The Case for Structured Interviews and Why Companies Don’t Use Them

While interviews are an enormously popular selection practice, I am becoming increasingly aware that they are rarely used in a structured or standardized manner in organizations. Van der Zee et al. (2001), for example, suggested that structured interviews are underutilized for a few reasons:

  • Because they hinder interviewers’ need for autonomy and power,
  • Because they may not be aligned with organizational culture and norms,
  • Because they require time and money to implement, and
  • Because practitioners might not be aware of their practical usefulness.

I want to use this blog to convey the criticality of structured interviews as a selection tool.
First, a brief description of what is a structured interview: Compared to unstructured interviews, structured interviews use:

  1. Questions that are more sophisticated (i.e., the questions are based on job analysis),
  2. Consistent procedures (i.e., the same questions are asked to everyone, follow-up questions are limited), and
  3. Consistent evaluation procedures (i.e., the same interviewer or group of interviewers are used across candidates, interviewers are trained in administering and scoring structured interviews, and they utilize anchored rating scales).

Practitioners need to know that with more standardized processes like structured interviews, they are less likely to be challenged in court, and they exhibit less adverse impact. One of the reasons structured interviews are so successful in improving the quality of your hires is because they combat a host of interviewer biases. Some of these unconscious biases include:

  • Similarity or similar-to-me bias (interviewers are likely to rate candidates more highly when they perceive them as similar to themselves),
  • Pre-interview bias (interviewers, after reading a candidate’s resume or recommendations, develop preconceived ideas about the candidate and use this preconception to filter information during the interview), and
  • Contrast bias (interviewers will judge interviewees based on their perception of previous candidates).

To combat biases in the interview process, evade legal troubles, and ultimately improve the quality of your employees, Harver suggests that you integrate more rigor into your selection interviews.

To learn more about standardizing your hiring processes, consider Harver’s Hiring Process Optimization. This comprehensive solution spans the TA lifecycle, including pre-hire assessments validated by our People Science team, video interviews that are inherently structured, and automated reference checking.

Harver Team

Harver Team

Updated on:
July 18, 2023

Recommended Articles

Gartner Orlando Video Recap: 2024 Macrotrends, UPS Success & More

Recruitment Software
Posted on:
November 1, 2023

Slowed Restaurant Growth? Order Up Restaurant Hiring Software

Recruitment Automation
Posted on:
October 10, 2023

Screening Candidates: Are Resumes A Dead Method?

Recruitment Strategy
Updated on:
October 9, 2023

How Internal Mobility Can Fill Roles for Aging Populations

Talent Management
Updated on:
August 24, 2023

Learning more about making better talent decisions faster?

Get the answers you need to optimize
your TA and TM processes and results.

Outmatch is now part of Harver

Ready to serve you with our full suite of talent solutions and a fresh look!