TABLE OF CONTENTS An interview has been the traditional method of selection for decades and yet research studies have shown, as indicated at the start of the chapter, that they are a poor predictor of future performance (Anderson and Shackleton, 1994). This is due to a number of factors, all centering around the faults of the interviewer. Graves and Karen (1992), for example, found that 29 interviewers from the same company used 13 different criteria weightings to make their decisions, which often lead to different conclusions.
Difficulties with arriving at a consistent and objective decision on a candidate is hampered by a long list of irrational but understandable tendencies by interviewers who have the following.
Different views on the person they are looking for. The person specification may be too vague or ambiguous so interviewers have different ideas on what would be the success factors in the position. One interviewer may place great importance on the candidate's previous experience, another may be influenced by a candidate's perceived inflexible ideas. In one research programme, a group of interviewers who were aware of the person specification and were in possession of the application forms, were shown a group of video-taped interviews and yet there was still a variation in the recommended candidate for the position. This was despite having identical information.
Decide intuitively. Despite repeated calls for interviewers to base their decisions on the objective evidence which they have collected, there remains a constant temptation to...
