15 Responses to “Behavioral interviews: It’s all in the follow-up questions”

1. Ricky_O Says:
   May 29th, 2008 at 12:55 pm

   From my experience, the reason HR interviewers ask behavioral questions is because they know nothing about the true requirements of the positions they interview for.
   I have yet to find an HR person that knows anything beyond the adjectives and adverbial bantor about sales, programming, logistics, ora a great many other occupations. Yet, they are given the responsibility to interview, discuss and then decipher and determine a great candidate from a lousy one. They can’t do it. They don’t understand the skills, the talents, or the value of proven experience. Instead they opt for younger college grads in place of quality, skills, experienced, proven professionals because they ‘like them more’. (Could it be the compensation they are offering also???)
   I know this because I have been on both sides of the table, a potential employee and a hiring manager. In that latter position, I couldn’t believe the quality candidates that were being disposed of by HR prior to sending me resumes and/or second-round interviewees. This has happened at three different employers. It’s ridiculous.
   My opinion is that HR people should not be allowed to interview. They are not qualified. They are rarely trained or certified in the evaluation of candidates by behavioral interview methods; and they certainly don’t know an advantageous answer from a less-advantageous answer to an abstract question, beyond how it ’subjectively strikes them’ (i.e., if they personally ‘like’ the answer, which has absolutely nothing to do with a quantifiable selection process). It seems that many times the employer assumes that the HR interviewer is capable of knowing a better answer to an abstract question they have no background or understanding of. As an example, I just read on one site how an interviewee was asked, “How would you weigh a Boeing 747 without the use of a scale?” How absolutely absurd. If five different interviewees came back with five different unique answers, how would an HR interviewer know which was a better answer; or even a more creative answer? I’ve yet to meet an HR interviewer with an advanced degree in physics or mechanical engineering…… Yet, they are presupposed to have some osmonic ability to proclaim one answer ‘creative’. Because an answer such as, “I’d go ask the pilot” is not ‘creative, it probably wouldn’t fare well in the interview. Yet, it is the answer the industry and the government have declared the correct answer. Fore you see, the pilot is the one who has the final say as to whether a plane is air worthy, which includes it’s take-off weight; which, would include the current real empty-weight, plus the weight of the load. But given that most HR interviewers are probably not educated in aeronautics, I doubt the use of such a question is valid, if even relevent. Somehow however, their industry has declared behavioral interviewing to be acceptable and a basis upon which to weed out the best sales, programming, logistical and other candidates from the rest.
   And they wonder why they end up with litigation invitations on their desks, ….. ‘go figure”. (They deserve it!)

2. Biggs Says:
   May 30th, 2008 at 1:45 pm

   I disagree with the comment that HR folks should not conduct interviews. I think HR personnel should conduct interviews to ascertain the social, mental, emotional, and psychological qualities of the candidate. I also think interviews should be conducted by technical staff, and management staff. I believe all candidates should be interviewed - at least- three times: one by HR, one by technical staff, and one by management. After all the interviews, all interviewers would meet and pick the most qualified candidate that would fit best within the organization. Thank you for the opportunity to reply.

3. Ricky_O Says:
   June 2nd, 2008 at 7:36 pm

   Since when does any HR degree include the professional certifications required by state licensure to be able to render any social, mental, emotional, and psychological evaluations. HR people are not trained to be able to render such evaluations. At best, they can render an opinion; which carries absolutely no weight beyond water cooler chit chat. We are a short distance away from attorneys subpoena’ing these pretend analysts and asking them to provide legal basis for stating they are qualified to draw such conclusions. They would have to be certified AND LICENSED in each state by licenssing boards in social work, psychology, and psychiatry to be able to render the evaluations you believe they are capable of. Most of the HR people who have interviewed me have no idea what they are doing.

4. Tom D. Says:
   June 3rd, 2008 at 10:39 am

   Reply to Ricky O - If HR is not allowed to interview - then who? You write of a concern that interviewers know the true requirements of the job. What about the true requirements of legal and business appropriate interview questions. You mention litigation. Who in an organization knows better about this area than HR?

