Structured recruitment interview

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The first objective of all job interviews is to identify suitable applicants for a vacant position. The use of structured recruitment interviews is a suitable instrument for this purpose in order to use the special advantages of the personal interview and at the same time to obtain a methodologically reliable assessment.

However, this is by no means a homogeneous or clearly defined category of procedures. Depending on the area of ​​application, interviewer or objective, various content or formal aspects are structured differently (e.g. same questions for all applicants, order of questions, interview situation, assessment rules, judgment process ...).

Historical development

Psychological research has been devoted to the question of whether the interview is a suitable aptitude diagnostic tool since 1915. Already at the beginning of the last century, the psychologist Walter Dill Scott criticized the lack of agreement between the judgment of several interviewers about the same candidates. In a first comprehensive meta-analysis of 106 studies, Ralph Wagner calculated a mean validity for the interview procedure of .27. Eugene C. Mayfield also attested that the interview procedure in 1964 was still insufficient ( objectivity , validity, usefulness, fairness ).

These results and the findings in other research areas (process of judgment formation and decision-making; social impression formation; controversy on statistical vs. clinical judgment formation) indicated the need to methodically improve the interview process. Several meta-analyzes showed that a stronger structure of the interview leads to more reliable results (judgments) and also reduces the discrimination of certain groups (women, disabled, blacks) - even if not every structuring measure is approved by interviewers and applicants.

Principles and measures for methodological improvement

From the results of interview research in the 1970s and 1980s, Heinz Schuler derived the following principles and measures in 1989, which "suggest a substantial improvement in the interview as a selection method". This is to ensure that the interview results are of sufficient quality.

  1. Requirements-related design, d. H. In advance it is clearly regulated which information is relevant for the job suitability and only this is requested.
  2. Thematic restriction of the interview to those characteristics that cannot be collected more reliably in any other way (e.g. do not ask for grades)
  3. Implementation in a structured or (partially) standardized form (given subject areas, questionnaires or fully structured interview)
  4. Use of tested and anchored scales
  5. Empirical testing of individual questions for their suitability as success predictors ( item analysis , verification )
  6. If the degree of standardization is low, use of several interviewers
  7. Integration of process components from the assessment center
  8. Separation of information and decision
  9. Standardization of the weighting and decision-making procedure (clear, binding rules for the ranking of qualifications, for evaluating certain answers ...)
  10. Preparation of the interviewer through process-related training

Special types of structured recruitment interviews

In the course of the interview research, in addition to general principles for increasing the quality of judgment, attempts were also made to implement these principles in specific procedures. The most common ones are briefly outlined below.

The Behavior Description Interview (BDI)

The Behavior Description Interview (BDI) was developed in 1986 by Janz, Hellervik & Gilmore and is based more strongly than other methods on the principle of biography- oriented methods : "the best prophet of the future is the past". The behavior of the applicant in past problem and conflict situations is thus queried.

preparation

First, real, success-relevant events within the position are collected as part of a requirements analysis . For this purpose, job holders, supervisors and customers can be asked questions using the Critical Incident Technique (CIT) in order to determine both positive and negative behavior in typical problem situations. These critical events are then assigned to 5–10 performance dimensions. These performance dimensions and the associated events (10–20 per dimension) form the basis for the interview.

execution

The BDI runs in 5 phases. First the query of verifiable facts (phase 1), then of specialist knowledge and skills (phase 2), then the description of personal experience and description of previous activities (phase 3), self-assessments and self-assessment (phase 4) and finally the central aspect of behavioral description (Phase 5). During the interview, the applicant should be asked specifically about situations that correspond to the previously identified critical events (query only about behavior relevant to success). The aim is to focus on real, actually occurred situations in the applicant's biography and the actual behavior in these situations is thoroughly inquired about. The assessment of the answers given is not based on behavior, but in terms of characteristics according to the performance dimensions determined.

target

The aim of the BDI is to get an impression of how an applicant behaved in real situations. In this way the query of “textbook knowledge ” or socially desirable general places should be avoided.

rating

The BDI is widespread and shows good validity values. However, the lack of precise assessment guidelines requires interviewers / assessors who are trained and knowledgeable about the job requirements.

The situational interview (SI)

In 1980 Latham, Saari, Pursell & Campion proposed the type of “situational question”. This interview approach is based on the basic idea that behavioral intentions are good predictors of real behavior and refers explicitly to the goal setting theory of Locke & Latham (1990, intention as a direct precursor of behavior).

preparation

As with the BDI, the beginning is a requirements analysis based on the CIT and the collection of job-related critical events. On the basis of these events, concrete situation specifications are developed and a behavior-related grading scale is constructed for each situation (with a behavior example for the two extreme poles and the mean value as well as a numerical coding). However, this serves more as a guideline (scoring guide) for the classification of later answers.

execution

The applicant is given a specific problem situation, this situational question should be based as closely as possible on the previously determined critical events. Then the applicant should describe how he would behave in this situation (future-oriented ≠ BDI). So behavioral intentions or cognitive behavioral possibilities are queried. However, it is of central importance that the applicant is neither informed of the requirements anchored (e.g. “cooperative” vs. “competitive”) nor the dimension of requirements raised with a question - he should answer freely and uninfluenced. In addition, each applicant is asked the same questions.

rating

Both good reliability and good validity values ​​could be demonstrated for the situational interview . The specified precise guidelines for evaluating the applicant's answers further contribute to the objectification of the procedure and also enable the use of less experienced interviewers (in relation to interview and assessment techniques, precise knowledge of the job requirements is also essential here). The situational interview is definitely appreciated by applicants, especially as it gives them the opportunity to be informed in advance about typical conflict situations of the position.

