Question:
Our company could like to try a team approach to interviewing. Do you think this is a good idea?
Response:
There is great upside to team interviewing. I don’t advocate three-on-one or four-on-one because it generates too much pressure on the candidate. Rather, I prefer team interviews to be a series of independent interviews.
The muck of the team interview process is getting everyone trained on how to conduct an interview. On a hiring team of three, if even one manager makes inaccurate assumptions or a misinterpretation, 33% of your input could be flawed. The bad news is that most companies don’t have a clue on how to conduct an effective interview.
Interview training for each member of the hiring team is essential for their collective effort to be of benefit. With the right training, the use of a team enhances the quality of the hiring decision big time. -TF
We did an interview for a nurse as a team with 3 staff nurses and myself, assistant director over the area. I do feel the person felt intimidated and perhaps pressured in that environment. However, it gave more than one perspective on the potential outcomes for that employee on the job and how she would fit in our unit. It was a success and we all agreed that she needed some specifics, but would fit in with the staff and was a great candidate. She got the job.
Mary,
I have found the team interview to be very effective. To make sure it is not intimidating, I recommend the interviews be sequential (one person at a time) instead of ganging up. You also need to coordinate prior to the process to make sure the team knows what it is looking for in the interview. It makes comparing notes much more useful.
I used Tom’s approach when hiring staff. Rather than using an interview panel (which was the custom), I arranged for each panelist to interview each candidate separately, with each asking a consistent set of questions. This permits each interviewer to develop their own sense of the candidate without being influenced by other interviewers. After all interviews are complete, we all get together to compare notes. We even “voted” on candidates to begin the review process as a means of separating the candidates into strong and weaker groups. Then the discussion focused on the candidates’ strengths and weaknesses. Generally worked well although sometimes a not-so-good candidate slipped through. Ultimately, you have to be clear on what you want and not kid yourself about what the candidates offer. If you don’t find the right one initially, keep looking.
Bill,
The team approach can be very powerful in the way that you structured it. Prior to the sequential interviews, you may find it helpful to have the team pow-wow on what they are collectively looking for and what each of those requirements means. This establishes the criteria for selection. This pow-wow will help drive the interview questions so that team members can compare notes on the same subjects. Keep me updated on how this is working for you. -TF