Press Materials and other Media Info

Holzschu, Jordan, Schiff & Associates

Articles and Publications

INTERVIEWING TIPS

Part I of III

by Michael Holzschu
© 2001 Michael A. Holzschu, Holzschu, Jordan, Schiff & Associates

In today's labor market, every employer is still faced with the same problem: finding and keeping a good staff. Even with the announcements of layoffs and corporate downsizing, it remains a problem in finding the good people. With the unemployment rates nationally at 5.8% and in some local markets as low as 2.0%, the challenge is real. What happens is that we, as employers, start to lower our standards to just find a warm, walking and talking person to fill the position. This is not fair to either the employer or the prospective employee. So how can you have a better set of odds that will help you to find the right person for the job? The starting point is the interview, that time when you meet the perspective employee for the first time and he or she meets you for the first time. Everyone is normally on his or her best behavior and it becomes necessary to strip through all of the formality to get down to brass tacks. The focus of this article is on the mistakes made by the you, as an interviewer, that prevent you in finding out who this person is that is sitting in your office. The "Cost of Turnover" has been set at 50% of annual salary of the position by the Hay Group, leaders in wage and compensation studies. This translates to a cost of $5,150 for a full-time minimum wage employee. Quite expense when you start looking at all the factors that go into establishing this cost, such as ad cost, interview time, benefits, level of efficiency for the first 90 days, insurance costs that are mandatory, social security costs, and the list goes on.

First, we need a working definition of what an interview is all about.

The stated purpose of an interview is to gather information about the candidate. We want to be able to make the best educated guess about each candidate's performance. We want to hire the candidate that best fits our profile for the successful employee and the position.

So what are the pitfalls that can prevent us from finding our ideal candidate?

The following list of interviewer mistakes will give you a picture of what can go wrong:

• The ground rules for the interview are not clearly understood by the candidate, consequently at the conclusion of the interview no decision is reached.
• The expectations of performance and the guidelines for firing are not discussed.
• The interviewer paints an overly rosy picture of the position and the company.
• The interviewer doesn't allow enough time for the interview.
• How the individual will complement the members of the existing staff are not taken into account.
• The interview doesn't consider the individual and consequently is not conducted on a personal basis.
• Much of the time, the interview is conducted out of immediate need and the real candidate is never interviewed.

When we look at the list it appears that the interviewer makes the most mistakes. This is absolutely true. After all, the interviewer does have control in each of the above areas. Let's explore these a bit before we get into the actual interview and see how each of the items can affect an interview. To some of you these may seem redundant or even basic in nature. All that I can say is that I have seen people, with many years of experience in interviewing, that continue to make one or more of the above listed mistakes. It's nice to think we all communicate the same way, but it's a fact that we don't. Words have different meanings dependent upon each person's background.

Just what do we mean by the ground rules for the interview are not clearly understood?

It is easy for interviews to wander all over the place. As the interview goes on, the "Rule of Mutual Mystification" takes over. The applicant feels that they have answered all the questions put forth by the interviewer. Yet at the conclusion of the interview, they still have no idea as to what happens beyond the interview. This becomes quite evident when the interview ends with a comment such as:

"Well Mr. Smith do you think you would like to work here?"

The most common response is usually:

"Well, Mr. Jones, I do have several more interviews."

Nobody makes a decision! This becomes a wide-open statement that doesn't solve the problem of either the interviewer or the applicant making a decision on the job.

To turn this type of session into a productive use of time, it is more beneficial to utilize a comprehensive opening statement. An example of an opening statement follows:

"Mr. Smith here is what I would like to happen during the time we have today. First, I am going to ask you a group of questions to determine if you're the person I'm looking for. Second, I'd like you to ask those questions, which will help you, decide if this is the right opportunity for you. The final step, which is for both of us, is to decide if there is an interest on both of our parts, to warrant going beyond the initial interview stage. Is this agreeable to you?"

What is being accomplished here is that both parties understand what is going to happen, how it is going to happen, and what is expected of each individual when they get to the end of the interview.

The second item in our list is that the guidelines for firing are never discussed. It isn't a pleasant experience to fire an individual from their job. Yet, this is an occurrence that does happen. As much as you would like every new hire to be successful, it doesn't happen. Many times it can be prevented in the interview, if the interviewer would take a short amount of time to explain what is expected of the applicant in the position. One of the easiest ways to do this is to use the job description and performance appraisal form for the position the applicant is interviewing for. This gives you the opportunity to explain up-front just what you will expect from this person. It gives the applicant the opportunity to decide if he/she can live with these expectations. The "Rule of Mutual Mystification" is further circumvented.

Next is the rosy picture interview. Here we find the interviewer telling the applicant about how great the people are. Or that the company really cares about its employees and there is never any politics involved. Or that you as an individual are the most important asset the company has. The person applying for the job wants to believe these statements. They need a job. What happens if and when reality sets in? Performance problems, they're late for work, slow to show progress in learning their job, or become negative about everything around them due to the picture that was painted in the interview not being real. A great deal of time and money has been wasted.

How many times have you found yourself in the situation where you have forgotten that an interview has been scheduled? You find yourself in the middle of a project that you do not want to stop. So you end up rushing through the interview, never really paying attention to the applicant or their comments. Who loses? EVERYBODY! This may have been the right person for the opening that you have; yet you won't know it because you were too involved with your project to pay proper attention to the applicant and the interview process.

The last three items work together. Now that you have a candidate sitting in front of you, how is this person going to fit in with the rest of the staff? Are you willing to accept anybody that can walk and talk at the same time? For those of you who have graduated from college, you will remember the interviews conducted on campus by companies like IBM. Short hair, white shirt and navy power suited individuals who were interviewing a group of graduates. For the recruiter, it was safer to recommend the individual who is dressed in the same type of attire to the corporate office, rather than the individual dressed in jeans and a plaid shirt, even if this candidate's credentials are better. So what happened during the interview? For the candidate attired in jeans, the motions were gone through. The interview was polite, cold, and non-committal. For the other individual it was just the reverse: warm, exciting and informative. The point to all of this is that regardless of the candidate, all interviews should be conducted the same. The occasional diamond in the rough exists out there. Besides, look what is happening today to IBM and the staff members that it has employed.

Too often the interviewer is into playing games with the applicant. What I mean by playing games is putting the applicant through a stress interview or remaining cold and aloof from the applicant. There are so many styles used today by interviewers that it has gotten to the point of being ridiculous. If you are a company moving towards a Total Quality Management philosophy, what does an interview run under stress approach tell the applicant? Certainly not a message consistent with the stated company philosophy. Besides, the candidate may not be the correct person for the position that you are interviewing for, but he/she may be correct for a different position. Remember the bench program for applicants.

If all of the planning that we previously have discussed is not in use, then interviews are done out of immediate need. Most interviewers are only interested in finding the person that has performed the specific job that is open, at another company. The real candidate is never interviewed and another opportunity to help build that bench is lost.

So now you have a list of pitfalls to watch out for when you conduct an interview. All the planning and all of the care in getting ready for the interview process can be lost if the interview itself is handled incorrectly.

With all of the resumes and applications coming in, what should you be doing next? The qualification step starts with all of the resumes and applications. That will be the starting point for Article II.

Business Home page | Company Info Index | Press Releases | Contact Us

This document maintained by mholzschu@hjsa.com.
Material Copyright © 2000 Holzschu, Jordan, Schiff & Associates