Evidence of problems with structured and competency interviews

Evidence of interview problems can readily be found in a number of places. First, review some questions from recent interviews in your department or organization. If questions don’t exist, I think you will find some managers are using an unstructured approach and are probably winging it. Simply sitting in on a few interviews will confirm this for you. For behavioural and competency interviews, I think you will find the same questions (or types of questions) are being used over and over again for many different jobs with very few changes. After all, many departments or organizations adopt, profile, highlight or require six to eight "core competencies" each year. If you sit in on a few of these structured interviews, I think you will also find that the hiring managers are frequently asking leading questions (as much as 40 per cent of the time). It is almost impossible to get top performers unless you ask the right questions.

The most compelling evidence of these problems can readily be seen by reviewing the on-the-job performance of the people hired by these types of interviews. At one time, structured behavioural and competency interviews improved (compared to an unstructured approach) the chances of hiring an acceptable performer or at least indicated which applicants would be unacceptable performers. Now, I think you will find (even in organizations using behavioural or competency interviews for years) less than 20 per cent of the workforce or new hires to be top performers and at least 25 per cent of the workforce or new hires to be comprised of unacceptable and below average performers. And the remaining workers or new hires will probably be only average performers. It may be time to upgrade your selection process if these numbers are representative of the staff at or hired by your organization.

 4 of 7    Previous page     Next page

This article copyright © Stephen Jackson. All rights reserved.

• More HR Articles