Interviews: The Good, The Bad, & The Different

Interviews are a funny, fickle thing. They do the purpose of "testing the waters," for all parties involved. From the organization, the employer's perspective, they want to make sure the candidate is a right fit for the organization, that they won't be wasting their time or their resources to hire them; also just as important, the candidates themselves want to be sure that they are going to the right fit for themselves and their livelihood. The "million-dollar question," is to how to go about doing it.

We, as hiring personnel, want to be effective, fair across the board to each candidate, as well as honest and transparent with job qualifications and expectations of the job itself. As hiring personnel, we want to look at different tests or questions that will examine each person's KSAOs and whether or not they are a fit for the position (Lecture outline, "Selection"). We as hiring personnel are also human- that means we can make mistakes, don't always see things the same way from person-to-person or even across interviews in the same day. "How to Get a Job at Google" showed the importance of looking at the person itself, not necessarily the paper qualifications; while they can be important, they are by no means the whole picture, or even half the picture. Laszlo Bock, Senior VP of people operations for Google, wrote about this in looking at candidates: "Talent can come in so many different forms and be built in so many nontraditional ways today, hiring officers have to be alive to every one — besides brand-name colleges. Because “when you look at people who don’t go to school and make their way in the world, those are exceptional human beings. And we should do everything we can to find those people.” Too many colleges, he added, “don’t deliver on what they promise" ("How to Get a Job at Google"). This is the problem with basing off credentials alone- it doesn't show the whole picture of the person, and no specific test does either.

The interview process itself shows the person behind the credentials; it can also completely change depending on who is giving it, and how it effective it is will depend on the interviewer. In my first couple of interviews, it almost felt awkward; I had the standard questions on availability for working and about my hobbies, what kind of things I liked to do. These interviews could have been better though- they did not help as far as making me feel better about the job itself, or what was really expected. Having known I was still early (re: young) in the workforce, they could have helped me understand better about the job, the pay, or the expectations. They did nothing to help me except hire me for a job so that I had a paycheck. From the 'middle' of my times I had two different interviews at customer service call centers- there were different skills assessment tests with a practice scenario, as well as the in-person interview. Felt like it was much better assessment of what I was getting into, and they (the hiring people) gave me more thorough answers and expectations as well. As this doesn't touch on retention much, but it felt like they didn't care as much about people staying as they did about getting enough people to fill their seats. The last interview I had was by far the most unique; this interview was done by phone and text. The manager here does her work mostly from home, and the days she was planning on coming to the workplace to interview me, she's had health issues and wasn't able to make it in-person. I've been working there four years now, and to this day, she says I was the best hire she ever did. While I personally think she may have been exaggerating, the fact was that it was the way she did it- questions she asked made it more personal as well as took away the nervousness I had; the interview itself was good, but it could have been made better. Any process can always be improved upon, just like anyone is human and can make mistakes. I think any of these interviews could have been improved upon by making them a little more standard or personal, to be more aware of the expectations of the position in the short term or long term. Some of these things would improve interviews as well as the candidates themselves to be in a better position of accepting the job, or declining to go to different work. These are my thoughts and actions on the interview process.