DRG Memo

By Stephen Moulton

Reprinted by Permission.

Remember the old westerns, when the hero was captured and forced to run a gauntlet? There would be two lines of people facing each other and the hero had to make it from one end of the gauntlet to the other, to prove himself. As our hero began the run, people in the gauntlet would take their shots at him to see how he stood up.

It seems that the gauntlet is not only still alive, but is a frequently used strategy for interviewing candidates in corporate America. This strategy follows the format of the candidate going from interviewer to interviewer getting pelted with almost the same questions time after time, with six to twenty or even more interviews.

Most companies want multiple interviewers assessing candidates. Is this strategy a good use of interviewer time? What's the alternative?

First let us start with a new paradigm. In a conversation I had with a leading researcher on interviewing, Michael Campion of Purdue University, he said that research showed that any more than four interviewers adds no value to the selection decision. We can now save time and resources by cutting back on the number of people necessary for interviewing.

Second, using a team interview of three interviewers can be one of the most effective strategies, in not only the use of time, but also in other benefits. For instance using a panel:

· Can increase validity and reliability

· Everyone sees and hears the same thing at the same time

· Inexperienced interviewers can be coached and kept legal

· Interviewer biases can be mitigated

· Synergy can lead to better probing

· Supporting witnesses can verify the content and procedures of the interview

· Note taking can be more detailed and less distracting

· A panel can be made to reflect diversity

· Candidate rating can be done immediately following the interview

An additional key to improving validity and reliability is the use of structured interviews. Structured interviews help keep the questioning of candidates consistent and the outcomes equally measurable.

So what is the recommended approach for using a team interview? Start by creating a position profile and structured interview based on criteria necessary for success.

Then use panels of three trained interviewers, alternating questions that are asked. For instance, if the profile identifies six skills or competencies essential for success, the structured interview should have two interview questions for each competency.

Prior to the interview the team should be briefed on each member's responsibilities. Include a copy of the structured interview, the candidate rating sheet, and make assignments such as who takes what kinds of notes, who asks what questions, and when.

Questions should be asked in the same sequence for each candidate. So with twelve questions (6 competencies x 2 questions) have the panel members alternate asking the questions. For instance have the first member ask the first question from the first competency, the second member ask the first question from the second competency, the third member asks the first question from the third competency, then repeating the sequence for the rest of the questions, returning to the first competency and asking the second question and so on.

Using this approach provides variety in questions and consistency in structure.

Moral: Team interviews are beneficial for the hiring organization and less painful for the candidate.

Stephen Moulton is president of Action Insight Inc., with software and training that focus on using competency and behavioral-based approaches for selecting, coaching, and developing employees. He can be reached at 303-439-2001 or steve@actioninsight.com.