The interview is not like a job interview: While standard job interviews are the norm, there is a general suspicion that questions such as “What are your strengths and weaknesses?” do little more than scratch the surface. This is hard for people to admit – after all, who does not feel that they understand people well? Professional interview training allows greater depth and security: STAR interaction techniques, identifying “good” questions, actually being able to listen, being able to recognize signals and to vary speed and depth at will. We help you to professionalize your interview approach: the focus here is on the relevant underlying skills, the interview guidelines and the interviewer’s skills in asking questions and steering the interview.
Structure and a focus on requirements can help to boost validity enormously: The traditional job interview has a validity of 0.14 – i.e. not much higher than zero on a scale of 0 to 1 (Schmidt & Hunter, 1998). Studies show that excellent validities are possible – even as high as an average validity of 0.45 in the last meta-analysis. Key topics in interview training: The questions have a 50% difficulty; all applicants are asked the same questions in the same order; the responses are evaluated separately; there are several interviewers and several interview parts planned.
Competency model as a starting point: The key element in good interviews is how the questions focus on requirements. To this end, companies have competency models that map the “target radar” of the required competencies. This structured approach zones in on competencies which, on a superficial level, are ultimately crucial for the success in the position but which are not written on the applicants’ faces: the ability to understand complex situations, the ability to deal with conflict, personal value structure, structure of professional motivation.
Validity of various aptitude procedures: The term “validity” is used to refer to the statistical correlation between initial prediction and actual professional success at a later stage. There are various success criteria, e.g. whether the candidate in question is still with the company after two years, whether his/her salary has increased or how satisfied his/her new direct superior is. Statistically speaking, the correlations can be between 0 and 1.0. However, 1.0 is practically impossible, as a “true” judgement of the professional success does not exist, e.g. the evaluation by direct superiors is also subjective. Even values of 0.3 or 0.4 are very good. The illustration gives an overview of the current state of research.