Despite their importance in choosing the right candidates, hiring managers are rarely judged on the quality of their selection decisions. They often use unstructured interviews, which have been shown to be ineffective. This article argues for adopting structured selection procedures to improve the quality of hires.
Unstructured interviewing: a persistent phenomenon
It is striking that hiring managers are not judged on the quality of their selection decisions, despite the great importance of these decisions to an organization’s success. The selection of new employees is still seen by many hiring managers as a tedious task, something that must be done in addition to their regular responsibilities. This is often reflected in a lack of preparation and a tendency to postpone the task under the guise of being too busy. As a result, the unstructured selection interview remains the norm, despite evidence that it is not a reliable or valid method for selecting the best candidates.
“Laszlo Bock described the selection procedures at Google as a random mess “
An interview with Laszlo Bock, former Senior Vice President of People Operations at Google, in the New York Times in 2013 revealed how chaotic and inconsistent selection interviews were at Google. Bock described selection procedures as a “random mess,” in which interviews were often unstructured, and their outcomes had no predictive value for employee performance. Even though Google was known for its innovative approach to HR, they were not immune to the pitfalls of unstructured interviews.
Careful selection contributes 1-for-1 to improved productivity
Another important aspect is the difference in productivity between average and top performers. Research by McKinsey, as described in their report “The War for Talent,” shows that top performers can be up to 400% more productive than average employees. This huge difference in productivity highlights the importance of high-quality selection procedures. An organization that fails to attract and retain top performers risks falling behind competitors who do.
Validity of structured versus unstructured interviews
It is also crucial to discuss the validity of selection procedures, as they play a fundamental role in the success of hiring the right candidates. Validity refers to the extent to which a selection procedure actually measures what it intends to measure and thus predicts how well a candidate will perform in the job.
Numerous studies have shown that structured interviews have much higher predictive validity than unstructured interviews. Structured interviews follow a set pattern where all candidates are asked the same questions and responses are assessed in a consistent manner. This makes for a more objective and reliable selection process.
Unlike structured interviews, unstructured interviews often rely on the interviewer’s personal impressions and intuition. This leads not only to inconsistencies but also to a higher likelihood of bias, reducing the validity (predictive value) of the selection process. This is a major reason why hiring managers should move to structured interviews.
“Better validity of selection procedures starts with avoiding unstructured interviews.”
Scientific research on validity of selection procedures.
The validity of different selection methods has been studied extensively. A meta-analysis by Schmidt and Hunter (1998), for example, examined the validity of different selection procedures. Structured interviews were found to have a validity of about 0.63, while unstructured interviews had a validity of only about 0.38. This means that structured interviews are significantly better at predicting future job performance than unstructured interviews.
Interested in improving talent acquisition structurally? Get more insights.
Case studies and best practices
Many successful companies have moved to structured interviews and other valid selection methods such as psychometric tests and assessments. Google, for example, revised its selection procedures after the Laszlo Bock revelations and invested in training hiring managers in structured interview techniques. This change resulted in improved quality of assumptions and a more consistent and fair selection process.
“The quality of your employees depends on the quality of the training that hiring managers receive.”
The importance of training and development
To ensure the validity of selection procedures, it is essential that hiring managers be trained in the use of structured interviews and other evidence-based selection methods. This can take the form of workshops, online courses, and ongoing professional development. It is important that these trainings are not one-offs, but that hiring managers receive regular refresher training to stay abreast of the latest insights and techniques.
Conclusion
The lack of validity in unstructured interviews highlights the need for hiring managers to adopt structured, valid selection procedures. By doing so, organizations can not only make better assumptions but also ensure a fairer and more consistent selection process. The impact of top performers on organizational productivity and success makes it all the more important that hiring managers be trained and evaluated on their ability to select the right candidates.
In the words of Laszlo Bock, “Hiring is the most important people function you have, and most of us aren’t as good at it as we think.” It is time for organizations to face this reality and adjust their selection processes accordingly. 2013 is now more than 10 years behind us, but the unstructured interview is still the norm at many companies. This, of course, can be much better.
