The interviewing process to screen candidates for a job vacancy might seem like a simple means to an end. But Julie McCarthy, a professor of organizational behaviour and human resources management at the University of Toronto Scarborough, says it’s crucial for hiring managers and business leaders to do it right. “We want to be selecting not only for job performance but for individuals who are going to stay on the job,” Ms. McCarthy explains. “We don’t want to hire people and suddenly turnover is high. That can cost hundreds of thousands or even millions of dollars.”
Trying to determine a candidate’s suitability during a job interview, and their likelihood for longevity in a role, can and should be an enjoyable experience for both the interviewer and interviewee. “We want to make sure that applicants are motivated to work for our company,” Ms. McCarthy says. But how can the job interviewing process be made better, particularly in the age of virtual interviews? We asked Ms. McCarthy and tech recruiter Carl Casis to share their takes on the best and worst job interviewing practices.
Worst: Scheduling interviews with firm dates on short notice
Best: Flexible interview scheduling
When it comes to scheduling an interview, Mr. Casis advises giving multiple date and time options, five to seven days in advance. “It gives them enough time to do more research on the company and prepare,” he explains. Conversely, giving too much notice for an interview can also be a bad practice. “You don’t want to leave people hanging too long because there’s an induced anxiety with the waiting time,” he says.
When scheduling an interview, Ms. McCarthy says that offering limited date and time options can be detrimental. “What is the signal that you’re sending to the candidate?” she asks. “It’s that the organization is maybe more autocratic and more rigid in the way that it operates.”
Worst: Expressionless virtual interviews
Best: Exaggerated body language in a virtual interview, framed from the waist up
Virtual interviews are becoming more common, but Ms. McCarthy says there are tricks an interviewer can do to make the process feel more natural, making it easier to get to know a candidate. The first is how the interviewer’s camera is framed, which should be from the waist up. This allows more of their body language to be captured. “It’s more natural when we can see people’s arm movements,” she says. Any sort of non-verbal communication, like smiling or nodding, can be exaggerated slightly in a virtual interview to mimic more of the in-person experience.
Another tip McCarthy offers is to allow for warm-up time in a virtual interview to humanize the experience. “Adding a little introduction to develop a rapport with the candidate can help calm them down, whether it’s small talk about the weather, where they’re located or how their week has been, instead of jumping right in,” she says.
Worst: Lengthy, synchronous assessments, testing and mock presentations
Best: Limited, asynchronous testing when needed, and paid when possible
Mr. Casis says that job tests are common for interviews in tech roles to determine, for example, a software developer’s knowledge of programming languages or a marketer’s ability to present. But he believes that if tasks result in work that could be used by the company, they should be paid. Otherwise, keep tests and tasks to under an hour. “Anything after that and it’s cutting into people’s time,” he says.
Ms. McCarthy sees the value in personality assessments since they can be reliable indicators of a candidate’s on-the-job performance and reduce reliance on an interviewer’s “gut feelings,” which she says are unreliable. However, she adds that companies should allow assessments to be done on an interviewee’s own time, which reduces anxiety. “It can give candidates a more positive perception of your organization,” she says.
Worst: High-stress pressure tactics
Best: Low-stress strategies that give interviewees a sense of control
An overall strategy that both Mr. Casis and Ms. McCarthy agree on is to make an interview feel as low-stress as possible. Mr. Casis says that he’s worked with companies who want to “frazzle people” in an interview to see how they’ll cope or react in stressful situations, but it’s not a good tactic. “You don’t want to scare people off,” he says. “You want to make the environment comfortable for people.”
Ms. McCarthy echoes this sentiment. She says that reducing candidate anxiety might look like offering more information about the interview, like an agenda or schedule, so they know what to expect, or allowing candidates to do testing on their own time. “When we feel like we have no sense of control, our anxiety goes up,” she explains. “We know that when candidates are anxious, it’s not reflective of their capacity in day-to-day performance on the job.”
Despite higher unemployment rates, Ms. McCarthy believes that it doesn’t excuse companies from engaging in good interviewing practices. “Some might say it’s an employer’s market,” she says. “But good companies still struggle to convince top talent to come to them because there are so many competing organizations.”
