6.6 Interview Assessment
Questions to Avoid
Any questions that may discriminate against applicants based on any of the following grounds are prohibited:
- race
- national or ethnic origin
- colour
- religion
- age
- sex (including pregnancy or childbirth)
- sexual orientation
- marital status
- family status
- disability
- convictions for which a person has been granted a pardoned status
Note: Interview questions should always be job-related.
| Do | Don’t |
|---|---|
| Use language that is clear, straightforward and concise. | Use complex language. |
| Develop questions that are open-ended and call for more than a simple “yes” or “no” answer. | Make questions so specific that applicants who have not experienced particular situations are unable to answer the question. |
| Develop questions that call for job knowledge or present a job-related problem or situation. | Develop questions that discriminate on the prohibited grounds. |
| Ensure questions are realistic and practical and deal with important aspects of the job. | Develop questions that may seem threatening to applicants or could make them feel uncomfortable. |
| Have your questions reviewed by subject matter experts such as managers or consultants who are knowledgeable about the job or job incumbents who are successful in the position. |
Probing Questions
Applicants’ responses will vary in length and level of detail, especially with behavioural questions. For this reason, an interviewer may need to request additional examples or more specific information in order to accurately score the applicant’s answer. The following example illustrates how probing questions can clarify the applicant’s role in a specific situation.
Example Probing Questions
Interviewer: “Can you describe a time when you had to handle a conflict between two employees?”
Applicant: “Yes, I had to mediate a conflict between two team members who were not getting along because of differing work styles.”
The interviewer has the following three probing questions prepared:
- “Tell me more about the initial steps you took when you first leaned about the conflict.”
- “Why did you choose the particular conflict resolution strategy that you used?”
- “What was the result of your mediation efforts?”
Probing questions are generally acceptable in a structured interview as long as the interviewers keep the level of probing as consistent as possible across applicants so that they do not introduce bias into the interview process. You do not want some applicants to have an advantage over others.
The recommended approach is to develop probing questions at the same time as structured interview questions. Spontaneous, unplanned probing could bias the interview. Standardized probes should ensure that enough details of the situation, the applicant’s behaviour in the situation, and the outcome of the behaviour are being described.
Listed below is a series of sample probing questions.
| Behavioural Questions | Situational Questions |
|---|---|
| What was the context and situation? | How could you accomplish that? |
| Who was involved? | Why would you do that? |
| What specifically did you do? | When would you do that? |
| What was the outcome? | Who would you involve? |
Note-taking
Taking detailed notes is an extremely important element of the interview process.
Notes help the interviewer recall the content of the interview and assessment of the applicant’s responses. Without notes, there may be a tendency to simply recall the applicant’s strengths and weaknesses or be unable to recall the responses at all. Notes create a record of the interview process to defend a hiring decision.
Developing an Interview Assessment Guide
The interviewers need to decide in advance how they are going to assess interview responses in a fair and accurate manner. One way is to develop an interview assessment guide for evaluating applicants’ performances. When designing the guide, it is important to consider the kinds of responses relevant for each qualification assessed. The use of a rating scale can enable a more precise assessment against the qualifications to determine the “right fit” for the position, and minimizing subjective bias.
Qualifications can be rated against a variety of scale types. The simplest scale provides only “meets/does not meet” choices. Or you may require a scale that makes clear distinctions between applicants and helps determine the ‘right fit’ for the job.
A sample rating scale: To assess applicants fairly, interviewers should use a common rating scheme and scoring procedure for each applicant. This standardized approach improves the accuracy of judgments made by the interviewer and helps in later comparisons among applicants.
Below is an example of a rating scale:
| Does not meet the qualification | Meets the qualification | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
1 Very Poor. Unacceptable. |
2 Poor. Below average. |
3 Moderate. Good. Acceptable. Satisfactory. Average. |
4 Strong. Above average. |
5 Very Strong. Excellent. |
Ratings provided for each qualification should be accompanied by a brief explanation by the interviewer as to why the rating was given.
