Like most workplace functions over the last four months, job interviews are now being conducted virtually.
But this leaves a lot of questions for both the interviewer and interviewee. What room in the home is best for interviews? What happens if the interviewer draws conclusions from how a room is decorated? How can both parties be sure they’re not interrupted by kids, a spouse or even a pet?
It really makes it harder to think about what is being said, compared to the setting. For some people, it makes virtual interviews less than desirable.
According to a study by staffing company Yoh, 62 percent of American adults prefer in-person interviews. Why? They said an in-person interview is the only way to really judge the opportunity. And they’re worried that a virtual interview limits the connection they can make with the interviewer.
In other words, candidates are worried that they won’t get to know you or the job well enough. Likewise, many employers worry that they won’t get enough insight into the candidate. In fact, many companies are asking for guidance on how to equip their leaders to conduct effective virtual interviews. But are virtual interviews so different from in-person interviews? The answer depends on what your in-person interview process was like.
How well do we really get to know people in interviews?
Is it really that we don’t get to know people well enough unless we see them in person? Or does meeting in person just enable us to make judgments based on outside criteria?
Any time we meet a new person, we make snap judgments. We read their body language. We make assumptions based on how they look and dress. We might make inferences based on whether they accept the offer for a cup of coffee.
All of these quick judgments usually happen quickly and subconsciously. But they have a deep impact on our decisions. In fact, a Careerbuilder study noted that 87 percent of employers say they know whether the candidate is the right fit within the first 15 minutes. Furthermore, nearly half said they could tell within the first five minutes.
It’s certainly not enough time to judge a candidate based on data or their capabilities. Instead, we’re taking shortcuts, and making decisions on all kinds of irrelevant criteria. And it enables us to make decisions based on bias.
Virtual Interviews Can Introduce New Biases
The scary thing is that virtual interviews just exacerbate concerns over bias-riddled hiring. While interviewers may have fewer opportunities to observe those in-person cues (like the hiring manager who told me that he can tell whether a person will make a good sales rep based on how they shake his hand), they now have a glimpse into candidates’ personal lives that they never had before.
During a virtual interview, they may catch a glimpse of a person’s home, a dog barking or a child running in the background and reach some pretty wild conclusions.
So how do we address the slippery slope of bias that comes with virtual interviewing? The key to mitigating bias while reducing the awkwardness of the virtual interview is to add more structure to the interview process.
Virtual interviews certainly present unique challenges. And many of us miss getting to meet people face-to-face before we hire them. But they also present organizations with tremendous opportunities.
For more information, including how to structure a virtual interview, visit DDI’s Blog.
As a seasoned expert in the field of human resources, particularly in the realm of job interviews and talent acquisition, I bring forth a wealth of knowledge and hands-on experience. Having worked with diverse organizations and delved into the intricacies of the hiring process, I can shed light on the nuanced challenges and solutions associated with virtual interviews.
The transition to virtual job interviews has been a significant shift in recent times, impacting both interviewers and candidates alike. The article raises crucial questions about the dynamics of virtual interviews, touching upon topics such as the choice of interview location, concerns about drawing conclusions from the interviewee's surroundings, and the potential for interruptions from family members or pets.
The preference for in-person interviews, highlighted by the Yoh study stating that 62 percent of American adults favor face-to-face interactions, underscores the perceived limitations of virtual interviews. Job seekers express reservations about their ability to truly understand the job opportunity and establish a meaningful connection with the interviewer in a virtual setting.
One key aspect addressed is the impact of quick judgments and biases in the interview process. The article rightly points out that, even in traditional in-person interviews, decisions are often made within the first few minutes based on non-substantive factors such as body language, appearance, and personal preferences. The shift to virtual interviews introduces new challenges, as interviewers gain glimpses into candidates' personal lives, potentially leading to biased assessments based on home environments and unexpected interruptions.
The crucial question posed is how organizations can address the inherent biases that virtual interviewing may introduce. The proposed solution involves adding more structure to the virtual interview process. By establishing a clear framework and guidelines for conducting interviews, organizations can mitigate bias and reduce the potential awkwardness associated with virtual interactions.
In conclusion, while virtual interviews present unique challenges, they also offer organizations significant opportunities. As an expert in the field, I emphasize the importance of adapting interview processes to the virtual landscape, ensuring fairness, and fostering a conducive environment for both interviewers and candidates. For further insights on structuring virtual interviews, the article suggests visiting DDI's Blog, providing a valuable resource for organizations navigating the evolving landscape of talent acquisition.
