Ten Common Interviewing Mistakes

How effective is the typical interview in predicting future performance?

A number of studies (see table, page 2) on the predictive power of different selection procedures have shown that the traditional interview- you know, the one where you walk into the interview with a blank page, ask some of your favourite questions (“Tell me about yourself??” “Are you a team player?”) – Is only marginally better than random selection in predicting future performance.

So why is that traditional interview so ineffective as a predictor of future performance? Here are some of the reasons for this disconcerting fact.

1. Making up your mind within minutes If you insist on asking these questions, try of meeting the candidate: following up by asking for concrete examples that would indicate how their strengths and Research has shown that interviewers make up weaknesses have worked for or against them in their minds within four minutes of shaking a the past. Or try asking what they have done in candidates hand. They spend the rest of the the last five years that would indicate that their interview interpreting what the candidate says five-year plan is a realistic one- you may get a in a way that is congruent with their first few dropped jaws. impression. For example, they are more likely to brush off the blemishes of a favoured 4. Not probing vigorously candidate’s history as just a bit of bad luck, while viewing Tom was interviewing Managers often accept sceptically the candidates for a sales associate unsupported or vague accomplishments of a less position. He like the squeaky- claims instead of probing favoured candidate. To clean, fresh-out-of college look for details. For example, a interview more effectively, of the first applicant, Andy. candidate says “I doubled managers must recognise When Andy mentioned that he my territory’s sales within their personal biases and played hockey in a league, tom the first year.” Does this objectively measure assumed this meant that he mean sales went from one candidates on their past was a team player who had the million to two million or behaviour. competitive desire he needed to twenty thousand to forty win in sales. The second thousand? Find out exactly 2. That Halo Effect: applicant, Bill, had a tattoo- a what they did to attain their sure sign of a bad attitude as achievements, and most Letting one factor (eg, far as Tom was concerned. importantly, ask for the Harvard graduate, worked for When Bill said he played hockey name of the person they your top competitor) influence in a league, Tom figured this were reporting to during everything else. Not everyone meant he was a hooligan who’d that time. You’ll find who has graduated from probably come in late often, success stories will Harvard has excelled in the because he’d be out drinking suddenly start sounding business world and your top with his buddies after evening more realistic. competitor has probably hired matches. their fair share of duds. 4. Being unprepared Where they worked or went to school is never as By not reading the important as what they did candidates resume until when they were there. they are in the reception area, or worse, in your office, you are sending a negative message: I 3. Asking predictable, opinion-based don’t care about you. This is not a people- questions: oriented company. I’m not going to be paying too much attention to your responses to my Questions like “What are your strengths and questions. weaknesses”, “Where do you hope to be in five years?” provide very little insight into what The candidate returns the favour by providing really motivates individuals. What you find out vague responses and mentally registering your instead is how well the person has prepared for company as a place to work only if nothing the questions and has crafted a response that better comes along. By not reviewing the you want to hear. resume you are missing a great opportunity to impress your candidates with your knowledge of - 1 - their past, build rapport, get candid responses provides, when what the job really requires is to your questions and probe their work history. someone to type memos all day long. What do you end up with is an employee who, in addition to being deeply dissatisfied with the 5. Placing an over-emphasis on the can- job, feels they have been lied to. They won’t do: last long.

(Things like education, industry experience and 10. Hiring the best of a bad lot: technical credentials) instead of the will-do (things like attitudes, motivations and Searching for the right candidate can be a long temperament). Will-do factors have been shown and arduous process. Sometimes when we time and time again to be the factors that lead reach the end is that process we find that no to success or failure in a job, yet managers rely one on the short list meets our criteria, on a combination of can do factors and gut although some may be close. When faced with feeling to make decisions. Remember, what the prospect of starting from square one, they did is never as important as how they did managers often elect to make sacrifices and it. Your ability to assess will-do factors can be hire the best of a bad lot, a process that costs greatly enhanced by using tools such as The them dearly in the long run. The cost of having McQuaig Word Survey. You’ll note from the to de-hire is always greater than the cost of table below that “personality tests” are two-to- delaying a staffing decision. Starting over will three times more effective than the traditional save you money in the long run. interview, providing that traits measured are those deemed critical for successful By avoiding these mistakes, we can be more performance, eg, a McQuaig Job Survey- type objective in the interviewing process, but we analysis is used. can never eliminate our biases completely. The good news is, by combing The McQuaig System 6. Asking Leading Questions: with structured behavioural interviewing, companies can greatly improve their ability to For example, “ABC Menswear runs their stores predict candidate’s job performance. like boot camps. How did you like working for Predictive Power of Selection Procedures them?” if you keep your own opinions out of the questions, you’d get more objective, meaningful Graphology (handwriting 0.0 responses from candidates. analysis) Typical Employment 0.15 7. Not carefully determining the job Interview requirements: Years Experience/ Education 0.19 Reference Checks 0.22 We often make assumptions about job Personality Tests 0.39 requirements and hire based on those Structured Behavioural 0.40 assumptions, only to find out that the Interview assumptions work against successfully filling the Ability Tests 0.52 position. For example, companies may limit their candidate pool by specifying a college By combining two or more methods, the diploma or greater for a position, when what ability to predict future performance they really need is someone with good problem increases substantially. Source: Hunter & solving skills. Hunter, 1984, Schmitt, 1984, Thacker & Cattaneo, 1987, Smith, 1988 8. Over- selling the position:

When we see a candidate who really excites us, Selection procedures have been researched in we tend to present the job in a way that they terms of their ability to predict successful job will find appealing. For example, if we’re performance. The correlations of various interviewing an energetic, assertive person for methods are outlined below, where 1.0 is an administrative assistant position, we may perfect prediction and 0.0 is random prediction. emphasis (even embellish) the autonomy and opportunities for advancement that the position

To find out more about working with Abbertons Human Resources call (07) 4659 7111

For more articles and workbook resources go to www.abbertons.com.au and click the resources link - 2 -