Behaviourally Anchored Scales
When developing these rating scales, one useful format is to distinguish different points on the rating scale using specific behaviours. This precision will help to ensure that all share a common understanding of what a given qualification means and what kinds of behaviours represent weak, moderate and strong performance on related interview questions. A behavioural rating scale consisting of sample answers to each question is called a scoring guide.
The number of points on a rating scale can vary, usually from three to five. When rating qualifications, a five-point scale is typically suitable. The scale may also vary in the level of detail provided in the behavioural description. For instance, the figure below provides a basic description of the expected responses for an applicant to receive a score of 1, 3, or 5 for situational and behavioural questions.
Question Samples
Situational Interview Question
“Suppose you had an idea for a change in procedure to enhance work quality, but some members of your work team were against any type of change…”
Probes
- “What would you do?”
- “What factors would you consider?”
- “Why?”
- “Who would you involve?”
Rating
- (5) Excellent Answer: Explain the change and try to show the benefits. Discuss it openly in a meeting.
- (3) Good Answer: Ask them why they are against change. Try to convince them.
- (1) Unacceptable answer: Tell the supervisor.
Behavioural Interview Question
“What was the biggest difference of opinion you ever had with a co-worker?”
Probes
- “How did you resolve it?”
- “What was the outcome?”
Rating
- (5) Excellent answer: “My co-worker and I looked into the situation, found the problem and resolved the difference. We had an honest conversation.”
- (3) Good answer: “Compromised. Resolved the problem by taking turns, or I explained the problem (my side) carefully.”
- (1) Unacceptable answer: “I got mad and told the co-worker off, or we got the supervisor to resolve the problem.”, or “I never have differences with anyone.”
Alternatively, more detailed behaviours can be added into the rating scale. This does not mean simply “cutting and pasting” the behavioural indicators for the qualification being measured. Rather, it entails outlining specific answers to the questions that define the different levels.
Behavioural Interview Question
“Can you give me an example of a time when you worked as part of a team to achieve a common goal?”
Scoring Guide
1. Unsatisfactory:
- The candidate is unable to provide a relevant example.
- The candidate’s behaviour demonstrated poor teamwork and did not contribute to the team’s success.
Example Answer: “I usually prefer to work alone, so I can’t think of a specific time when I worked in a team.”
3. Satisfactory:
- The candidate provides a specific example with some details.
- The candidate’s role was clear, and their contribution was adequate but not outstanding.
Example Answer: “I worked on a team to develop a new marketing strategy. I contributed my ideas during meetings and completed my assigned tasks on time. The strategy was implemented, but there were some communication issues.”
5. Excellent:
- The candidate provided a thorough and highly relevant example.
- The candidate’s role was crucial, and their contribution was highly effective, leading to outstanding team performance and goal achievement.
Example Answer: “I led a cross-functional team to launch a new product. I facilitated open communication, delegated tasks based on team members’ strengths, and kept everyone motivated and focused. The launch was a huge success, resulting in a 30% increase in sales within the first quarter.”
Examples of More Detailed Scoring Guides
Behavioural Interview Question
“Tell me about a time when you had to manage a conflict between two employees. What steps did you take to resolve the issue, and what was the outcome?”
Scoring Guide
1. Below Expectations:
Example Answer: “Two employees were constantly arguing over minor issues. I told them to sort it out themselves because I didn’t have time to get involved. The conflict eventually escalated, and one of the employees started avoiding the other, which affected team productivity.”
- Probes:
- “How did you initially become aware of the conflict?”
- “Why did you choose not to intervene directly?”
- “What was the long-term impact on the team, or the employees involved?”
- Behaviour Description:
- The candidate avoided taking responsibility for resolving the conflict.
- There was a lack of proactive intervention, leading to escalation.
- The resolution was ineffective or nonexistent, negatively impacting the work environment.
- The approach suggests poor conflict management skills and a lack of leadership in addressing team dynamics.
3. Meets Expectations:
Example Answer: “When two employees had a disagreement over how to approach a project, I brought them together for a discussion. I allowed each person to explain their perspective and then facilitated a conversation to help them find common ground. We discussed potential solutions, and I encouraged them to compromise on a way forward. They eventually agreed on a plan, and I checked in with them afterwards to ensure things were going smoothly.”
