PSY 3630 Module 3 Structured Interview Paper: Questions, Anchors and Panels Example

Same Questions, Same Scale, Same Panel: Building a Structured Interview for Member Service Representatives

Student Name

B.S.B.A. in Human Resources/Organizational Management, Thomas Edison State University

PSY-3630: Industrial Psychology

Mentor Name

Month Day, Year

Same Questions, Same Scale, Same Panel: Building a Structured Interview for Member Service Representatives

Introduction

Interviews are the most widely used selection method and among the most trusted by managers, who feel they can judge people in conversation. At the credit union, each branch manager interviews applicants in his or her own way, asking different questions and making an overall judgment. Module two recommended a structured interview as the final step in hiring. This paper designs it.

What Structure Means

Campion et al. (1997) reviewed research on interview structure and identified fifteen components in two groups. Their content components start with questions drawn from job analysis results and the same wording for every applicant, then add limits on prompting and follow-up, better question types, more questions, control of ancillary information such as résumés and a rule that candidates' own questions wait until the end. Evaluation components include rating each answer or using multiple scales, using detailed anchored rating scales, taking notes, using multiple interviewers, keeping one panel for every candidate, avoiding talk about candidates between interviews, training interviewers and combining ratings statistically. They found that each component tended to improve reliability or validity, and that structure also made interviews more legally defensible.

How Much Structure Helps

McDaniel et al. (1994) meta-analyzed studies of interview validity. Structured interviews had a corrected validity of about .44 for job performance, compared with about .33 for unstructured interviews. Situational interviews, which ask candidates how they would handle hypothetical job situations, showed high validity. Interviews that focused on job-related content outperformed those that probed general psychological traits. These findings made structure the most important single improvement an organization can make to its interviews.

Question Types

Levashina et al. (2014) reviewed later research on structured interviews. They found strong support for two question types. Situational questions present a realistic dilemma and ask what the candidate would do. Past-behavior questions ask for an account of how the candidate really handled a comparable situation. Both predicted performance, and structure improved reliability and validity regardless of type. They also found that structured interviews reduce, but do not eliminate, the effects of impression management, and that candidates and interviewers generally accept them once they are explained.

The Questions

The job analysis named emotional control, active listening, accuracy, reading policy, service orientation and learning new systems as first-day characteristics. Each maps to one question:

Emotional control (situational): A member comes to your window shouting that the credit union charged him a fee he never agreed to. Other members are watching. What would you do?

Active listening (past behavior): Tell me about a time a customer's real problem turned out to be different from what they first said. How did you find out?

Accuracy (past behavior): Describe a time you caught a mistake in numbers or paperwork before it caused a problem.

Reading policy (situational): You are given a two-page policy on a member request you have never seen before. The member is waiting. How would you handle it?

Service orientation (past behavior): Tell me about a time you went beyond what was required to help someone.

Learning systems (past behavior): Walk me through a software tool you had to master fast at a previous job. What did you do first?

Rating Anchors

Each answer is rated from 1 to 5 using anchors. For the emotional control question, a 1 might describe arguing with the member or calling security immediately; a 3, staying calm and explaining the fee policy; and a 5, staying calm, acknowledging the member's frustration, moving the conversation away from the line if possible, checking the account and offering to review the fee with a supervisor. Anchors for the other questions were written in the same way using examples from the focus groups in the job analysis.

Running the Interview

Interviews will last 30 minutes. The panel will not see the résumé until after rating, will take notes, will rate each answer independently before discussing and will not compare candidates between interviews on the same day. Ratings will be averaged, with the emotional control and listening questions weighted double, since the job analysis rated them most important. Branch managers who resist the script will be shown the validity evidence and invited to help write anchors, which research suggests builds acceptance.

Training Interviewers

Branch managers will attend a half-day session before using the new interview. They will practice asking questions without adding their own, take notes on what candidates say rather than impressions, rate recorded sample answers and compare their ratings with others to calibrate. The session will also cover questions that must not be asked, such as those about age, family plans or health.

The Candidate's Side

Candidates will be told at the start that every applicant hears the same questions and that the panel will take notes, which research suggests improves perceived fairness. At the end, they will have five minutes to ask their own questions about the job, after ratings are complete.

Checking the Interview

After a year, the human resources team will correlate interview scores with six-month performance ratings and compare score distributions across groups, revising questions or anchors that do not predict or that show unexpected gaps.

Limits

Structured interviews still allow some impression management, and anchors can become outdated. Validity estimates are averages, and the credit union should track whether interview scores predict its own new hires' performance. The organization and questions are invented.

Conclusion

Campion and colleagues listed what structure consists of, McDaniel and colleagues showed structured interviews predict performance better and Levashina and colleagues confirmed that situational and past-behavior questions both work. For the credit union, six job-based questions, anchored scales, a panel and set weights turn a manager's chat into a valid selection tool.

References

Campion, M. A., Palmer, D. K., & Campion, J. E. (1997). A review of structure in the selection interview. Personnel Psychology, 50(3), 655-702. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.1997.tb00709.x

Levashina, J., Hartwell, C. J., Morgeson, F. P., & Campion, M. A. (2014). The structured employment interview: Narrative and quantitative review of the research literature. Personnel Psychology, 67(1), 241-293. https://doi.org/10.1111/peps.12052

McDaniel, M. A., Whetzel, D. L., Schmidt, F. L., & Maurer, S. D. (1994). The validity of employment interviews: A comprehensive review and meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79(4), 599-616. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.79.4.599