The structured interview represents the greatest progress in the field of inter- views. It was developed in the 1980s. The structured system of an interview entails a detailed processing of each part of an interview. The activity of conducting an inter- view is structured with grade tables and checklists, etc. A structured interview begins by a detailed job analysis which guarantees that the grades and questions are connect- ed with it. The system of structured interviews essentially diminishes the traditional autonomy of the interviewer.
Several different types of structured interviews are used in practice (Cook, 1996). The most typical ones are the following:
• Situational interview,
• Behaviour description interview;
• Comprehensively structured interview.
Situational interview
The situational interview (known also as the interview of positions) (Latham and colleagues, 1980, in Cook, 1996) were developed by the critical incident tech- nique, especially from the example of efficient and inefficient behaviours:
The employee devoted himself or herself to his or her family. He or she is mar- ried for just 18 months and he or she uses all possible excuses to stay home, such as friends’ child fell ill, wife cut herself with the knife for cutting bread. He did not come to work and he did not inform anyone about it.
The critical incident technique may be formulated as a question: Your wife and two children are ill and they are in bed with the flu. You do not have any friends or relatives to take care of them. Your shift begins in three hours. What would you do in this situation?
The supervisors in the organisation, that described the situation, agree that it is possible to differentiate answers of good, average and unsatisfactory employees:
During the interview the questions are put to the candidates and they give their answers. The grades are given on the basis of comparison of the candidate’s answer with the previously established possible answers. The situational interview is very reli- able and forecasts well the future grades for the general efficiency in the job. The pro- ponents of this type of interview insist that this instrument is very fair since it deals with a specific knowledge necessary for the verification of the direct acceptability of the candidates.
An example of questions in the structured interview for the position of a sec- ondary school teacher:
O
54POSSIBLE ANSWERS GRADE
I would stay at home – wife and children are in the first place Unsatisfactory employee I would call my superior and explain him or her the situation Average employee Regardless of the fact that they are sick I would go to work Good employee
Behaviour description interview
This type of interviews begins (Janz, 1982, in Cook, 1996) by the analysis of the critical events related to the job. The interviewers from the casual behaviour descrip- tion interviews have considerably active role in comparison to the interviewers from sit- uational interviews since they are “trained” to channel responses when candidates try to avoid a question or do not provide straight answers but talk about something else. Causal behaviour description interviews have a retrospective character which is reflect- ed in the fact that they are focused on the indicative behaviours of candidates that happened in his or her past.
One more example of questions during the behaviour description interview of the secondary school teacher:
A behaviour description interview always achieves greater validity than conven- tional interviews.
Comprehensively structured interviews
Comprehensively structured interviews (Campion, Pursell and Brown, 1988, in Cook, 1996) process four fields: knowledge required in the job position, requirements and expectations of employees and the analysis of hypothetical work situations. Knowledge required in the job position is covered by questions such as: “since you assem- bled the machine, clean it; why didn’t you clean all the parts?” A simulation of a job posi- tion entails questions such as “many operations require the use of a forklift truck. We kindly ask you to read out aloud the (ninety words) instruction for the forklift truck.” The requirements of employees are assessed by asking questions such as “certain job posi- tions require climbing the ladders to the height which corresponds to a five-story build- ing. Describe your feelings in relation to this type of tasks?” The fourth field uses both techniques of interviews as those used in the case of the situational interview.
5.2.4.1. Value of a structured interview
The proponents of the methods of structured interviews usually report on their great value but that is often obtained from very modest samples. The evaluation of the value of interviews demonstrates that structured interviews achieve better results than conventional ones. A study (Wiesner and Cronskhaw, 1988, in Cook, 1996) confirmed that the best results were achieved by the structured interview based on the formal analysis of the job position.
O
551. What would you do if your student had difficulties with the understanding of the bases of your course and was always lagging behind?
2. What would you do if some of your students started to whisper, laugh or in any other way disturb the class during the lecture?
Source: Tre ven, 1998: 190.
1. You speak about the example of your students and difficulties they had with the understanding of the course and the fact that they were lagging behind others. Can you describe for me how did you solve this problem and what was the result?
2. Tell me something about the cases of students who, by making noise or any other form of inappropriate behaviour, disturb your lectures. How did you react in that case?
A very structured situational interview erases differences between interviews and traditional “pencil and paper” tests. Overall structured interviews are highly cor- related with the test of abilities (multiple correlation is 0,75) and actually enable the testing of mental abilities (Campion, Pursell and Brown, 1988, in Cook, 1996). On the other hand, structured behaviour tests demonstrate the mental abilities of a candidate to a lesser extent or not at all.
5.2.4.2. Decision-making of the interviewer
A leader of the interview shall listen to the candidate carefully and make a deci- sion on the basis of the information received. A research has shown numerous reasons why interviewers do not act in this manner in practice.