   Certainly, the better interviewers are trained in interviewing techniques and skills, the better the screening process will go. HR should focus on pre-screening, which includes work history, skills match (from a job description), and some behavioral assessment. Candidates that make the cut will have a chance to discuss the technical and performance match with subsequent interviewers.

   The successful candidate must not just fit the job, but the organization as well. HR must be there as a partner in the selection process.

5. Ricky_O Says:
   June 3rd, 2008 at 7:02 pm

   This is a typical response that I would expect from an HR Person.

   You ask, “Who would interview?” How about the hiring manager, after he/she was trained by the legal department.
   You ask, “Who is knows better than HR about the legal and business appropriate interview questions?” It’s simple, the same people the HR people get their advice from: the Legal department.

   Again, the interviewing process is not meant to be choices on a ‘better’ or ‘worse’ basis; and, it’s certainly not in the organization’s best interest to leave it to those untrained specifically in the occupation being interviewed for. In many cases, it is literally the blind leading the deaf.

   Allowing a candidate to move further in the process should not be contingent on a question such as, “How would you measure the weight of a Boeing 747 without a scale?”, when interviewing a computer programmer. How could such a question have anything to do with determining if a candidate is a ‘good fit for the organization’? Are you serious? You probably are; and that would be exemplary of the HR mindset.

6. Jean Says:
   June 6th, 2008 at 10:44 am

   It’s obvious that Ricky O has had a bad experience, and that is unfortunate. However, making blanket statements about how little HR people know is insulting and completely inaccurate. HR is no longer a paper-pushing function given to a random clerical employee with free time. A large number of Human Resources professionals now have advanced degrees (myself included) and professional certifications. That may not qualify us as licensed Psychologists, but it certainly trains us to provide a professional contribution to our companies far beyond that of “an opinion that carries no weight beyond water cooler chit chat.” In my company, HR performs the first round of screening of resumes. The hiring manager and either Operations Manager or Administrative Manager are then involved in looking at potential candidates to provide their input. The hiring manager and HR are both involved in the interviewing process, as both provide valuable perspectives when evaluating candidates. To completely eliminate HR from the process is ludicrous.

   To Ricky O….the fact that you’ve had so many bad interviewing experiences begs the question, Why have you been on so many interviews? An employee who can’t keep a job is a definite red flag in my book. Perhaps you should look inside yourself to see why you continue to have such negative experiences in your interviewing and possibly your career in general. I would venture to guess that HR is not at the root of your problem. Good luck to you.

7. Laura Mc Says:
   June 6th, 2008 at 12:10 pm

   Perhaps I have a different perspective as an HR professional. Hiring managers and HR need to communicate openly to select the best candidates. When both sides are able to discuss departmental needs and the skills and attributes necessary to meet these needs, HR will send you better candidates.

   As an HR professional, I see the value in extensive training and certification. Many of us work towards those goals in addition to our daily duties. My first priority is, and has always been, making it easier for those I support to do their jobs.

   I’m currious about your final comment. What is, from your point of view, “the HR mindset?”

8. BP Says:
   June 6th, 2008 at 12:40 pm

   Ricky, it is clear you have had a bad experience somewhere along the line with HR. I hope you will not generalize as you have in your comments that all HR people lack the skill and intelligence to conduct successful interviews and hire great candidates. A successful interview process is a team effort, with interviews conducted by HR, the hiring managers, and co-workers. The peer reviews are important so that the appropriate questions can be asked regarding the day to day activities. I have been present in many peer interviews with candidates and find them extremely helpful. HR provides a critical role in the overall process to ensure equality, fairness, and represent the company.

9. Judy Says:
   June 6th, 2008 at 2:06 pm

   Rick_O, it is obvious that you have been personally affected by an interview conducted by HR. While everyone is allowed their opinion, it sounds as if you truely believe the rest of the business world should change their procedures to eliminate HR’s involvement. As you may have a reason for your bitter comments, companies also have reasons for HR to be in the drivers seat when it comes to recruitment and interviewing. That doesn’t mean there aren’t others in the vehicle - managers and technical staff or anyone else that would have valid input. If a person is hired and turns out to be a bad choice (could be one of many reasons for this), who do the managers run to? The Human Resources department! It becomes HR’s responsibility to “fix it” regardless of what “it” may be. Not all companies have the luxury of a legal department and the legal dept. wouldn’t make a better informed decision than any one of the other participants.
   Recruiting is not easy and interviewing is not a singular responsibility. But someone has to take responsibility to lead the process. If you have the proper people in HR, they are the best qualified.

