Escolar Documentos
Profissional Documentos
Cultura Documentos
Introduction
Interviewing is still the most commonly used method of selection in
employment, in spite of the fact that many studies have shown it to be a very
flawed technique. Given the preference of managers and human resource
practitioners for interviewing, structured interviewing techniques have been
suggested as a means of improving validity. Much of the research into these
interviewing techniques is experimental in nature, and the aim of the present
study was to identify and explore the use of two particular structured
interviewing techniques by various organisations in the UK. This is seen as the
first stage of a larger study. The next stage will provide more detailed analysis
of how the techniques are introduced and applied, together with benefits and
problems in practice. This study relates specifically to selection interviewing
although it may also have relevance to other interviewing situations such as
discipline, grievance, appraisal and exit interviewing. It is also likely to be
relevant to other situations where interviewing techniques are important as a
means of inquiry, such as research, criminal investigation and social work.
Background
Many studies have demonstrated the weaknesses of interviewing in staff
selection (Hunter and Hunter, 1984; Reilly and Chao, 1982). The common
deficiencies in interviewer decision making have been summarised by
Anderson (1992) and by Taylor and O’Driscoll, (1995). These include, for
example: stereotyping of candidates; primacy effects; similarity effects; and
negative information weighting bias.
Personnel Review,
Vol. 28 No. 1/2, 1999, pp. 134-151,
Owing to its many limitations the traditional, unstructured interview has
© MCB University Press, 0048-3486 been found to have poor predictive accuracy, and various alternative selection
methods have better predictive validity than interviews, such as psychometric A question of
tests and assessment centres (Anderson and Shackleton,1993). structure
Popularity of interviewing
Despite the evidence over many years discrediting the interview as an effective
selection technique, studies also show that it is still the most popular selection
technique in use in Britain, in both the public and private sectors: (Robertson 135
and Makin, 1986; Shackleton and Newell, 1991; Williams, 1992).
Several reasons have been suggested to explain this apparent paradox
(Arvey and Campion, 1982; Kumra and Beech, 1994):
• It seems that some human resource managers are unaware of the
research evidence discrediting the interview (Kumra and Beech, 1994).
• While some human resource managers are aware of the interview’s
shortcomings, they nevertheless believe it to be effective in their own
experience (Kumra and Beech, 1994). Interviewers maintain great faith
and confidence in their own judgements and create an “illusion of
validity” (Einhorn and Hogarth, 1978).
• The interview is “really” valid to the extent that it can be a useful
technique for assessing certain interpersonal skills which are manifested
in the interview, such as sociability and verbal fluency.
• Another perspective suggests that psychologists overemphasise the
importance of “assessment” in the selection procedure (Herriot, 1987,
1989). Even if the interview has poor predictive validity, it serves other
purposes well, such as “selling” the job, negotiating the contract,
answering candidates’ questions, and providing a public relations
function for the organisation (Herriot, 1987; Kumra and Beech, 1994).
Related to this is the impact that the selection process can have on candidates,
on the candidate’s image of the organisation and thus also on the likely
acceptance of a job offer. Interviewers can influence applicants’ job choices by
increasing the perceived attractiveness of the job, not just by indicating
obvious factors such as salary, but also through more indirect “signalling”
(Rynes, 1989). Interviewers are viewed as “typical” of the company
employees, and candidates pick up cues from them about friendliness,
competence and formality. Practitioners therefore need to be aware of the dual
purposes of applicant attraction and selection in interviewing (Eder, 1989;
Townley, 1991):
• Interviewing is also a popular choice for practical reasons. The use of
“more sophisticated” selection methods such as tests tends to be limited
to those jobs with a large number of incumbents, where the costs of
developing and evaluating the technique can be justified.
• Williams’ study of local authorities also identified the main reason why
interviews were used simply as “tradition” (Williams, 1992).
Personnel Interviewing therefore seems to enjoy continued popularity because it is a
Review flexible, personal, two way process which is often used for social processes
28,1/2 which go beyond mere selection information gathering, and in addition it is
“expected”. There is clearly an attachment to interviewing as a selection
method and the evidence is that this will continue.
Previous surveys
A limitation of the existing research into structured interviewing techniques
is the reliance on an experimental approach. Studies typically apply the
techniques on a “one-off” basis, some using existing employees or teaching
assistants as “candidates” and non-managerial employees or teaching
assistants as “interviewers”, who conduct the interviews under instruction
from the experimenters (Janz, 1982). While these studies suggest that
structured interviewing offers potential benefits to recruiters, little is known
about the actual use of structured interviewing in practice within
organisations.