The multimodal interview (MMI)

With the multimodal interview (MMI), Schuler tried to overcome the deficits of conventional selection interviews in 1992 and in this process combines both construction- oriented , simulation- oriented and biographical approaches ( trimodal approach ). The MMI is characterized by the invariant sequence of eight conversation components or phases, of which only five are used to form an opinion, while the other three serve the natural course of the conversation and provide information to the applicant.

The Biographical Interview (BI)

The Biographical Interview (BI) by Sarges (1990, 1995), just like the BDI, looks at the past, but is more comprehensive or more in-depth than the BDI based on the candidate's biography. The critical situations in the biography for the requirements are not “queried” from the candidate, but rather “tracked down” by the interviewer in the candidate's report on his / her career-related curriculum vitae. Its methodological basis is an idiographic approach to data acquisition and the evocation of deeper (so-called implicit) memory contents according to spontaneously reported biographical contents.

Comparison of the concepts and other alternatives

All of these interview concepts are based on empirically proven findings from psychological research. The first two concepts originally come from the USA and have been used there for around 30 years, as in the German-speaking area, the last two come from Germany and have been used in the German-speaking area for over 20 years.

In principle, each of these four concepts can be adapted to most professional fields. In this respect, it will also depend on the personal taste of the interviewer which of the concepts she / he prefers for himself. However, for higher and highly qualified positions (managers, professionals, etc.), BI - as a less standardized but more in-depth procedure - is likely to be more appropriate because it is used to assess candidates for more complex functions in management or expert positions standardized questions are only partially functional and, moreover, are no longer reasonable for this clientele.

Two more concepts have recently come from Germany as well: (a) the behavior-based interview (VI) from the Wottawa school and (b) the decision-based conversation (EOG) from the Westhoff school. The first (a) combines requirements-based psychometric procedures, the second (b) wants to be useful as a “toolbox” more instrumentally than in terms of content.

Individual evidence

  1. ↑ Walter Dill Scott: Scientific selection of salesmen . In: Advertising and Selling Magazine . 1915, 5, pp. 5-6.
  2. ^ Ralph Wagner: The employment interview: A critical review . In: Personnel Psychology . 1949, 2, pp. 17-46.
  3. ^ Eugene C. Mayfield: The selection interview: A re-evaluation of published research . In: Personnel Psychology . 1964, 17, pp. 239-260.
  4. ^ A b M. A. Campion, DK Palmer, JE Campion: A review of structure in the selection interview . In: Personnel Psychology . 1997, 50, pp. 655-702.
  5. ↑ AI Huffcutt, W. Arthur: Hunter and Hunter (1984) revisited: Interview validity for entry-level jobs . In: Journal of Applied Psychology . 1994, 79, pp. 184-190.
  6. ^ WH Wiesner, SF Cronshaw: A meta-analytic investigation of the impact of interview format and degree of structure on the validity of the employment interview . In: Journal of Occupational Psychology . 1988, 61, pp. 275-290.
  7. ^ H. Schuler: Interviews . In: S. Greif, H. Holling, N. Nicholson (eds.): Industrial and organizational psychology . PVU, Munich 1989, pp. 260-265.
  8. ↑ T. Janz, L. Hellervik, DC Gilmore: Behavior Description Interviewing . Allyn & Bacon, Newton, MA 1986.
  9. ↑ Lord Byron, quoted from Kwiatkowski, C. Einstellungsinterview II. ( Memento of the original from June 10, 2007 in the Internet Archive ) Info: The archive link was inserted automatically and has not yet been checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. (PDF file; 236KB) @1@ 2Template: Webachiv / IABot / wwwpsy.uni-muenster.de
  10. ^ GP Latham, LM Saari, ED Pursell, MA Campion: The situational interview . In: Journal of Applied Psychology . 1980, 65, pp. 422-427.
  11. ^ H. Schuler: The multimodal recruitment interview . In: Diagnostica . 1992, 38, pp. 281-300.
  12. ^ W. Sarges: Interviews. In: W. Sarges (Ed.): Management diagnostics . Hogrefe, Göttingen, 1990, pp. 371-384.
  13. ^ W. Sarges: Applicant interviews and employee interviews: bottleneck exploration. In: B. Voss (Ed.): Communication and behavior training . Publishing house for applied psychology, Göttingen. 1995, pp. 136-156.
  14. ^ W. Sarges: Interviews. In W. Sarges (Ed.): Management Diagnostik (4th, completely revised and expanded edition;). Hogrefe, Göttingen, 2013, pp. 575-592.
  15. ^ C. Kirbach & H. Wottawa: The behavior-based interview. Personnel management (6) 2008 , pp. 48–54.
  16. ↑ K. Westhoff (Ed.): The decision-oriented conversation (EOG) as an aptitude interview . Pabst, Lengerich 2009.

literature

  • Werner Sarges: Biographical interviewing in aptitude diagnostics. In G. Jüttemann (ed.). Biographical diagnostics . Pabst-Verlag, Lengerich 2011, pp. 169–177. Article for download (PDF, 295 kB)
  • Werner Sarges: Interviews. In W. Sarges (ed.). Management Diagnostik (4th, completely revised and expanded edition; pp. 575–592). Hogrefe, Göttingen 2013. ISBN 978-3-8017-2385-9
  • Heinz Schuler: Textbook of Personnel Psychology . Hogrefe, Göttingen 2001, pp. 197-206.
  • Heinz Schuler: textbook of organizational psychology . Huber, Göttingen 1995, p. 247f.
  • Stephan Kolominski: The blind spot in the personnel selection process. Identification of unconscious factors in the selection process using the example of recruitment interviews . Publishing house Dr. Kovac, Hamburg 2009, ISBN 978-3-8300-3952-5 .

See also