Job interview
Yüklə 20,42 Kb.
|
|
JOB INTERVIEW A job interview is an interview consisting of a conversation between a job applicant and a representative of an employer which is conducted to assess whether the applicant should be hired.[1] Interviews are one of the most popularly used devices for employee selection.[1] Interviews vary in the extent to which the questions are structured, from a totally unstructured and free-wheeling conversation, to a structured interview in which an applicant is asked a predetermined list of questions in a specified order;[1] structured interviews are usually more accurate predictors of which applicants will make suitable employees, according to research studies.[2] A job interview typically precedes the hiring decision. The interview is usually preceded by the evaluation of submitted résumés from interested candidates, possibly by examining job applications or reading many resumes. Next, after this screening, a small number of candidates for interviews is selected. Potential job interview opportunities also include networking events and career fairs. The job interview is considered one of the most useful tools for evaluating potential employees.[3] It also demands significant resources from the employer, yet has been demonstrated to be notoriously unreliable in identifying the optimal person for the job.[3] An interview also allows the candidate to assess the corporate culture and demands of the job. Multiple rounds of job interviews and/or other candidate selection methods may be used where there are many candidates or the job is particularly challenging or desirable. Earlier rounds sometimes called 'screening interviews' may involve fewer staff from the employers and will typically be much shorter and less in-depth. An increasingly common initial interview approach is the telephone interview. This is especially common when the candidates do not live near the employer and has the advantage of keeping costs low for both sides. Since 2003, interviews have been held through video conferencing software, such as Skype.[4] Once all candidates have been interviewed, the employer typically selects the most desirable candidate(s) and begins the negotiation of a job offer. Strategies
Job-relevant interview content: Interview questions are generally designed to tap applicant attributes that are specifically relevant to the job for which the person is applying. The job-relevant applicant attributes that the questions purportedly assess are thought to be necessary for successful performance on the job. The job-relevant constructs that have been assessed in the interview can be classified into three categories: general traits, experiential factors, and core job elements. The first category refers to relatively stable applicant traits. The second category refers to job knowledge that the applicant has acquired over time. The third category refers to the knowledge, skills, and abilities associated with the job. General traits: Mental ability: Applicants' capacity to listen, to communicate, to work with a team, to have attention to detail,[9] and to learn and process information,[6] Personality: Conscientiousness, agreeableness, emotional stability, extroversion, openness to new experiences[5][6][7] Interest, goals, and values: Applicant motives, goals, and person-organization fit[6] Experiential factors: Experience: Job-relevant knowledge derived from prior experience[6][7] Education: Job-relevant knowledge derived from prior education Training: Job-relevant knowledge derived from prior training Core job elements: Declarative knowledge: Applicants' learned knowledge[7] Procedural skills and abilities: Applicants' ability to complete the tasks required to do the job[10] Motivation: Applicants' willingness to exert the effort required to do the job[11] Interviewee performance Interviewer evaluations of applicant responses also tend to be colored by how an applicant behaves in the interview. These behaviors may not be directly related to the constructs the interview questions were designed to assess, but can be related to aspects of the job for which they are applying. Applicants without realizing it may engage in a number of behaviors that influence ratings of their performance. The applicant may have acquired these behaviors during training or from previous interview experience. These interviewee performance constructs can also be classified into three categories: social effectiveness skills, interpersonal presentation, and personal/contextual factors. Social effectiveness skills: Impression management: Applicants' attempt to make sure the interviewer forms a positive impression of them[12][13]
Verbal expression: Pitch, rate, pauses, tone[17][18] Nonverbal behavior: Gaze, smile, hand movement, body orientation[19] Personal/contextual factors: Interview training: Coaching, mock interviews with feedback[20] Interview experience: Number of prior interviews[21] Interview self-efficacy: Applicants' perceived ability to do well in the interview[22] Interview motivation: Applicants' motivation to succeed in an interview[23] Job-irrelevant interviewer biases The following are personal and demographic characteristics that can potentially influence interviewer evaluations of interviewee responses. These factors are typically not relevant to whether the individual can do the job (that is, not related to job performance), thus, their influence on interview ratings should be minimized or excluded. In fact, there are laws in many countries that prohibit consideration of many of these protected classes of people when making selection decisions. Using structured interviews with multiple interviewers coupled with training may help reduce the effect of the following characteristics on interview ratings.[24] The list of job-irrelevant interviewer biases is presented below. Attractiveness: Applicant physical attractiveness can influence the interviewer's evaluation of one's interview performance[19] Race: Whites tend to score higher than Blacks and Hispanics;[25] racial similarity between interviewer and applicant, on the other hand, has not been found to influence interview ratings[24][26] Gender: Females tend to receive slightly higher interview scores than their male counterparts;[5] gender similarity does not seem to influence interview ratings[24] Similarities in background and attitudes: Interviewers perceived interpersonal attraction was found to influence interview ratings[27] Culture: Applicants with an ethnic name and a foreign accent were viewed less favorably than applicants with just an ethnic name and no accent or an applicant with a traditional name with or without an accent[28] The extent to which ratings of interviewee performance reflect certain constructs varies widely depending on the level of structure of the interview, the kind of questions asked, interviewer or applicant biases, applicant professional dress or nonverbal behavior, and a host of other factors. For example, some research suggests that an applicant's cognitive ability, education, training, and work experiences may be better captured in unstructured interviews, whereas an applicant's job knowledge, organizational fit, interpersonal skills, and applied knowledge may be better captured in a structured interview.