10. Ricky_O Says:
    June 7th, 2008 at 12:08 pm

    In response to Jean:

    If there is any question to be begged, at least for the benefit of your shot-in-the-dark comment that I have been on an excessive number of interviews (which by the way, I find a precise example of HR thinking); it’s why would you ASSUME I have worked for a great many employers, and in any way, can’t keep a job? (Here again, my experience has been that HR people tend to ‘jump’ to such conclusions, without any empirical or substantiated data.) Let me assure you, you missed the mark on those assumptions. Since you opened the door on it, let’s pursue it.

    Actually, in a society where the average worker is now expected to have in the range of 6-7 career changes over their working life (that being ‘career changes’, not actual job counts, which is far more in number); I have had the same job for sixteen of the last seventeen years. That was founder and executive officer of a computer consulting firm. Prior to that, I turned around two computer hardware companies. That was after doing quite well in sales.

    Now I wouldn’t consider that an ‘excessive’ number of positions would you? (Care to amend your comment yet; or, at least the assumptions you posted under?)

    Since closing my past business, I have been out ‘transitioning’, as it is so affectionately termed.
    Also, since sales has always been the occupation and activity I have enjoyed the most, it is that which I have been interviewing for. Though I know I am capable of more, it’s something I am extremely good at, and have proven so. It is also what I want to do. I enjoy the people, the travel, and day-to-day challenges. I’ve experienced the dream. It was hard work. It taught me more than you will ever experience; and it taught me how to succeed. One would think that these should be assets a professional company would appreciate; especially when I’ve stated that all I seek to do is sell, because I enjoy it.

    Dealing with the specifics I’ve personally experienced, I have been told I am over-qualified twice, never received the promised callback after two third-round interviews, and have asked an incredible number of outright silly questions, none of which had anything to do with sales or my experience. Based on the questions asked, I sincerely doubt they have any idea of my capabilities. (I should mention, I even had one person ask me, “Why should I hire you when I can hire a twenty-five year old just out of college or with a young family, a new mortgage, and probably more motivated than you?” That was quite memorable.) More importantly, in every case, not once did the interview ever make it to a point where I was asked to either demonstrate my sales abilities, or give evidence of why I believed I was better qualified for the sales position.

    I must tell you Jean; I am not the only one holding these and similar opinions of HR methods. Those methods may be why nearly every private employment placement firm, referral organization, peer group, and recruiter I have dialogued with agree in near unanimous thunder: Don’t bother answering ads, they end up in HR departments. The better jobs are discovered through networking and direct referral; which by the way, by-passes the vast majority of HR impact. The figure commonly provided is that “80%” of jobs placed are through networking. It appears from the insight provided by those I’ve conversed with, the networking process commonly puts the candidate in the unique position of being treated in a far different way by HR, commonly without all the silly questions. It’s as if, since the candidate is being referred, they are already pre-qualified to a significant degree. It commonly appears that such dynamics (maybe due to such vectors as the internal value of employee referral fees) begin to outweigh the importance of coming up with ‘unique and creative’ answers to off-the-cuff and unproven behavioral questions with subjective, if any, qualified answer; none of which have anything to do with the occupation or position being filled.

    Moving this along, since you are so eager to defend the use of behavioral questioning, help me out here. What industry tested, certified, and therefore tortiously defensible criteria can you cite for me that objectively proves that the use of behavioral questioning provides ANY quantifiable and qualitatively factual evidence of it being superior to simply asking a candidate how and why they qualify for the skills and knowledge needed to fill the specific position being considered for? And again, what basis or authority are you depending upon to provide proof, through scientific method, that any of you or your cohorts have a standardized methodology for interpreting the answers to such inane questions?

