As I sit here on Thanksgiving evening, with more to be thankful for
than I have time to mention, I look ahead a few weeks, as I face certain
layoff on December 22.
If you've been through a layoff before, then you know the roller coaster of emotions you ride. I have had 3 months' warning, and have been doing all that I know to do to find a new gig, both inside and outside of my present place of employment, but at this writing, I have, at best, a few warm leads.
Some might be content to have leads, but I'd be a lot more content with a job offer. The truth is that I've applied and networked as much as I can while working full time, and it has produced calls from potential employers. I have done multiple phone interviews, follow-up thank you letters, a couple of really good face-to-face interviews, but that is as far as it goes. Naturally, I'm wondering what I might be doing or not doing in the interview to not move past the initial face-to-face interview.
Many thoughts go through my head about my interviewing--- too confident, not confident enough, wasn't specific enough, went into too much detail, etc., etc. The truth is, I do not know what is going on. "Behavioral interviews" are the interviewing style du jour, and depending on how strict to form the interviewer is, it can be very difficult to answer the unspoken questions being asked by the question being asked.
For example, if you are asked "tell me about a time when you had a disagreement with your boss. What was it about, how did you approach it, and what was the result?" Is the interviewer interested in that specific incident? Somewhat, but more than that, the real questions being asked are "How do you relate to your boss? How do you handle conflict? What people skills do you have? Will you fit in to our culture?" etc....or at least that is what I perceive to be the questions behind the questions. I've had one interviewer give me feedback about these questions behind the question, and it is very difficult to understand what the interviewer really wants to know or hear. It is sad that this newest form of interviewing is seen as superior to having a conversation with the person you are interviewing about their experiences and accomplishments as they relate to the specific position for which that person is being interviewed. In all honesty, it is much easier to fool the interviewers using the behavioral interviewing approach if you know the game and can play well, especially in a situation where the interview is short and there isn't a lot of other discussion before a hiring decision is made.
Behavioral interviewing is all the rage today, but I would caution anyone who thinks it's a panacea for poor interviewing of the past. It wasn't that past interviewing techniques were inferior; it's that the same bad interviewers of the past are now doing bad interviews in the present with the behavioral interview model. Frankly, anyone can talk a good game using any interview model. Multiple discussions over time and with different people about experience needed for a position should not be replaced by an "all powerful" behavioral interview.
Perhaps a better approach to the behavior interview is to ask interviewees about specific skill/experience/accomplishments that would show that an interviewee has the skills and experience needed to be successful in the role for which they are interviewing. For example, "How do you work with a group of diverse people as we have at our company? Can you give me an example of when you have done that?" This is straightforward questioning that will generate a straightforward answer. If the interviewer has no ability to discern the skill level from this approach, behavioral interviewing will not help them.
I've had several behavioral interviews lately, and people will ask me about an organizational development experience, I answer the question with a clear OD example, only to have them say that they did not hear an OD example, and they re-ask the question. The issue is not so much that I didn't answer the question, but that they are non-OD people, do not understand what OD people do, but by using a behavioral interviewing sheet, believe they can discern if I have OD skills. Ludicrous.
Perhaps it is just me, but behavioral interviewing is another "HR trend" that HR believes will suddenly help bad hiring decisions from being made. Giving a person a supposed tool does not enable a person to suddenly have discernment or make them analytical enough to read the human being with whom they are thinking. It is unfortunate that the root cause of bad interviewing hasn't been truly addressed--the interviewers themselves. More skill building in this area with hiring managers and HR personnel would greatly improve the interviewing process.
If you've been through a layoff before, then you know the roller coaster of emotions you ride. I have had 3 months' warning, and have been doing all that I know to do to find a new gig, both inside and outside of my present place of employment, but at this writing, I have, at best, a few warm leads.
Some might be content to have leads, but I'd be a lot more content with a job offer. The truth is that I've applied and networked as much as I can while working full time, and it has produced calls from potential employers. I have done multiple phone interviews, follow-up thank you letters, a couple of really good face-to-face interviews, but that is as far as it goes. Naturally, I'm wondering what I might be doing or not doing in the interview to not move past the initial face-to-face interview.
Many thoughts go through my head about my interviewing--- too confident, not confident enough, wasn't specific enough, went into too much detail, etc., etc. The truth is, I do not know what is going on. "Behavioral interviews" are the interviewing style du jour, and depending on how strict to form the interviewer is, it can be very difficult to answer the unspoken questions being asked by the question being asked.
For example, if you are asked "tell me about a time when you had a disagreement with your boss. What was it about, how did you approach it, and what was the result?" Is the interviewer interested in that specific incident? Somewhat, but more than that, the real questions being asked are "How do you relate to your boss? How do you handle conflict? What people skills do you have? Will you fit in to our culture?" etc....or at least that is what I perceive to be the questions behind the questions. I've had one interviewer give me feedback about these questions behind the question, and it is very difficult to understand what the interviewer really wants to know or hear. It is sad that this newest form of interviewing is seen as superior to having a conversation with the person you are interviewing about their experiences and accomplishments as they relate to the specific position for which that person is being interviewed. In all honesty, it is much easier to fool the interviewers using the behavioral interviewing approach if you know the game and can play well, especially in a situation where the interview is short and there isn't a lot of other discussion before a hiring decision is made.
Behavioral interviewing is all the rage today, but I would caution anyone who thinks it's a panacea for poor interviewing of the past. It wasn't that past interviewing techniques were inferior; it's that the same bad interviewers of the past are now doing bad interviews in the present with the behavioral interview model. Frankly, anyone can talk a good game using any interview model. Multiple discussions over time and with different people about experience needed for a position should not be replaced by an "all powerful" behavioral interview.
Perhaps a better approach to the behavior interview is to ask interviewees about specific skill/experience/accomplishments that would show that an interviewee has the skills and experience needed to be successful in the role for which they are interviewing. For example, "How do you work with a group of diverse people as we have at our company? Can you give me an example of when you have done that?" This is straightforward questioning that will generate a straightforward answer. If the interviewer has no ability to discern the skill level from this approach, behavioral interviewing will not help them.
I've had several behavioral interviews lately, and people will ask me about an organizational development experience, I answer the question with a clear OD example, only to have them say that they did not hear an OD example, and they re-ask the question. The issue is not so much that I didn't answer the question, but that they are non-OD people, do not understand what OD people do, but by using a behavioral interviewing sheet, believe they can discern if I have OD skills. Ludicrous.
Perhaps it is just me, but behavioral interviewing is another "HR trend" that HR believes will suddenly help bad hiring decisions from being made. Giving a person a supposed tool does not enable a person to suddenly have discernment or make them analytical enough to read the human being with whom they are thinking. It is unfortunate that the root cause of bad interviewing hasn't been truly addressed--the interviewers themselves. More skill building in this area with hiring managers and HR personnel would greatly improve the interviewing process.
No comments:
Post a Comment