Making interviews more fruitful

A job interview call kindles hope for any aspiring candidate, and the preparation journey begins. Until the interview, a candidate keeps thinking about the likely questions that may be posed to her and how best to answer them.

It is difficult to determine whether it is of similar seriousness for those who will take the interview. Interviewers, of course, review candidates' profiles. Thinking they are on a higher pedestal, they often feel free to ask anything and everything, including questions irrelevant to assessing the candidate's suitability for the position. 

An interview is the most commonly used tool in the HR selection process. When interviewers don’t do their job well, the risk of a bad hire increases. As such, it is important for them to be clear about the role's traits and competencies and to ask questions that help assess the extent to which the candidate possesses these attributes.

A good interviewing process has to be crisp and focused, objective, and free of bias.

In a diverse country like India, job aspirants can be from different social, financial and ethnic backgrounds. Not everyone may have the same exposure. Consider a case where a candidate appears shy, while the one next to her exudes dynamism. In general, the latter would be preferred. But thinking critically, can it be guaranteed that this will be the better choice in all cases? Boys and girls from humble backgrounds who have struggled to reach a higher or professional degree may sometimes appear hesitant, and their body language, which is sometimes given disproportionate weight, may not be perfect. None of these should be construed to mean that they are less performing or less productive.

Many interviewers are aware of being impressed or unimpressed by candidates' personality traits or academic performance. A mature approach is to assess only those elements that relate to the role's suitability.

There are a few requirements that apply regardless of the role. For example, every employee needs to be trustworthy, diligent, and organised.

Interviews are typically conducted with a sense of urgency. There is less time available to interview a large number of candidates. Budgeting this time can be a challenge 

If interviewers aren’t doing justice to their role, they risk causing injustice on two fronts: a more promising candidate may not be shortlisted, and the organisation may have to compromise on a less suitable candidate. For the organisation, a wrong hire can entail high costs. 

Analysing and evaluating the answers

In all interviews, it is essential to be very careful when framing the questions for the interviewee. Equally important is analysing the candidate's responses. Often, after asking a question, interviewers pay insufficient attention to listening to the answers. The performance of a candidate in an interview shouldn’t be judged by the number of questions the candidate has answered correctly. The way these answers have been presented also matters. An honest pleading of ignorance is more appreciable than a manipulated or fabricated answer, no matter how confidently the answers are given. Also, it’s important to read between the lines when a candidate appears to be hiding something or shows undue confidence.

A mix of open-ended and close-ended questions is considered better in an interview process. In open-ended questions, where the candidate is expected to share her viewpoint on an issue, it’s not appropriate for the interviewer to expect ideas or thoughts that match her own. Let’s consider the question- ‘What is the biggest problem before India?’ One candidate may name it poverty, while for the other, it may be unemployment. If the questioner believes this to be social and/or economic inequality, it doesn’t mean that other answers are incorrect. The focus should be on understanding how the candidate justifies her answer and how clear her understanding of the issue is.

A candidate with substantial accomplishments or extensive extracurricular involvement may find favour with the panellists, but again, how these translate into performance is worth considering. Candidates should not be judged solely on their grades, achievements, or past performance. Evaluating potential is of no less value. In any case, all hiring is done to achieve an organisation’s short-term, medium-term, and long-term goals.

The length of experience need not be overstated. A candidate with 5 years of experience is not necessarily a better hire than one with three years of experience. Also, experience in a similar line shouldn’t give a candidate an unfair advantage. A candidate who has worked in the HR function of a manufacturing firm shouldn’t be considered a misfit for an HR role in a service organisation. Cultural fit is important, but it shouldn’t be stretched too far. There are numerous cases of employees from a particular background performing exceedingly well in a different setting. It’s more a matter of intent, adaptability and willingness to learn. 

It's crucial to ensure the interview doesn’t become a question-and-answer session. There should be a holistic approach to developing an understanding of the candidate, with the role requirements in mind, and the interviewer(s) should also be adequately prepared.