Previous surveys of organisations’ recruitment and selection practices
(Robertson and Makin, 1986; Shackleton and Newell, 1991; Williams, 1992) have
tended to take a broad view of different selection methods, and have not A question of
considered specific interviewing techniques (other than one-to-one and panel structure
arrangements). These surveys also focused on management selection. A more
recent survey which did investigate use of interviews in the private sector
obtained only very limited data on the use of structured interviewing
techniques (Kumra and Beech, 1994).
139
The survey
The survey reported here was designed to address this gap. The author wanted
to gain information about the use of structured interviewing practices in both
the private and public sectors and across all levels, not just management
grades. How long have these been used, for which positions, and at what stage
in the selection process?
As well as these questions, there were several expectations about the use of
structured interviews:
• Behavioural interviewing and situational interviewing have been
highlighted, and their different approaches outlined. These are two
different techniques, each requiring different strategies regarding
preparation and development as well as conduct and evaluation. It was
expected that organisations might use one or the other of these, but not
both.
• Behavioural interviewing is a more flexible and acceptable technique
than situational interviewing. Because of this it was expected that
behavioural interviewing would be more prevalent than situational
interviewing.
• Since structured interviewing involves development time and costs, and
since larger organisations tend to have more resources than smaller ones,
it was expected that larger organisations would use structured
interviewing techniques more than smaller organisations.
• Management recruitment tends to be more expensive than other grades
of staff, and so any investment in improving the selection decision for
these posts would provide potentially greater returns and savings.
Hence it was expected that structured interviewing would be used more
for management selection than for other posts.
The objectives of the survey were to identify organisations using structured
interviewing techniques, and then to explore the interviewing practice in these
organisations. The first issue was how to identify organisations using
structured interviewing. Since relatively few organisations were using
structured interviewing techniques any random sample would be unlikely to
yield much positive information. (For example, in a recent survey of 400
organisations taken from the Times 1000, only 12 organisations indicated that
they were using behavioural interviews (Kumra and Beech, 1994)). A particular
Personnel approach was selected, therefore, in order to increase the likelihood of targeting
Review organisations which were using structured interviewing techniques.
28,1/2 A questionnaire was sent to a number of UK organisations in Summer 1995.
These organisations were known to have used a particular training video on
behavioural interviewing for selection. There is only one such video on the
market in the UK (and none specifically on situational interviewing as far as is
140 known). Some organisations may well be using structured interviewing without
recourse to the video mentioned and so these organisations cannot be
represented. However, by focusing the survey in this way it was felt that a
significant number of relevant organisations could be targeted reliably. The
questionnaire was sent to the named individuals in the organisation which had
used this video over the previous eight years, with a request that it be passed to
the appropriate recruitment specialist for completion. Some organisations had
hired the video before purchasing it and so were included twice on the original
database. Additionally, in some cases the video had been hired by different
divisions of the same organisation. By discounting all of these “duplicates”,
questionnaires were sent to 889 organisations. Of these, 70 per cent were private
sector organisations, 25 per cent public sector and 5 per cent from the voluntary
sector.
Responses
Of the questionnaires returned, 282 were usable, with a slightly lower response
rate from the private sector (65 per cent). For a “one-shot” postal survey this
overall response rate of 31 per cent is not unexpected. Possible reasons for non-
return of questionnaires are that some of the named contact individuals may
have left the organisation since the original time of obtaining the video, or the
organisation itself may have moved, merged or closed. The time of year may
also have been a contributing factor, with staff on holiday.
Although this survey did not use a representative sampling approach, the
number of survey responses makes it significant (282), as well as the number of
employees represented (over 200,000). The number of responses is considerably
more than in other recent surveys (see Table I).
The 282 respondents in the present survey represent almost all economic
sectors and range in organisation size from below ten to over 5,000 employees.
(See Figure 1 and Table II.)
141
N = 282
0-100 37 13
101-500 97 35
501-1,000 54 19 Table II.
1,001-5,000 68 24 Survey respondents
over 5,000 26 9 grouped by number
Note: N = 282 of employees
Personnel Results
Review Structure in interviews
28,1/2 The survey asked about the use of structure in interviewing for different
categories of staff. Results are shown in Table III. This illustrates that more
structured interviews are more likely to be used for management posts, thus
confirming expectations.
