Structured Behavioural Interview

Using the Interview as a part of an Integrated Selection Process

Most interviewers think they have good "instincts."

While interviewing is the most commonly used selection procedure, in most cases it is considered to be the least valid. Why? Because in most interviews, an untrained interviewer reaches his/her decision about the applicant during the first 3 to 5 minutes of the interview and spends the remainder of the time rationalising his/her decision.

But they don't!

The good news for the applicant - first impressions make the difference.

The downside for the company - first impressions mean little in terms of predicting job success.

What do you really know about the candidate and their qualifications after only five short minutes? Very little. What you may know is whether you liked their choice of clothing, if they have a "firm handshake," or whether or not they appeared nervous. Are these the qualities that determine success in the job?

Unless they are well trained and use a behaviourally-based, structured process.

^ Top

Generally, in-depth interviews are the last hurdle in the selection process. It is here that the interviewer (or the interview team) makes the final hiring decision. How can you give the interviewer the right tools to improve their chances of making the correct decision (and reduce the cost of making a mistake)?

Most research indicates that the effectiveness of the interview will be greatly improved if you use a well-developed, structured, behavioural interview process which includes training for the interviewer(s).

A good interview process will:

• Focus the interview on the relevant job competencies

• Encourage the applicant to describe their typical behaviour rather than providing rehearsed answers

• Provide consistency (all applicants are asked the same questions)

• Help you to avoid asking illegal or inappropriate questions

• Allow you to objectively compare candidates

• Improve your hiring decisions

At PS² we help our clients by developing well-constructed interviews and then training their interviewers in good practices. As a result, interviewers are able to provide a more objective, job-related evaluation of the candidate, improving the odds of a making a good recruitment decision.

For more information contact Nik Plevan on (07773) 362-754 or by e-mail at nik@peoplesuccess.co.uk.
 

^ Top

Here are some examples of interview processes we have developed for our clients.

Case Study: Team Interviews for a large defence contractor

A large electronics and defence industry manufacturer wanted to improve the quality of their overall selection process to reduce turnover and improve productivity. Because of the company's team-based operations environment, one of the goals of the revamped process was to include production-line work team members as evaluators in the selection process.

After incorporating a Realistic Job Preview and pre-employment testing, a structured interview was developed. The content focused on critical competency dimensions. We developed the interview structure, follow-up questions, prototypic positive and negative responses, an evaluation form and a process for good consensus decision making among interview team members.

Two to three person interview teams (including a supervisor and peers) conducted interviews and made summary ratings as a group. Prior to implementation, all potential interviewers completed a one-day training course which included general interview training (do's and don'ts) and practice interviews using the new interview structure and process.

The company has been using the revised selection process for several years. Outcomes include reduced staff turnover among new recruits and increased commitment on the part of the team members to help the new employees succeed in the job.
 

^ Top

Case Study: A Major US Airline

A major US airline was revamping its recruitment and selection processes to better utilise incumbent flight attendants as part of the selection team.

Because of the nature of the work, flight attendants operate in an independent (non-supervised), team-based environment. It was important to select flight attendants that could work well with other flight attendants; therefore it was believed that trained peer interviewers would be the best potential evaluators of incoming applicants.

After conducting a job analysis, two types of interviews were developed. A group interview (one to two interviewers with a small group of applicants) was designed to measure basic communication and interaction skills while an in-depth, one-on-one interview focused on job fit characteristics.

These interviews were placed within a total selection process, which included a realistic job preview video and pre-employment personality testing. On-going interviewer training is conducted to train new members of the recruitment and selection team and to modify and refine the interviews as needed.

Feedback from the flight attendant training department (the first rotation for a new recruit) indicates a better quality of candidate. Those on the recruiting and selection team indicate an increased confidence in selecting the best candidate.
 

^ Top

Case Study: A Regional Children's Hospital

A large children's hospital in the South Eastern United States wanted to improve the selection of entry-level staff while not adding to the already burdened and understaffed HR department. While HR took responsibility for the testing portion of the process (using SELECT for Health Care), the interview and hiring decision were decentralised to the departments.

A number of structured interviews were developed (all customised to specific jobs and departments) to help identify relevant technical skills and experiences. First-level supervisors and team leaders were trained to conduct good behavioural interviews using the new structured approach and to integrate all information, including the results of testing and the structured interview, to make an informed, comprehensive hiring decision.

Two benefits were realised through this strategy. First, the HR department was able to use testing for efficient, first-level screening for all departments. Second, by developing a structured interview and providing training for staff, the interview workload was distributed to the departments for which the new candidates were hired. In turn, these departments felt greater ownership of the selection process and more commitment to their new staff members.

^ Top