In the professional world, to secure a decent job demands a range of factors and abilities, justifying why many recruitment procedures consist of several steps. Hence, it is widely argued that interviews should not be seen as the most effective method to evaluate one’s chance of employment. This essay will elaborate my concurrence with the aforementioned view owing to this approach’s drawbacks and the availability of other measures.
Firstly, face-to-face or online interviews would not allow candidates to express their full potential as an employee due to the time limits. A half-an-hour discussion with recruiters may not be sufficient for job seekers to create a positive impression and to judiciously assess their specialized knowledge, problem-solving capacity as well as diligence, all of which are the main attributes of an ideal worker. In many cases, interviews can best reflect individuals’ oral skills only, leaving little room for other abilities to present themselves during these formal conversations. This is particularly inadequate for positions that require a high level of technical expertise, such as software developers or electrical engineers, since these types of work do not underscore the significance of communication skills as opposed to sales managers or language instructors.
Secondly, the efficiency of interviews significantly depends on the ability of interviewers. If these meetings are hosted by inexperienced staff of the Human Resources department, they may be incapable of assessing a participant’s employability due to a deficiency in specialized knowledge and shrewd observation. Besides, they may not be able to foster an ambient and healthy atmosphere, in which candidates are stimulated to bring out the best in the interview. Thus, selecting unsuitable interviewers can risk a company’s progress by losing remarkable and dedicated candidates, even to its competitors.
Finally, interviews alone cannot provide a holistic view of an applicant’s working capacity, instead, other alternatives can facilitate such assessment, including performance tests and probation. While the former can effectively evaluate candidates’ qualifications, the latter can test their adaptability, dedication and other interpersonal skills, such as computer literacy or communication. Both these methods should provide recruiters with reliable predictors of their long-term suitability for an occupation, thereby reducing economic loss and turnover rates for companies because of inadequate work placement.
To sum up, in my view, interviews are not the best way to measure one’s employability due to drawbacks associated with time limits, interviewers’ abilities and partial assessment of job candidates. Hence, a balanced approach between interviews and other methods, such as probation and performance tests, should be adopted to ensure a just and comprehensive evaluation of a job applicant.