142 The survey then asked about specific structured techniques used. A
description of behavioural interviewing was provided together with examples of
this type of question. Similarly, situational questions were outlined, with
examples. In each case organisations were asked to indicate whether they used
these types of question in interviews and if so, whether these were used
systematically or not. Responses indicated that behavioural interviewing was
more popular and was also used more systematically than situational
interviewing, again confirming expectations (although it is likely that this may
be due, at least in part, to the nature of the survey sample). (See Figures 2 and 3.)
An unexpected finding was the large proportion of respondents (36 per cent)
who indicated that they used both behavioural and situational interviewing
systematically. (See Table IV.)
Table III. More than half the organisations which use behavioural interviewing
Interview structure systematically also use situational interviewing systematically. It is possible
used for manual,
non-manual and
managerial staff.
Percentage of
unstructured, Unstructured Semi-structured Structured N
semi-structured and
structured interviews Manual 12 38 50 184
used for each category Non-manual 3 37 60 253
of staff Managerial 1 27 72 264
70
62
60
50
Percent
40
34
30
20
10
0
used systematically not used
used not systematically don’t know
Figure 2. use of behavioural interviewing questions
Use of behavioural
interviewing all respondents
N = 281
70 A question of
60 structure
50
43
39
Percent
40
30
143
20 17
10
0
used systematically not used
used not systematically don’t know
use of situational interview questions
Figure 3.
Use of situational
all respondents interviewing
N = 281
Number of (Percentage of
Technique(s) used respondents total respondents)
that the two techniques may be used by different interviewers, at different times
or for different categories of staff. Alternatively interviewers may be combining
the techniques during interviews. This is explored further in the discussion
section.
These results also show that a substantial proportion of organisations seem
to use behavioural interviewing or situational interviewing in an unsystematic
way. This may mean that interviewers are just trying out a few novel questions,
or it may reflect some adulteration of the approach. This is likely to weaken the
usefulness and might lead to false confidence on the part of selectors. On the
other hand, some use of these structured questions is likely to be better than
none at all. The way that these interviews are used may also relate to concerns
about the impact of too much structure in practice: concerns about being too
impersonal and rigid, and a desire for a more comfortable approach.
The next section provides more detailed information on the use of structured
interviewing, and includes only those responses which indicated use of
behavioural interviewing systematically. (Very few organisations use only
situational interviewing.)
Personnel Systematic use of structured interviewing
Review Organisation size. Table V shows the proportion of organisations using
28,1/2 behavioural interviewing in each of the establishment size categories.
This seems to indicate that a larger proportion of small establishments than
large or medium-sized establishments use behavioural interviewing
systematically.
144 Of the organisations in the small category (with 0-100 employees), 65 per cent
of these are consulting or training firms: these seem to be “practising what they
preach”. Of the remaining organisations in this category, however, 77 per cent of
these too are using behavioural interviewing systematically, so the extent of
systematic use is not restricted just to training and consulting professionals.
Organisational size or structure may be a factor in determining the use of
structured interviewing throughout the organisation. In larger organisations
there may be obstacles to human resources developing the use of techniques,
especially in quasi-independent units, which may restrict the application to
central recruitment/promotion decisions (e.g. for graduates and managers).
Management 90
Administrative 84
Supervisory 71
Technical 64
Graduates 63 Table VI.
Manual 42 Job category for which
School-leavers 40 behavioural interviewing
Other 15 used: percentage
Notes: N = 73 responses in rank order
Personnel not used systematically, falling to around 50 per cent. The figures for
Review situational interviewing show very similar relationships to competencies. This
28,1/2 is a little surprising: a stronger link between behavioural interviewing and
competencies was expected than between situational interviewing and
competencies. Situational interviewing can be linked readily to specific
situations, whereas behavioural interviewing links directly to the underlying
146 competencies (which may be applied across a variety of situations).
Discussion
The evidence from this survey suggests that the use of structured techniques is
rapidly increasing, with one quarter of organisations only introducing the use
of structured techniques in the previous two years. Many organisations in this
sample seem to be focusing their efforts on improving interviews as well as
introducing other selection methods such as psychometric testing and
assessment centres, suggesting an overall more methodical and comprehensive
approach to selection. As noted earlier, these alternative methods can be
problematic: many organisations may be finding that structured interviewing
helps to balance these problems. The organisations which are using the
structured interviews are not confined to the very large ones. Thus structured
interviewing seems to be an accessible way for many organisations to improve
their selection decisions for a variety of positions.
Conclusions
Structured interviewing is increasing in popularity. This can be attributed to
three main reasons:
(1) Social aspects of interviewing: it is flexible, it provides the opportunity to
meet the “whole” person face to face, it involves line managers and
allows some bargaining and influencing to take place.