    I can also share with you, that when I was managing at various levels in my employing organizations, I discovered early on that some great and extremely qualified talent was passed on by in the hiring process, based on some pretty illogical HR rules. When I sat in on some interviews, I could see why. These people were dismissed from the process, not based on their abilities to bring value to the organization in the expertise that we needed, but based on highly subjective thought processes and criteria. Business is competitive. It takes getting the best people possible. In the case of sales, which I am extremely qualified to speak to, I really don’t care if the candidate doesn’t have an answer to how to start a Sherman tank without a key, or how to weigh a Boeing 747. Such questions have nothing to do with why he or she is sitting in that interview! I want to know if they know how to start a conversation, if they know how to qualify, if they are a good listener, if they are comfortable closing, and what impression they provide (are they in a suit, are they extremely well groomed, do they understand the English language, and are they shy of a CRM system).

    That leads us back to my original contention that HR people have no way of knowing what makes or doesn’t make a person one of the super-stars I’m looking for. They can’t – they’ve never been one, or probably seen one. Instead, they set criteria and interview on the basis of some minimal threshold of qualities. Minimal thresholds provide mediocrity, and mediocrity means lost sales. This argument is not limited to sales. It is appropriate to a great many occupations within an organization. This is why I believe HR people should not be involved in the interviewing process. They can instruct those in the organization about the legalities and appropriateness of interviewing, though I contend a qualified attorney would be far better in that capacity. They can do background checks. They can process benefit programs. They can administer internal training programs. They can do a number of other functions. But can or should they interview? In my opinion, only for other HR positions.

    In responding to BP:

    You want co-workers to interview candidates? In this tortious environment?? Are you crazy???
    Are you planning on putting all those co-workers through interview training first? And then you’re going to hope and pray one of them doesn’t have a gaff? Good luck with that.

11. Ricky_O Says:
    June 7th, 2008 at 12:26 pm

    Correction:

    In the last post I wrote:

    Dealing with the specifics I’ve personally experienced, I have been told I am over-qualified twice, never received the promised callback after two third-round interviews, and have asked an incredible number of outright silly questions, none of which had anything to do with sales or my experience.

    It should read:

    Dealing with the specifics I’ve personally experienced, I have been told I am over-qualified twice, never received the promised callback after two third-round interviews, and have been asked an incredible number of outright silly questions, none of which had anything to do with sales or my experience.

12. Ricky_O Says:
    June 7th, 2008 at 1:18 pm

    To Laura Mc:

    From my point of view, “the HR mindset”, in its broadest terms, is a want to ‘quantify’ everyone into categories. Unfortunately, the categories and criteria I’ve seen demonstrated, do so based on the most obvious of terms. Many make sense, others are beyond being outright silly.

    Depending on the occupations and needs of the markets served, certain requirements are obvious. If you were hiring doctors, you would want those with MD degrees from accredited institutions. You would want clean practice records. You would probably want to see some research publications.

    In sales, which is one of the areas I am qualified to comment on, categorizing or prioritizing candidates by industry experience is an example of one of those criteria leading to a categorization that is simply short-sighted and arbitrary. Other criteria may be level of college education, length of work experience, sales experience, location, and others.

    Let’s say I’m in the publishing business. Let’s also say I publish business newsletters, brochures, newsletters, cards, and promotional paper items. I have four candidates applying for one position. The first has been selling publishing for ten years. The second has been in IT sales for five years. The third has been in retail for three years. The fourth has been scheduling bus routes for the city for two years. All have at least two years of college; two have BA/BS degrees.

    From experience (in similar scenarios, but not an exact match for industries and times on the job), when hiring I’ve had HR come to me with stacks of resumes. In the beginning, these were stacks AFTER they had filtered them. That was until one day I was at a local trade show and I ran into a sales person I was really impressed with. We spoke and in the conversation, he mentioned that he had sent in his resume to the company I was with at the time, but had never heard anything back.

    From that time on, I made it a point that HR was to bring me all the resumes and get ready to interview them all. Why? Would it be worth it? I think so.

