Pre-interview questions
Discussion
I am working with a company faced with large numbers of job applicants, all with good looking CVs who when the people arrive at interview, turn out to be right muppets. In particular they seem to know nothing about the job they have applied for or the company. They are thinking about adding some of the questions to their application form to get candidates to research the job and the company a little so that they only get the genuinely interested applicants and would sift out those with little insight.
I would value the PH view on doing this. Despite providing lots of information on their web site they have had a problem with people turning down job offers or being employed but not knowing what they had signed up to, including for example the travel required, the challenges of the job and the day to day tasks they will be undertaking. Accordingly they quickly get racked off and under perform until sacked (very few jump ship as it is a well paid job). they have triallled some extra interview questions to get at these points which seem to work well and now wany to use them in the application form so the real muppets don't get an interview. I just wondred if real job applicants would get royally racked off by having them at application form stage and if it would put off even keen candidates.
The questions they have in mind are:
Tell us why you have applied to company A, rather than one of our competitors. How do we differ?
Tell us what you think you will be doing on a daily basis if you got this job.
Tell us what you feel are the current operational priorities of company A.
Given what you know about the travel involved in this role, how do you see that affecting your social and domestic life?
I would value the PH view on doing this. Despite providing lots of information on their web site they have had a problem with people turning down job offers or being employed but not knowing what they had signed up to, including for example the travel required, the challenges of the job and the day to day tasks they will be undertaking. Accordingly they quickly get racked off and under perform until sacked (very few jump ship as it is a well paid job). they have triallled some extra interview questions to get at these points which seem to work well and now wany to use them in the application form so the real muppets don't get an interview. I just wondred if real job applicants would get royally racked off by having them at application form stage and if it would put off even keen candidates.
The questions they have in mind are:
Tell us why you have applied to company A, rather than one of our competitors. How do we differ?
Tell us what you think you will be doing on a daily basis if you got this job.
Tell us what you feel are the current operational priorities of company A.
Given what you know about the travel involved in this role, how do you see that affecting your social and domestic life?
If the company finds itself employing people who don't know what they signed up to, then it's the interviewers that are as much at fault as the applicants.
I'd save those questions for the interview, because if I were asked them upfront, my answers would be:
1. I applied ot company A rather than a competitor, because company A advertised the vacancy
2. ctrl-C, ctrl-V the job spec in the advert
3. ctrl-C, ctrl-V the company's mission statement from their website
4. I am OK with the travel
They won't prompt the applicant to do any more research than they otherwise would. As things are, every job will have a huge number of applicants, many of whokm are looking for anything until something better comes along.
As I said before, if the company keeps employing the wrong people, then it's their fault, not the candidates'
I'd save those questions for the interview, because if I were asked them upfront, my answers would be:
1. I applied ot company A rather than a competitor, because company A advertised the vacancy
2. ctrl-C, ctrl-V the job spec in the advert
3. ctrl-C, ctrl-V the company's mission statement from their website
4. I am OK with the travel
They won't prompt the applicant to do any more research than they otherwise would. As things are, every job will have a huge number of applicants, many of whokm are looking for anything until something better comes along.
As I said before, if the company keeps employing the wrong people, then it's their fault, not the candidates'
You seem to have two separate issues here.
The first is unsuitable candidates applying and getting interviews. You could do a second screening by short telephone interview and this should show up the good and bad candidates so that you have a better hit rate on your face to face interviews. That should save you a lot of wasted time. You could also review the effort you put into interpretting applications and selecting for interview. Look back to the applications put in by the 'muppets' and see if you could have spotted them in advance.
The second issue is employing people who turn out to be unsuitable. This one is entirely in your court. Interviewing is often regarded as something anyone can have a bash at but actually its a very skilled activity. Sounds like some training would be in order. You need to learn ways to find out who's telling you the truth in interview. Trap door techniques, story telling etc.
The first is unsuitable candidates applying and getting interviews. You could do a second screening by short telephone interview and this should show up the good and bad candidates so that you have a better hit rate on your face to face interviews. That should save you a lot of wasted time. You could also review the effort you put into interpretting applications and selecting for interview. Look back to the applications put in by the 'muppets' and see if you could have spotted them in advance.