[6] Further, interviews are typically designed to assess a number of constructs. Given the social nature of the interview, applicant responses to interview questions and interviewer evaluations of those responses are sometimes influenced by constructs beyond those the questions were intended to assess, making it extremely difficult to tease out the specific constructs measured during the interview.[29] Reducing the number of constructs the interview is intended to assess may help mitigate this issue. Moreover, of practical importance is whether the interview is a better measure of some constructs in comparison to paper and pencil tests of the same constructs. Indeed, certain constructs (mental ability and skills, experience) may be better measured with paper and pencil tests than during the interview, whereas personality-related constructs seem to be better measured during the interview in comparison to paper and pencil tests of the same personality constructs.[1] In sum, the following is recommended: Interviews should be developed to assess the job-relevant constructs identified in the job analysis.[30][31] Assessment
An applicant's knowledge, skills, abilities, and other attributes (KSAOs) are the most commonly measured variables when interviewers assess Person-job fit.[33] In one survey, all interviewers reported that their organization measures KSAOs to determine Person-job fit.[33] The same study found that all interviewers used personality traits and 65% of the interviewers used personal values to measure Person-organization fit.[33] Despite fit being a concern among organizations, how to determine fit and the types of questions to use varies. When interview fit questions were examined, only 4% of the questions used in interviews were similar across the majority of organizations. 22% of questions were commonly used by recruiters in some organizations. In contrast, 74% of the questions had no commonality between organizations.[33] Although the idea of fit is similar in many organizations, the questions used and how that information is judged may be very different.[33] Person-job fit and Person-organization fit have different levels of importance at different stages of a multi-stage interview proves. Despite this, Person-job fit is considered of the highest importance throughout the entire process. Organizations focus more on job-related skills early on to screen out potentially unqualified candidates. Thus, more questions are devoted to Person-job fit during the initial interview stages.[32][33] Once applicants have passed the initial stages, more questions are used for Person-organization fit in the final interview stages. Although there is more focus on Person-organization fit in these later stages, Person-job fit is still considered to be of greater importance.[32] In a single-stage interview, both fits are assessed during a single interview.[32] Interviewers still put more weight on Person-job fit questions over the Person-organization questions in these situations as well. Again, Person-job fit questions are used to screen out and reduce the number of applicants.[32][33] Potential applicants also use job interviews to assess their fit within an organization. This can determine if an applicant will take a job offer when one is offered. When applicants assess their fit with an organization the experience they have during the job interview is the most influential.[34] Applicants felt that they had highest fit with an organization when they could add information not covered during the interview that they wanted to share. Applicants also liked when they could ask questions about the organization. They also when they could ask follow up questions to ensure they answered the interviewer's questions to the level the interviewer wanted.[34] Interviewer behaviors that encourage fit perceptions in applicants include complimenting applicants on their resume and thanking them for traveling to the interview.[34] Applicants like to be given contact information if follow-up information is needed, the interviewer making eye contact, and asking if the applicant was comfortable.[34] The Interviewer can discourage fit perceptions by how they act during an interview as well. the biggest negative behavior for applicants was the interviewer not knowing information about their organization. Without information about the organization, applicants cannot judge how well they fit. Another negative behavior is not knowing applicants’ background information during the interview. Interviewers can also hurt fit perception by being inattentive during the interview and not greeting the applicant.[34] There are some issues with fit perceptions in interviews. Applicants’ Person-organization fit scores can be altered by the amount of ingratiation done by the applicants.[35] Interviewers skew their Person-organization fit scores the more ingratiation applicants do during an interview. By applicants emphasizing similarities between them and the interviewer this leads to a higher Person-organization fit perceptions by the interviewer.[35] This higher perception of fit leads to a greater likelihood of the candidate being hired.[36][35][33] Process
