet?” A -> “How did you first go about fixing the issue?” A -> “Who did you involve in the problem and why?” A -> “How did you arrive at the new solution to the problem?” A -> “How did you go about implementing this change?” R -> “What was the outcome?” Close -> “Thank you for that.”
The S.T.A.R. format gives a quality example and provides evidence of the candidates’ ability to think out-of-the-box in a constructive way.
There is much more to leading a constructive interview, such as the different ways of formulating questions and what questions to avoid, etc. To conduct a strong, effective and fair hiring process, it is essential to acknowledge and understand ‘bias’, that little human feature we all share. Recognising the immediate and long-term advantages of leading a structured interview will also be beneficial to any organisation looking to build a positive reputation in the market.
For those who believe that obtaining the above skillset will only benefit them in a business context, try to use the art of effective questioning and gaining evidence at home with your family. We would love to hear from you!
www.rpoglobal.com