The second issue is employing people who turn out to be unsuitable. This one is entirely in your court. Interviewing is often regarded as something anyone can have a bash at but actually its a very skilled activity. Sounds like some training would be in order. You need to learn ways to find out who's telling you the truth in interview. Trap door techniques, story telling etc.
Doofus said:
If the company finds itself employing people who don't know what they signed up to, then it's the interviewers that are as much at fault as the applicants.
I'd save those questions for the interview, because if I were asked them upfront, my answers would be:
1. I applied ot company A rather than a competitor, because company A advertised the vacancy
2. ctrl-C, ctrl-V the job spec in the advert
3. ctrl-C, ctrl-V the company's mission statement from their website
4. I am OK with the travel
They won't prompt the applicant to do any more research than they otherwise would. As things are, every job will have a huge number of applicants, many of whokm are looking for anything until something better comes along.
As I said before, if the company keeps employing the wrong people, then it's their fault, not the candidates'
I think they would be happy if they went to the web site and did any amount of looking at the job they were applying for. It is similar to advertising for an electriocal engineer, and then loads of civil engineers apply not knowing that electrical engineers did anything different. I sat in on interviews last week and the interviewers were very adept, but were faced with I'd save those questions for the interview, because if I were asked them upfront, my answers would be:
1. I applied ot company A rather than a competitor, because company A advertised the vacancy
2. ctrl-C, ctrl-V the job spec in the advert
3. ctrl-C, ctrl-V the company's mission statement from their website
4. I am OK with the travel
They won't prompt the applicant to do any more research than they otherwise would. As things are, every job will have a huge number of applicants, many of whokm are looking for anything until something better comes along.
As I said before, if the company keeps employing the wrong people, then it's their fault, not the candidates'
I had suggested the telephone screening interview but their corporate line is that all de-selections must be carried out by 2 people. I guess they could record them and get a 2nd opinion before rejecting.
I'm often asked about the company I've applied to at interview. In the last interview I had I was able to offer when they started, who they'd been taken over by, what the number of employees were, what the annual revenue was and how it compared to my previous company, etc.
Yet I write computer software, I don't even talk to clients in my current role. Does it help differentiate potential employees for the position you're seeking to fill?
Yet I write computer software, I don't even talk to clients in my current role. Does it help differentiate potential employees for the position you're seeking to fill?
I've probably interviewed a dozen people in my time, and one thing that I've always noticed in common is that regardless of the role, (interviewed for several roles) you will always get 'muppets' applying. It doesn't help that our company's job specs are so full of 'corporate bulls
t' that the candidates mistake the role for something else, leading to unsuitable applicants.
It is also a lot down to the interviewer to spot the good from the bad, which can be difficult in such short time frames. Best bet is to make sure the interviewers are equipped with relevant and challenging questions, and give out a clear description of the day to day activities of the role. Better to ask too many questions, than not enough surely?
t' that the candidates mistake the role for something else, leading to unsuitable applicants.It is also a lot down to the interviewer to spot the good from the bad, which can be difficult in such short time frames. Best bet is to make sure the interviewers are equipped with relevant and challenging questions, and give out a clear description of the day to day activities of the role. Better to ask too many questions, than not enough surely?
CVs are the worst method of conveying competencies for role. Interviewing is the worst method of confirming competence for role.
Now that's out of the way...you need a specialist recruiter who uses modern methods of identifying potentials and selecting the best. But they can only convert what you give them, so you need to know exactly what it is you want (rubbish in, rubbish out). If you are a high value organisation who trade on quality, then doing it properly will cost more up front but deliver efficiencies over time. Carrying on as you are, even with adjustments, will always be suboptimal. God luck!
Now that's out of the way...you need a specialist recruiter who uses modern methods of identifying potentials and selecting the best. But they can only convert what you give them, so you need to know exactly what it is you want (rubbish in, rubbish out). If you are a high value organisation who trade on quality, then doing it properly will cost more up front but deliver efficiencies over time. Carrying on as you are, even with adjustments, will always be suboptimal. God luck!
Gassing Station | Jobs & Employment Matters | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff