Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
If you think about it, most job interviews are a waste of time for both the applicant and the company/organization. How can you determine if someone is going to be a "good fit" by talking to them for 30 minutes or an hour.
Most people who go to job interviews are going to be on their best behavior anyway, so how can you determine if that person will be able to perform the job they are interviewing for.
Yes, there may be an instance where someone doesn't act right during an interview or doesn't something egregious, but most people act right.
If I was in charge of hiring, I would have the applicant came in for a few hours and perform the tasks that are listed in the job description and rate their performance. That way you can see what type of employee they would be and you can see first hand how they work.
Calling previous employers/references is not always a good way of understanding an applicant's abilities/demeanor.
It think job interviews are for the most part very subjective.
There was a good article the other day on msn.com about job interviews. To put it bluntly, It Is Not About You. In fact, that was the title. While your theory sounds good about having applicants come in and actually perform the work, that's just not feasible without prior training, in most cases.
The interviewer is not only looking at your prior work history, education, clothing, etc., they are gauging things such as eye contact, diction, courtesy, alertness, coherency, and body language. It is a process, and the interview is only the first step.
The application process I'm going through for a company right now includes a screening interview, a test of your skills through a software program that takes about an hour. It tests math, english, excel skills, typing skills, and a personality test to see how well you react in certain situations. Then you interview with a regional manager, and also do another interview using a list of questions from corporate. If you pass all that, then you do background check and drug test before they even make an offer. Everyone that applies for the company from executives to warehouse personnel go through this test. Anyway, not everyone relies on just an interview anymore.
As someone who has interviewed people before, I think interviews are helpful for two reasons. First, you wouldn't believe how many people are weird in interviews and can be quickly eliminated from the running. Not that they do something horrific but they don't present themselves as well as the other candidates for one reason or another. Second, you have to remember that one thing employers care about is how they interact with you. They are hiring someone that they will have to put up with all day 5 days a week. It is reasonable for them to care about whether they can have a conversation with you or whether they find you annoying. You are right that most of you objective credentials are presented pre-interview but don't underestimate the subjective aspects.
If you think about it, most job interviews are a waste of time for both the applicant and the company/organization. How can you determine if someone is going to be a "good fit" by talking to them for 30 minutes or an hour.
Actually interviews are only a waste of time for the applicant, especially these days where they file in about 50 people for each job.
Although most people are on their best behavior, you can tell a TON about a person within the first 30 minutes of meeting them. That is the benefit to the employer.
The interviewee often is brought in for an interview simply in a fishing net technique by the company, and many likely have no real shot at getting the job even if they do interview well. Ive been to a few interviews wondering why I was even there after a few minutes. Ive been to places that clearly had no intention of paying me the salary I wanted, and Ive been to places that clearly were looking for someone different than even what my resume suggested. Its like they thought if I came in for an interview, my qualifications would change and Id suddenly want less money for those changes.
If potential employers would stop bringing in candidates that have characteristics that rendor them practically unplaceable in a particuliar job, much less time would be wasted.
A job interview IS completely subjective. You might not have done anything wrong but for whatever reason (behind the scenes), the interviewer might not like you so you're chances for the position are very low... but you'd never know that. There are some very good and seasoned interviewers as well as very bad ones out there, with little or no experience in interviewing.
The best you can do in your control during interviews is put your best foot forward. You do this by being genuine about the company and position by being knowledgeable in what the company does, your interviewer(s)' background, being able to elaborate on how your experiences match the responsibilities of the role you're applying for, and sounding enthusiastic when you interview. And obviously as you've probably heard, practice makes perfect.
There are many things that can be learned in an effective behavioral interview. "Tell me about a time when you were given "need it now" assignments by two of your bosses and what did you do..." is an example of a question that could be posed to an executive assistant candidate who will provide support to more than one boss. The answer would give insight to this person's creativity, or humor, or ability to process.
Effective interviewers apply behavioral situations of candidates at all levels to help determine best fit to hiring authorities needs. However, there are many recruiters and interviewers that lack such skills so its understandable that many candidates fail to see value in the interview process.
If I was in charge of hiring, I would have the applicant came in for a few hours and perform the tasks that are listed in the job description and rate their performance. That way you can see what type of employee they would be and you can see first hand how they work.
Wow what a brilliant idea! Oh, wait....many employers already do this.
Behavioral interview questions are stupid. If you have to pick your questions out of a book, you shouldn't be interviewing any body.
Location: The Chatterdome in La La Land, CaliFUNia
39,031 posts, read 23,012,380 times
Reputation: 36027
Quote:
Originally Posted by heeha
If you think about it, most job interviews are a waste of time for both the applicant and the company/organization. How can you determine if someone is going to be a "good fit" by talking to them for 30 minutes or an hour.
Most people who go to job interviews are going to be on their best behavior anyway, so how can you determine if that person will be able to perform the job they are interviewing for.
Yes, there may be an instance where someone doesn't act right during an interview or doesn't something egregious, but most people act right.
If I was in charge of hiring, I would have the applicant came in for a few hours and perform the tasks that are listed in the job description and rate their performance. That way you can see what type of employee they would be and you can see first hand how they work.
Calling previous employers/references is not always a good way of understanding an applicant's abilities/demeanor.
It think job interviews are for the most part very subjective.
I agree that job interviews are not the best predictors of how well-suited a candidate is for a job. I am not that great of an interviewee but have gotten great reviews from supervisors and positive feedback from the clients I serve. In many professions, it is not feasible to have candidates do work samples because of training, expense and/or confidentiality reasons. *sigh* unless there is another way to evaluate a candidate's suitability for a job, the interview will remain the top choice.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