- Probes:
- “What specific steps did you take to facilitate the conversation?”
- “How did you ensure both employees felt heard during the discussion?”
- “How did you follow up to confirm the conflict was resolves?”
- Behaviour Description:
- The candidate took a structured approach, involving both parties in a mediated discussion.
- The conflict was resolved satisfactorily, with both employees able to work together afterwards.
- The candidate ensured that both employees felt heard and worked toward a mutually acceptable solution.
- There was follow-up to confirm the resolution was effective, demonstrating thoroughness.
5. Exceeds Expectations:
Example Answer: “Two employees were in conflict over the distribution of responsibilities on a major project, which was starting to affect team morale. I first met with each employee individually to understand their concerns and gather all relevant details. I also spoke with other team members to get a broader perspective. Then, I brought the two employees together in a neutral setting and used a structured mediation process to guide the conversation. We not only addressed the immediate conflict but also uncovered some underlying issues related to communication styles and workload distribution. I worked with them to develop a long-term plan that included regular check-ins and clearer role definitions. I also facilitated a team workshop on effective communication to prevent similar conflicts in the future. The result was a stronger working relationship between the two employees and improved team dynamics overall.”
- Probes:
- “How did you identify the underlying issues beyond the immediate conflict?”
- “What strategies did you use to ensure the conflict wouldn’t resurface?”
- “How did your approach affect the broader team or work environment?”
- Behaviour Description:
- The candidate demonstrated deep understanding and empathy by thoroughly investigating the conflict.
- The approach was comprehensive, addressing both the immediate issue and underlying causes.
- The candidate implemented long-term solutions to improve team dynamics and prevent future conflicts.
- The resolution had a positive impact not only on the individuals involved but also on the broader team, reflecting strong leadership and conflict-resolution skills.
Situational Interview Question
“Suppose an employee comes to you with a request to work remotely on a permanent basis. How would you handle their request?”
Scoring Guide
1. Below Expectations:
Example Answer: “I would tell the employee that remote work isn’t allowed without checking company policies or discussing it with their manager. I would ask them to continue working as usual and mention that they could reconsider their request in the future.”
- Behaviour Description:
- The candidate displays a lack of flexibility and doesn’t consider the request seriously.
- There is no attempt to review company policies or discuss the matter with relevant stakeholders.
- The response lacks empathy and does not explore the employee’s reasons for the request.
- The candidate’s approach may lead to employee dissatisfaction or demotivation.
3. Meets Expectations:
Example Answer: “I would start by discussing the request with the employee to understand their reasons for wanting to work remotely. I would then review the company’s remote work policy and consult with their manager to evaluate whether the request is feasible given their role and responsibilities. If the request aligns with company policy and can be supported by the team, I would work with the employee and their manager to outline a plan for remote work, including expectations, communication, and performance monitoring. If the request isn’t feasible, I would explain the reasons to the employee and explore alternative arrangements, such as flexible hours or partial remote work.”
- Behaviour Description:
- The candidate takes a balanced approach, considering both the employee’s needs and the company’s policies.
- The response includes consulting with the manager and evaluating the impact on the team and the employee’s role.
- There is an effort to find a solution that works for both the employee and the organization, even if the original request isn’t fully granted.
- The candidate shows an understanding of company policies and strives to maintain fairness and flexibility.
5. Exceeds Expectations:
Example Answer: “I would begin by having a detailed conversation with the employee to fully understand their reasons for requesting permanent remote work. I would then thoroughly review the company’s remote work policies and assess how this arrangement could benefit both the employee and the organization. I would consult with the employee’s manager to discuss potential challenges and how they could be mitigated, such as setting up clear communication channels and performance metrics. If the request seems viable, I would draft a comprehensive remote work agreement that outlines expectations, deliverables, and a plan for regular check-ins to ensure continued alignment with team goals. If the request isn’t feasible, I would offer alternative solutions, such as a hybrid work model or other accommodations that could address the employee’s needs. Throughout the process, I would ensure transparency, open communication, and a focus on maintaining the employee’s engagement and satisfaction.”