People waiting to be interviewed at an employment agency One way to think about the interview process is as three separate, albeit related, phases: (1) the pre-interview phase which occurs before the interviewer and candidate meet, (2) the interview phase where the interview is conducted, and (3) the post-interview phase where the interviewer forms judgments of candidate qualifications and makes final decisions.[37] Although separate, these three phases are related. That is, impressions interviewers form early on may affect how they view the person in a later phase. Pre-interview phase: The pre-interview phase encompasses the information available to the interviewer beforehand (e.g., resumes, test scores, social networking site information) and the perceptions interviewers form about applicants from this information prior to the actual face-to-face interaction between the two individuals. In this phase, interviewers are likely to already have ideas about the characteristics that would make a person ideal or qualified for the position.[1] Interviewers also have information about the applicant usually in the form of a resume, test scores, or prior contacts with the applicant.[37] Interviewers then often integrate information that they have on an applicant with their ideas about the ideal employee to form a pre-interview evaluation of the candidate. In this way, interviewers typically have an impression even before the actual face-to-face interview interaction. Nowadays with recent technological advancements, interviewers have an even larger amount of information available on some candidates. For example, interviewers can obtain information from search engines (e.g. Google, Bing, Yahoo), blogs, and even social networks (e.g. Linkedin, Facebook, Twitter). While some of this information may be job-related, some of it may not be. In some cases, a review of Facebook may reveal undesirable behaviors such as drunkenness or drug use. Despite the relevance of the information, any information interviewers obtain about the applicant before the interview is likely to influence their impression of the candidate.[37][38] Furthermore, researchers have found that what interviewers think about the applicant before the interview (pre-interview phase) is related to how they evaluate the candidate after the interview, despite how the candidate may have performed during the interview.[39] Interview phase: The interview phase entails the actual conduct of the interview, the interaction between the interviewer and the applicant. Initial interviewer impressions about the applicant before the interview may influence the amount of time an interviewer spends in the interview with the applicant, the interviewer's behavior and questioning of the applicant,[40] and the interviewer's post-interview evaluations.[39] Pre-interview impressions also can affect what the interviewer notices about the interviewee, recalls from the interview, and how an interviewer interprets what the applicant says and does in the interview.[38] As interviews are typically conducted face-to-face, over the phone, or through video conferencing[41] (e.g. Skype), they are a social interaction between at least two individuals. Thus, the behavior of the interviewer during the interview likely "leaks" information to the interviewee. That is, you can sometimes tell during the interview whether the interviewer thinks positively or negatively about you.[37] Knowing this information can actually affect how the applicant behaves, resulting in a self-fulfilling prophecy effect.[40][42] For example, interviewees who feel the interviewer does not think they are qualified may be more anxious and feel they need to prove they are qualified. Such anxiety may hamper how well they actually perform and present themselves during the interview, fulfilling the original thoughts of the interviewer. Alternatively, interviewees who perceive an interviewer believes they are qualified for the job may feel more at ease and comfortable during the exchange, and consequently, actually perform better in the interview. Because of the dynamic nature of the interview, the interaction between the behaviors and thoughts of both parties is a continuous process whereby information is processed and informs subsequent behavior, thoughts, and evaluations. Post-interview phase: After the interview is conducted, the interviewer must form an evaluation of the interviewee's qualifications for the position. The interviewer most likely takes into consideration all the information, even from the pre-interview phase, and integrates it to form a post-interview evaluation of the applicant. In the final stage of the interview process, the interviewer uses his/her evaluation of the candidate (i.e., in the form of interview ratings or judgment) to make a final decision. Sometimes other selection tools (e.g., work samples, cognitive ability tests, personality tests) are used in combination with the interview to make final hiring decisions; however, interviews remain the most commonly used selection device in North America.[43] For interviewees: Although the description of the interview process above focuses on the perspective of the interviewer, job applicants also gather information on the job and/or organization and form impressions prior to the interview.[1] The interview is a two-way exchange and applicants are also making decisions about whether the company is a good fit for them. Essentially, the process model illustrates that the interview is not an isolated interaction, but rather a complex process that begins with two parties forming judgments and gathering information, and ends with a final interviewer decision. Types
Unstructured The unstructured interview, or one that does not include a good number of standardization elements, is the most common form of interview today.[46] Unstructured interviews are typically seen as free-flowing; the interviewer can swap out or change questions as he/she feels is best, and different interviewers may not rate or score applicant responses in the same way. There are also no directions put in place regarding how the interviewer and the interviewee should interact before, during, or after the interview. Unstructured interviews essentially allow the interviewer to conduct the interview however he or she thinks is best. Given unstructured interviews can change based on who the interviewer might be, it is not surprising that unstructured interviews are typically preferred by interviewers.[47] Interviewers tend to develop confidence in their ability to accurately rate interviewees,[48] detect whether applicants are faking their answers,[49] and trust their judgment about whether the person is a good candidate for the job.[50] Unstructured interviews allow interviewers to do so more freely. Research suggests, however, that unstructured interviews are actually highly unreliable, or inconsistent between interviews. That means that two interviewers who conduct an interview with the same person may not agree and see the candidate the same way even if they were in the same interview with that applicant. Often interviewers who conduct unstructured interviews fail to identify the high-quality candidates for the job.[51] See the section on interview structure issues for a more in-depth discussion. Yüklə 20,42 Kb. Dostları ilə paylaş:
|