Where can we find the information we
need?
Most interviewers will agree very quickly to the principle that the best
predictor of future behavior will be past behavior or performance. They
will even agree to a further refinement, the best indicator of future
behavior will be past behavior in similar circumstances. While we
know that no two events are exactly alike, we can search for
circumstances in the candidates past that will be quite similar to what
they will face in the future. However, as interviewers, we often don’t
act like we believe this principle. We spend a good deal of our time
asking questions that elicit information of lesser importance. For
example, this is the information that emerges in most selection
interviews, in this order:
- Biographical facts, Credentials and
Achievements
- Technical knowledge
- Experience/activity descriptions
- Self-evaluation information
- Likes and dislikes
- Strengths and weaknesses
- Statements of Goals/attitudes/philosophy
- Hypothetical, speculative statements
- Behavior descriptions
However, if we take each type of information in
turn, we find that biographical facts, credentials and achievements
(1)are usually written down or substantiated somewhere, perhaps in the
candidate’s resume or curriculum vitae, and are thus “low yield”
information. These are often useful “screening” questions but
“selection” should probably be directed toward more subtle information.
Sometimes we zero in on a candidate’s technical knowledge (2), to tap
into whether they have the right kind of knowledge for the job. However,
paper and pencil tests can easily be developed to yield good information
about a person’s technical knowledge. The challenge will be to make test
items at the right difficulty level, so they are neither too hard nor
too easy.
Work experience and activities are important to know (3). All other
things being equal, we would prefer someone who knows our industry,
services etc. However, don’t assume that a candidate who has done
something has done it well. Experience does not always equal excellence.
In fact, the candidate may be in the job market because of ineffective
performance.
Self-evaluation information (4) that the candidates provide have been
filtered through their own interpretation. We can’t be sure that what a
person likes, they do well, nor that they will do a job poorly if they
dislike it. Responses to strengths and weaknesses and other similar
types of self-evaluations questions can be useful but they are apt to be
vastly over-rated. We don’t always perform according to our goals nor do
we perform in concert with our attitudes and philosophies at all times.
Candidates who are highly verbal, or who have the ability to articulate
goals, have an enormous advantage in this area. Similarly, if the
candidate’s attitudes match those of the interviewer, they can gain an
advantage over other candidates.
Speculative or hypothetical questions are rooted not in past behavior
but in hypothetical behavior. Again, the advantage goes to those who are
intellectually alert. Once again, it is better to look for similar
behavior in the past, or to describe in detail incidents that have
happened in the past at your facility, to get the candidate’s expected
response. |