(2) Limitations of other methods: time and costs and specialist training
required; the potentially adverse effects on candidates; the monopoly of
techniques by personnel specialists leading to marginalisation of line
management.
(3) The benefits of structure in interviewing: more focus on relevant criteria
and candidates’ competencies; hence an increased likelihood of better
selection decisions; more consistency and fairness in treatment of
candidates.
Structured interviewing therefore commends itself to personnel practitioners
and line managers alike. However, it does require that interviewers:
• understand the different types of structured questioning technique;
• know how to use them;
• base decisions on defined, relevant criteria; and
• use a systematic approach to evaluation of responses.
All this requires time and effort, more than might be required for a more
“casual” interview.
These issues of practice will form the basis of future research and some
specific research questions are now considered.
Impact on candidates
What are applicants’ responses to structured interviewing techniques? Are they
given enough opportunity to sell themselves to the organisation? Do the
techniques affect candidates’ perceptions of the organisation? Is the impact on
candidates different for behavioural interviewing and situational interviewing?
Impact on interviewers
What do interviewers themselves think about the techniques? Do they help
them to make selection decisions? Do they make interviewers feel as though
they are merely using a script? How much involvement and flexibility do line
managers have in conducting the interview? How much training do they
receive?
References
Anderson, N.R. (1992), “Eight decades of employment interview research: a retrospective meta-
review and prospective commentary”, European Work and Organisational Psychologist, Vol. 2
No. 1.
Anderson, N. and Shackleton, V. (1993), Successful Selection Interviewing, Blackwell, Oxford.
Personnel Arvey, R.D. and Campion, J.E. (1982), “The employment interview: a summary and review of
recent research”, Personnel Psychology, Vol. 35, pp. 281-322.
Review Arvey, R.D., Miller, H.E., Gould, R. and Burch, P. (1987), “Interview validity for selecting sales
28,1/2 clerks”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 40, pp. 1-12.
Baker, B.R. and Cooper, J.N. (1995), “Fair play or foul? A survey of occupational test practices in
the UK”, Personnel Review, Vol. 24 No. 3.
Barclay, J. (1993), “Making the ‘right’ choice: some considerations of the ethics of selection at the
150 workplace” Recruitment, Selection & Retention, Vol. 2 No. 3, 1993.
Campion, M.A., Campion, J.E. and Hudson, J.P. (1994), “Structured interviewing: a note on
incremental validity and alternative question types”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 79
No. 6.
Eder, R.W. (1989), “Contextual effects on interview decisions”, in Eder, R.W. and Ferris, G.R. (Eds),
The Employment Interview: Theory, Research and Practice, Sage, London.
Eder, R.W. and Ferris, G.R. (Eds) (1989), The Employment Interview: Theory, Research and
Practice, Sage, London.
Einhorn, H.J. and Hogarth, R.M. (1978), “Confidence in judgement: resistance of the illusion of
validity”, Psychological Review, Vol. 85, pp. 395-416.
Fletcher, C. (1996), “Mix and match fails to work on competencies”, People Management, Vol. 2
No. 18, September.
Goodale, J.G. (1989), “Effective employment interviewing”, in Eder, R.W. and Ferris, G.R. (Eds),
The Employment Interview: Theory, Research and Practice, Sage, London.
Green, P.C. and Horgan, D.D. (1982), Behavioral Interviewing, Memphis, TN.
Green, P.C., Alter, P. and Carr, A.F. (1993), “Development of standard anchors for scoring generic
past behaviour questions in structured interviews”, International Journal of Selection and
Assessment, Vol. 1 No. 4, October.
Herriot, P. (1987), “The selection interview”, in Warr, P. (Ed.), Psychology at Work, Penguin,
Harmondsworth.
Herriot, P. (1989), “Selection as a social process”, in Smith, M. and Robertson, I.T. (Eds), Advances
in Selection and Assessment, Wiley, Chichester.
Huffcutt, A.I. and Arthur, W. (1994), “Hunter and Hunter (1984) revisited: interview validity for
entry level jobs”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 79 No. 2.
Hunter, J.E. and Hunter, R.F. (1984), “Validity and utility of alternative predictors of job
performance”, Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 96, pp. 72-98.
Janz, T. (1982), “Initial comparisons of patterned behaviour description interviews versus
unstructured interviews”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 67 No. 5.
Janz, T. (1989), “The patterned behaviour description interview: the best prophet of the future is
the past”, in Eder, R.W. and Ferris, G.R. (Eds), The Employment Interview: Theory, Research
and Practice, Sage, London.
Keenan, A. (1978), “Selection interview outcomes in relation to interviewer training and
experience”, Journal of Social Psychology, No. 106.
Kumra, S. and Beech, N. (1994), “The selection interview: an investigation into contemporary
usage”, Paper presented at the British Academy of Management Conference, September.
Latham, G.P. (1989), “The reliability, validity and practicality of the situational interview”, in Eder,
R.W. and Ferris, G.R. (Eds), The Employment Interview: Theory, Research and Practice, Sage,
London.
Latham, G.P. and Saari, L.M. (1984), “Do people do what they say? Further studies on the
situational interview”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 69, pp. 569-73.
Latham, G.P., Saari, L.M., Pursell, E.D. and Campion, M.A. (1980), “The situational interview”,
Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 65 No. 4.
McDaniel, M.A., Schmidt, F.L. and Hunter, J.E. (1988), “A meta-analysis of the validity of methods A question of
for rating and training and experience in personnel selection”, Personnel Psychology, Vol. 41,
pp. 283-314. structure
McDaniel, M.A., Whetzel, D.L., Schmidt, F.L. and Maurer, S.D. (1994), “The validity of
employment interviews: a comprehensive review and meta-analysis”, Journal of Applied
Psychology, Vol. 79 No. 4.
Orpen, C. (1985), “Patterned behaviour description interviews versus unstructured interviews: a
comparative validity study”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 70 No. 4. 151
Pulakos, E.D. and Schmitt, N. (1995), “Experience based and situational interview questions:
studies of validity”, Personnel Psychology, Vol. 48, pp. 289-308.
Reilly, R.R. and Chao, G.T. (1982), “Validity and fairness of some alternative employee selection
procedures”, Personnel Psychology, Vol. 35, pp. 1-62.
Robertson, I.T. and Makin, P.J. (1986), “Management selection in Britain: a survey and critique”,
Journal of Occupational Psychology, Vol. 59 No. 1.
Robertson, I.T., Gratton, L. and Rout, U. (1990), “The validity of situational interviews for
administrative jobs”, Journal of Organisational Behaviour, Vol. 11 No. 1.
Rynes, S.L. (1989), “The employment interview as a recruitment device”, in Eder, R.W. and Ferris,
G.R. (Eds), The Employment Interview: Theory, Research and Practice, Sage, London.
Shackleton, V.J. and Newell, S. (1991), “Management selection: a comparative survey of methods
used in top British and French Companies”, Journal of Occupational Psychology, Vol. 64,
pp. 13-36.
Silvester, J. and Brown, A. (1993), “Graduate recruitment testing: the impact”, Selection &
Development Review, Vol. 9 No. 1.
Smith, M. and George, D. (1994), “Selection methods”, in Cooper, C.L. and Robertson, I.T. (Eds),
Key Reviews in Managerial Psychology, Wiley, Chichester.
Stohr-Gillmore, M.K., Stohr-Gillmore, M.W. and Kistler, N. (1990), “Improving selection outcomes
with the use of situational interviews: empirical evidence from a study of correctional officers
for new generation jails”, Review of Public Personnel Administration, Vol. 10 No. 2, Spring.
Taylor, M.S. and Bergmann, T.J. (1987), “Organisational recruitment activities and applicants’
reactions at different stages of the recruitment process”, Personnel Psychology, Vol. 40.
Taylor, P.J. and O’Driscoll, M.P. (1995), Structured Employment Interviewing, Gower, Aldershot.
Townley, B. (1991), “Selection and appraisal: reconstituting ‘social relations’?”, in Storey, J. (Ed.),
New Perspectives on Human Resource Management, Routledge, London.
Weekley, J.A. and Gier, J.A. (1987), “Reliability and validity of the situational interview for a sales
position”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 72 No. 3.
Wiesner, W.H. and Cronshaw, S.F. (1988), “A meta-analytic investigation of the impact of interview
format and degree of structure on the validity of the employment interview”, Journal of
Occupational Psychology, Vol. 61, pp. 275-90.
Williams, R.S. (1992), “Management selection in local government: a survey of practice in England
and Wales”, Human Resource Management Journal, Vol. 3 No. 2.
Wright, P.M., Lichtenfels, P.A. and Pursell, E.D. (1989), “The structured interview: additional
studies and a meta-analysis”, Journal of Occupational Psychology, Vol. 62, pp. 191-9.