    The reason it was worthwhile is that you can’t tell a great sales person based on a couple of pieces of paper. When they all came in, I granted each one a two-minute opportunity to introduce themselves. I was looking for some specific qualities and abilities. It took roughly five days, at roughly 10 -12 hours a day. It was worth it because I got the cream of the crop; not what some non-sales experienced person subjectively had an intuitive and momentary shot-in-the-dark warm feeling about after glancing over a boilerplate resume. From those 2-minute intros, I would have roughly 50 applicants to work from. Those were given a second interview in which they were given the opportunity to sell me on one of our products. I wanted to know if they did certain specific professional sales steps, if they listened well, used questions correctly, closed appropriately, collected my contact info correctly, and employed other skills necessary to the position I was trying to fill. It also told me if they had done any research about our company before they showed up. I also had the chance to see closer how they dressed. Were they wearing starched shirts or un-ironed? Did they trim their finger nails? Did they speak with correct grammatical structure? Did they have any manners, poise, and etiquette? Did they stand when a woman entered the room? How did they handle interruptions? How was their eye contact? Did they understand personality differences and adjust? The list goes on.

    I really didn’t care if they were in the industry already or not. (You’d be amazed how many times organizations have some silly rule that those who are experienced in the industry are better qualified than those without industry experience. Look. If they are smart enough to be successful in sales already, odds are they are smart enough to learn the industry, and do it quickly and thoroughly. Sales people, at least professional sales people are competitive. Give them a challenge and they are all over it SUCCESSFULLY and USUALLY WITH RESULTS WAY BEYOND EXPECTATIONS. I’ve proven that by training many, many, many of them. It’s the company’s job to train their employees. And you want them trained in your own knowledge and culture. Is your culture to be subjectively selective based on NO objective, individualized qualities in your employees; or, is it your culture to take the time and find the BEST?) Also, think about this: From experience, I’ve found that about 10% of the sales people in a sales force are the cream of the crop. They do the most and best business, over and over again. If someone who is already in the industry is coming to interview, I want to know how they did at my competitors. I also want to know whether I’m going to have to deal with a tortuous interference case or not.

    Even though there was only one position open, I always hired all those who I believed were super stars. The impressive part is that after hundreds of hires, I only had let one person go; and I felt terrible in doing so.

    When HR was making the decisions, I would get one; and maybe he or she was the real golden asset I was hoping for.

    So, why wouldn’t HR have taken the time to do it this way in the first place? From my experience, when I asked about this dichotomy all I heard was, “We don’t have the resources to do all of that work for you”. Go figure. Maybe that’s why two companies needed someone to turn them around because they were going broke. I call that lazy; but that’s just my opinion. At the least, my opinion is that ‘someone’ didn’t have the organization’s best interests in mind. (By the way, I increased sales at one company by over 500% in three months. I doubled sales in the other in 30 days.)

    That’s the short version of an answer of what is the hr mindset.

13. Laura Mc Says:
    June 9th, 2008 at 9:35 am

    As a simple reply to your post, your clairvoyant powers are substandard and I wouldn’t rely on them. In addition to that NOT being my mindset, I would venture to guess that no one responding to anything posted here has that mindset either.

    What comes across to me in your posts is anger. Perhaps you should harness your talent in a more positive direction. I fear the anger that I perceive (and others may also) may be what is standing between you and the continued success you crave.

    Good luck in your job search.

14. Tom D. Says:
    June 9th, 2008 at 10:24 am

    At the risk of continuing a debate between Ricky O. and everyone else, let me offer this. The assumption people have made here is that you are in job transition (HR speak for out of work and looking). Ricky, if your take on HR and the selection process is dead on, consider adapting your interviewing style to it, however wrong you feel it may be . Find out what HR and the hiring manager wants and give it to him/her. In the end, that is what most of business is about.

    Good luck, and if you are still in a job search, I advise you to pick up the book “Knock’Em Dead”, by Martin Yate. Maybe , as a first step, visit his website http://www.knockemdead.com/ I too, have been on both sides of the hiring desk, and I believe it’s the best tool for a job search.

15. Angel Says:
    June 27th, 2008 at 11:44 am

    Ricky,
    A great book I recommend is by Joel Osteen “Become A Better You”: 7 Keys To Improving Your Life Everyday.

    After reading it, you will realize that the “HR Mindset” that you continue to refer to is not as important as your own mindset that is holding you back from achieving what you want. Best Wishes.

Leave a Reply