Interviewers actually pass judgements before the actual interview
Even before the interview the interviewer has information on candidates from their CVs’ and job applications. An additional study in relation to the aforementioned data and the creation of initial impact did not determine what information is the most relevant to the purpose of the selection of candidates. Certain researches suggest that the attention should be given to the examination of qualifications, history of individu- als and experiences (Graves and Powell, 1988, in Cook, 1996).
The interviewers make decisions too quickly
Certain researches indicate that interviewers make decisions in 4-5 minutes of a planned 15-minute interview (Buckley and Eder, 1988). On average, the interviewer accepts or rejects candidates in the first 9 minutes, while the rest of the interview is only “a cover up”. It is astonishing that interviewers who did not see the candidates’ job appli- cation need the same amount of time as those interviewers who examined the applica- tions, and the same time if they know the candidates’ background. This means that fac- tual information does not have a significant influence on the decision of the interviewer.
First impression on a candidate forms an opinion of the interviewer
The evaluation of the job applications and the conduct of a candidate are deci- sive for the final grade for 85 to 88 percent of candidates (Cook, 1996). It is often heard that a timely piece of advice and smart clothes could be helpful to a candidate. E.g. female and male interviewers react similarly to the perfumes used. Female candi- dates for managerial positions leave the best impression if they are dressed in a con- ventional manner but not too formally.
However, all other factors, being positive or negative, are proved to have little impact due to “capricious” character of the interviewer. In general, the interviewers decide upon first impressions, although they do not want to admit this and claim that the advantage is given to the “last impression”. Therefore, a structured system of inter- views is more recommendable since it helps in overcoming the first impression and to a great extent reduces the influence of the subjective factor.
The interviewer looks for reasons to reject a candidate
Springbett (1958, in Cook, 1996) identified another weakness of the assess- ment due to which 90 percent of candidates are rejected. This is the reaction to nega-
tive information even when the information is meaningless and there is no significant influence on the quality of candidate’s immediate or expected behaviour. A bad news changes the grade more radically than a good one. The interviewer usually pays little attention to good sides of a candidate and too much attention to candidate’s weak- nesses. Thus, the reasoning for rejection of a candidate should be reviewed at multiple instances particularly if there are numerous candidates.
The interviewer has a certain theory
Andrews (1922, in Cook, 1996) described an interviewer who found a sales man who had previously dealt with computer sales and who proved to be unsatisfac- tory in his new job. The interviewer never again employed a person who previously sold computers since he concluded “that people who sell computers are bad sales persons. A candidate who previously sold computers is a bad sales man”.
Obviously the employer from Andrew’s example used twisted logic since the salesman of computers must also be good at his or her job in order to be able to sell those machines; thus this event was a mere coincidence.
5.2.4.3. Mistakes and deviations of interviews
Advocates of interviews give arguments that a good interviewer notices samples of information already during the preparation of the methods and techniques which will be used in the interview and thus notices possible mistakes and deviations.
A research rejects the beliefs of interviewers that the personal conversation is so complete and its role so decisive that it cannot be replaced by any other method. In reality, the situation is different. The research showed that:
1. People never work better than the system;
2. People do not use all information which they seek and obtain.
The more an interviewer likes the candidate the more likely he or she will offer the candidate a job. This appeal may be related to the expressed competence essential for the job but it may also be based on completely irrational bases.
Dominance of stereotypes
Interviewers are often led by stereotypes, which can cause a certain neglect of candidates in the selection procedure.
Cecil, Paul and Olins (1973, in Cook, 1996) made a list of characteristics that are desirable with male and female candidates in administrative services. An ideal male candidate can quickly modify his opinion, he is persuasive, resistant to pressure, highly motivated and aggressive while the female candidate has a nice voice, good office man- agement skills, expresses herself very well, dresses nicely and has a university degree.
Physical attraction
The research confirms that people communicate well with attractive persons and that a “good appearance” brings a wide spectre of social advantages.
Certain evaluators strongly favour physical attractiveness – a good appearance entails two types of advantages on a scale of 12 points. The result of physical attrac- tion is taken into consideration regardless of sex, has a strong influence also when a
male evaluates other men and when a man evaluates a woman. Certain individuals explain that the “effect of a survivor” indicates that more attractive persons are more acceptable for activity within an organisation.
Although a research confirms the impact of physical attraction, actually its influence is not that significant.
5.2.4.3. What is not allowed during the interview
Despite the frequent use of interviews and experience, there may be a violation of legislation guaranteeing equal opportunities, as well as legislation on the prohibi- tion of discrimination. The employers may avoid numerous mistakes as long as the interviews are conducted on the safe terrain. Thus, questions that are not clearly con- nected to the job are best to be avoided.
The interviews are in line with the legislation if they are based on a good job description, if the interviewers are well chosen and trained, if the employment commis- sion is engaged and not individual evaluators.
When it is necessary to discuss certain characteristics and their influence in relation to the competitiveness for the job, it should be done in a neutral manner, iden- tically and with the same approach to each candidate.