“interviews are the most effective Human resource selection technique” negative side (opposing side)

“Interviews are the most effective Human Resource selection technique.”

The methods or techniques used in human resources selection tend to vary depending on the staff and resources of the company; however, interviews are regarded as the most effective human resource selection technique because it provides an opportunity for individuals to express their opinions thereby enabling the organization to collect a lot of information about the candidate. Although, as a Human Resource selection technique, interview method is helpful in selecting the best candidate with right skills and qualifications for any job at any job level, it has many limitations or disadvantages that affect its effectiveness.

Firstly, the information from the interviews is subject to biases that are introduced by human interaction. Although they aid in conducting an in-depth analysis of candidates to help in concluding if they are really suitable or not for the organization, interviews may normally discourage or encourage the expression of specific opinions and facts (Daft & Marcic, 2009, p. 334). Therefore, the biases of the interviewer can influence the effectiveness of the technique in selecting the right candidate. The interview’s results are dependent on the interviewer’s personal judgment; it is decided based on the biases of the interviewer’s personal judgment which are always incorrect (Anbuvelan, 2007, p. 130). At times, the interviewers form a specific opinion or view about a given candidate who usually deviates from the main objective of purposeful exchange of meanings. Even though no single Human resource selection technique is completely free of interpretation, the interview method is usually very open to biases than other Human resource selection techniques. Bias cannot totally be avoided; however, it is crucial that great care is taken in attempting to reduce it during the Human resource selection process. Although the proponents of this technique may argue that complete job specifications and job descriptions for every job may help in reducing interviewer biases because the actual requirements are clearly spelled out in detail, the effect of the mood of the interviewer cannot be fully eliminated (Marquis & Huston, 2009, p. 344).

Secondly, Human resource selection technique is not the most effective method because it is subject to the problem of social desirability. The interview is preferred because it can only test the personality of a candidate; however, it is unable to fully and effectively judge the skills as well as the ability of the candidate for the job. The proponents of the method may argue that it is the main tool of the selection process but it is an incomplete process because it does not help the interviewer to extract every single detail concerning the candidate (Daft & Marcic, 2009, p. 335). For instance, the interviewees usually give the most socially acceptable responses to the questions asked. They just say what the interviewer would like to hear and because individuals do not often do what they say, relying on such skewed information can be ineffective in selecting the best candidate for the job. Since interviews are arranged for a particular time frame during which more information is collected about a candidate through asking questions, it may result in snap judgment. This is because the interviewer judges the attitude, nature and personality of the candidate based on just the answers they provided (Anbuvelan, 2007, p. 130). The choice of preference of words of the candidate cannot completely define the candidate but just to some extent. In addition, the interviewer may only select comparatively easier questions because the level of scrutiny and the selection of questions are dependent on the personality of the interviewer. Easy going interviewers can select less capable candidates for further consideration while more demanding and strict interviewers are able to reject even highly qualified candidates (Marquis & Huston, 2009, p. 344).

Thirdly, the success of the interview method is dependent on the interviewer. Generally, the interviewers may not be experts of the job being offered or of the situation and hence may not be in a good position to take out the maximum and suitable information from the interviewees. By not being an expert on the specific situation, some interviewers tend to confuse the interviewees by asking the questions that are not relevant only to defeat them thereby not getting maximum information from the candidates (Daft & Marcic, 2009, p. 334). A good number of interviewers may direct the questions to the candidates in such a way that does not allow them enough time to answer. Even though the proponents of interview method may argue that it helps in collecting sufficient information because the interviewers are able to ask any question to the candidates, lack of attention on the part of the two parties may affect the information collected (Marquis & Huston, 2009, p. 345). Real information cannot be collected when the two parties are less attentive. In addition, the interview method is not suitable alone in selecting the right candidate without the written test to gauge the conceptual skills.  Therefore, the inefficiency on the part of the interviewer may lead to misleading results. In addition, the interview method is unsuitable for personal matters because the candidates may not be free to reveal such information (Anbuvelan, 2007, p. 131).

Finally, it is clear that the interview method is flexible and can be set up in accordance with the needs of an organization and different posts demanding different skills and qualifications be detected by the interviews. There are high chances that wrong candidates will be selected in the company because of subjective evaluations of the interviewers. Because decisions are usually made by the interviewers within the first few minutes while the rest of the interview is used in justifying or validating the original decisions, interview method is not the most effective method of human resource selection (Marquis & Huston, 2009, p. 344). There are high chances of disproportionate rates of selection of minority members using this method because there is no sufficient evidence of the validity of this type of selection technique. In addition, the interview technique is relatively costly as well as time-consuming as the interviews require a significant amount of time and resources (Daft & Marcic, 2009, p. 334).

In summation, it is clear that interviews have some factors that justify its usefulness; it is a less effective human resource selection technique. Although, as a Human Resource selection technique, interview method is helpful in selecting the best candidate with right skills and qualifications for any job at any job level, it has many limitations or disadvantages that affect its effectiveness.

Get a 10 % discount on an order above $ 100
Use the following coupon code :