In practice, can you think of reasons why organizations might NOT want their interview questions to be provided prior to an interview? For instance, many consulting firms have intellectual property rights on their interviews and thus would not want their questions given to any individual prior to taking an interview. Additionally, this would seem not terribly feasible for situations where we are interested in the individual’s ability to think on their feet or their adaptability to change or stress.
The transparency manipulation seems so tiny yet it worked. It seems like organizations could easily prepare applicants through email or even on their web page. What are the downsides to being transparent with the applicants before the interview?
Do you think providing advance information to applicants about the performance dimensions that will be the focus of questions in the interview would enhance rapport building when using a structure interview format?
Transparency manipulation for interviews seems valuable for the applicants but disadvantageous for highly complex positions and even high-level positions. Is this only good for low-level positions?
I think whether or not one uses a transparent interview process depends on the job. If I need a person who has to think on their feet without preparation, then I am not going to use a transparent interview process. It just doesn't make sense. Thoughts?
I appreciated the point of the fairness of transparency (in addition to the construct validity - it gives a more accurate picture of the relative strengths and weaknesses of candidates) - when in some prominent orgs you have individuals who get access to the dimiensions and so have an advantage and others do not.
In practice, can you think of reasons why organizations might NOT want their interview questions to be provided prior to an interview? For instance, many consulting firms have intellectual property rights on their interviews and thus would not want their questions given to any individual prior to taking an interview. Additionally, this would seem not terribly feasible for situations where we are interested in the individual’s ability to think on their feet or their adaptability to change or stress.
ReplyDeleteThe transparency manipulation seems so tiny yet it worked. It seems like organizations could easily prepare applicants through email or even on their web page. What are the downsides to being transparent with the applicants before the interview?
ReplyDeleteDo you think providing advance information to applicants about the performance dimensions that will be the focus of questions in the interview would enhance rapport building when using a structure interview format?
ReplyDeleteHow might transparency in interviews improve perceptions of procedural justice?
ReplyDeleteTransparency manipulation for interviews seems valuable for the applicants but disadvantageous for highly complex positions and even high-level positions. Is this only good for low-level positions?
ReplyDeleteI think whether or not one uses a transparent interview process depends on the job. If I need a person who has to think on their feet without preparation, then I am not going to use a transparent interview process. It just doesn't make sense. Thoughts?
ReplyDeleteI appreciated the point of the fairness of transparency (in addition to the construct validity - it gives a more accurate picture of the relative strengths and weaknesses of candidates) -
ReplyDeletewhen in some prominent orgs you have individuals who get access to the dimiensions and so have an advantage and others do not.