Structure enhances fairness, ensures best hire
More than three-quarters of HR professionals go off script to prompt job candidates during interviews, which allows biases and even racism to creep into the interview process, according to a Trent University study.
The Employment Selection Interviewfound 78 per cent of 300 HR practitioners surveyed stray from a predetermined list of prompts when candidates struggle for answers.
“That really opens the door for, at the very least, perceived unfairness to enter into the interview,” said Sheldene Simola, assistant professor of business administration at the Peterborough, Ont.-based university and co-author of the study.
In this day and age, overt racism and bias are unusual, said Simola. It is subconscious racism that HR practitioners have to be more wary of, she said. Actions such as sitting further away, making less eye contact, forgetting to shake someone’s hand or giving them fewer prompts when they struggle for answers are all signs of this less-recognizable form of bias.
Studies in the United States show interviewers don’t score the responses of racial minorities more harshly. However, human rights tribunals show racism is still an issue in hiring practices, said Simola.
“The problem may not be that we are more harsh in our ratings of the answers that people of certain ethnicities give, the problem may occur far before that point,” she said. “It may be that where racism enters in is the number of opportunities by way of prompts and probes that we give to certain candidates over others.”
Besides preventing bias, structured interviews ensure a more successful hire, said Simola.
“If your hope and intention is to truly choose the candidate who will be the best candidate for the position, you’re far better off using a structured interview,” she said.
Important components of structure include questions based on job analysis, specific behavioural questions, interviewer training, note taking and standardized questions, prompts and scoring.
However, the degree to which HR professionals follow structure varies, according to the study. About one-third (34.6 per cent) of respondents said they base interview questions on formal job analysis and 44.2 per cent use a job description.
While 78 per cent of respondents said they always prepare questions ahead of time, 75.4 per cent also said they add new questions during the interview. Only 12.6 per cent of respondents use a rating scale for questions.
Survey respondents were better with behavioural questions, with 85.7 per cent using them always or most of the time. The majority of respondents (84.7 per cent) also take notes on candidates’ responses.
Structured interviews can also protect employers against legal or human rights claims lodged by job candidates, said Simola.
However, based on a review of human rights tribunal cases cited in the study, tribunals don’t value using job analysis for the basis of interview questions and interviewer training as highly as other areas of structure, said Simola. This in turn makes it less likely employers will focus on these aspects.
“Human rights tribunals may unwittingly be creating disincentives for human resources professionals to attend to certain aspects of structure like job analysis and interview training,” she said.
The Employment Selection Interviewfound 78 per cent of 300 HR practitioners surveyed stray from a predetermined list of prompts when candidates struggle for answers.
“That really opens the door for, at the very least, perceived unfairness to enter into the interview,” said Sheldene Simola, assistant professor of business administration at the Peterborough, Ont.-based university and co-author of the study.
In this day and age, overt racism and bias are unusual, said Simola. It is subconscious racism that HR practitioners have to be more wary of, she said. Actions such as sitting further away, making less eye contact, forgetting to shake someone’s hand or giving them fewer prompts when they struggle for answers are all signs of this less-recognizable form of bias.
Studies in the United States show interviewers don’t score the responses of racial minorities more harshly. However, human rights tribunals show racism is still an issue in hiring practices, said Simola.
“The problem may not be that we are more harsh in our ratings of the answers that people of certain ethnicities give, the problem may occur far before that point,” she said. “It may be that where racism enters in is the number of opportunities by way of prompts and probes that we give to certain candidates over others.”
Besides preventing bias, structured interviews ensure a more successful hire, said Simola.
“If your hope and intention is to truly choose the candidate who will be the best candidate for the position, you’re far better off using a structured interview,” she said.
Important components of structure include questions based on job analysis, specific behavioural questions, interviewer training, note taking and standardized questions, prompts and scoring.
However, the degree to which HR professionals follow structure varies, according to the study. About one-third (34.6 per cent) of respondents said they base interview questions on formal job analysis and 44.2 per cent use a job description.
While 78 per cent of respondents said they always prepare questions ahead of time, 75.4 per cent also said they add new questions during the interview. Only 12.6 per cent of respondents use a rating scale for questions.
Survey respondents were better with behavioural questions, with 85.7 per cent using them always or most of the time. The majority of respondents (84.7 per cent) also take notes on candidates’ responses.
Structured interviews can also protect employers against legal or human rights claims lodged by job candidates, said Simola.
However, based on a review of human rights tribunal cases cited in the study, tribunals don’t value using job analysis for the basis of interview questions and interviewer training as highly as other areas of structure, said Simola. This in turn makes it less likely employers will focus on these aspects.
“Human rights tribunals may unwittingly be creating disincentives for human resources professionals to attend to certain aspects of structure like job analysis and interview training,” she said.