- Behaviour Description:
- The candidate demonstrates a proactive and thorough approach, considering the request from multiple angles.
- The response includes detailed planning to ensure the remote work arrangement is successful for both the employee and the organization.
- There is a strong focus on clear communication, ongoing support, and maintaining high performance.
- The candidate shows a commitment to finding a mutually beneficial solution and improving employee satisfaction and retention.
- The approach reflects strategic thinking, with a focus on long-term success and alignment with company goals.
OpenAI. (2024, August 15). ChatGPT. [Large language model]. https://chat.openai.com/chat
Prompts: “provide a behavioural interview question assessing an HR skill using a detailed behavioural scale of example answers rated as 1, 3 or 5 with probes”, “Provide a situational interview question assessing an HR skill using a detailed behavioural scale of example answers rated as 1, 3 or 5”
The interviewer’s task is to compare the applicant’s answers with the examples on the scoring guide. The ideal answer does not have to be given exactly as written in the scoring guide. As organizations are not all the same, an effective behaviour response in one organization might not be an effective response in another. Accordingly, the scoring guide may differ from one company to another.
Training the Interviewers
Research indicates that skilful interviewing requires training. It is important that all interviewers are properly trained on how to conduct structured interviews.
Interviewer preparation should cover the following topics:
- How to build rapport with applicants and active listening.
- The importance of taking good notes and how to do so.
- Learn how to ask questions, evaluate answers, and use scoring guides.
- How to use probes and when to probe.
- Assessor biases, common assessment errors and how to minimize them.
For a more detailed explanation of assessment errors, read ahead to Chapter 10.3 Assessment Errors and Probes.
Integrating Interview Results With Other Information
Interviews are not usually the only source of information about an applicant. Customarily, there is the applicant’s résumé, which will include information about previous work experience and educational background. Information may also be collected through additional assessments such as work samples, simulations, written tests, or reference checks. When collecting information from various sources, it is important to combine the information systematically in order to arrive at a final appointment decision. Otherwise, even when using valid selection instruments, combining the information haphazardly may result in poor, inconsistent decision-making.
This topic is explored further in Chapter 10 Decision Making.
Evaluating the Structured Interview Process
Once you have completed the selection process, it is important to review and evaluate the structured interview process and its outcomes to identify strengths and areas for improvement. By evaluating the interview process, you can determine how it may need to be changed to ensure that it continues to result in effective hiring decisions for your organization.
Overview of the Interview Process
The interview process includes the following steps:
Image Description
Flow chart moving through the following stages:
- Preparing for the interview
- The arrival of the applicant
- Initiating the interview
- Asking questions
- Probing
- Closing the interview
- Assessing the qualifications
Next to asking questions with an arrow pointing down is Controlling the Interview and Notetaking.
Summary Tips
The following summary will enhance the effectiveness and legal defensibility of an employment interview:
- Ensure that interview questions are job-related and based on the requirements of the target position.
- Avoid questions that are related to prohibited topics.
- Use standardization. This includes asking the same questions of all applicants.
- Enhance the objectivity of the assessment of applicants by having a well-defined and documented scoring system.
- Provide training to ensure interviewers know how to conduct fair and unbiased interviews.
- Use an interview panel rather than individual interviewers whenever possible. Diversity in interviewers is also preferable.
- It is important to use the same interviewers for all applicants whenever possible.
Structured Interviewing: How to design and conduct structured interviews for an appointment process The Assessment Oversight and the Personnel Psychology Centre, by the Government of Canada, used under the Crown Copyright – NonCommercial Reproduction Licence (Canada). This reproduction is not endorsed by the Government of Canada.—Modifications: Used section Do’s and don’ts when designing interview questions; Used section Probing questions, edited, changed example; Used section Developing an assessment booklet, edited; Used section Behaviourally-anchored scales, edited; Used section Training the interview board, edited; Used first paragraph of section Integrating interview results with other information, Used first paragraph of Section 5: Evaluating the interview process; Used section Summary tips for practitioners.
