When designing a selection process, we assume that a job interview is meant to assess who is most suitable for the position. However, as Wingate and Bourdage discovered, this is merely one of three goals that employers often have in mind. In addition to evaluating candidates, they also aim to make a good impression and provide clear information about the role and its expectations. Sounds logical, doesn’t it? But here lies the problem: these goals are not easily combined within a single conversation. The desire to both assess and impress the candidate can lead to failure. Imagine trying to thoroughly evaluate a candidate while simultaneously convincing them of the advantages of your organisation. The tension between these two goals can result in a loss of objectivity or a failure to genuinely persuade the candidate.

In today’s episode, part of our series on Structured Interviewing, we examine the purpose of interviews from a scientific perspective. How effective are interviews in evaluating different traits? We will also explore how interviews can be adjusted to better assess these traits. Our guest is Professor Tim Wingate from Wilfrid Laurier University in Waterloo, Canada.

For more information: www.schoolforrecruitment.be, www.dynamo.be of www.sliminterviewen.be

Also available to listen on your favorite player: Spotify, Apple Podcast, Google Podcast, Edge, ...

More readings:

The Website of Tim Wingate you can find the research papers

https://tgwingate.com/interviews-%26-staffing

The Meta analysis study: Evaluating interview criterion-related validity for distinct constructs

What are interviews for? A qualitative study of employment interview goals and design

Other articles mentioned in the Podcast:
Anderson & Shackleton, 1990: https://bpspsychub.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.2044-8325.1990.tb00510.x
Huffcutt & Arthur, 1994: https://psycnet.apa.org/record/1994-31607-001
Barrick et al., 2009: https://psycnet.apa.org/buy/2009-21033-003