Hiring the right person is a difficult exercise. The interview is the lynchpin of evaluating candidates. The task is to create questions that help you see the real person behind the mask The question must not “lead” the candidate by cuing them on what the right answer is.
Many interviewers don’t recognize that a question is leading. This is particularly true of unstructured interviews with candidates where there are no planned questions. Fifty years of psychological research have shown this to be one of the weakest predictors of job success.
Take the Quiz
Here are ten interview questions. See if you can pick out which ones are leading.
- Tell me about a problem you faced at work that you were able to resolve?
- Can you describe a problem you had with a customer and tell me how you solved it?
- Describe a time you had conflicting priorities at work and then tell me how you resolved the issue?
- How do you deal with a boss who you think is making unreasonable demands of you?
- What, if anything, did you do to get ready for today’s interview?
- How important is it for you to learn new work skills?
- What steps do you usually take to build harmonious relationships with the people you work with?
- From time to time, we have an outside person come in to provide directions. Would you be able to easily accept direction from this person?
- As you know, closing a sale is very important. What actions should be taken to close a sale, and then what actions should be taken after the close?
- Is work something you do to earn money to pay bills, or is it something you enjoy?
The Answers to the Quiz
Let’s take them in groups.
Numbers 1-2 are both leading questions. They point the applicant to telling you a story about a problem they faced at work. Not bad. But the question then injects the assumption that they successfully solved the problem.
This leads the candidate to tell you about their successes. Wouldn’t areas where they struggled to be more revealing?
Number 3 begins with an open question. By adding the closing line “… tell me how you resolved the issue” leads the applicant toward a more favourable answer. This too closes off hearing about unsuccessful or partially successful situations.
Number 4 is a theoretical question. It doesn’t tell us anything about how that person dealt with a real boss. This makes it particularly easy for the verbally adroit candidate to give a persuasive answer while yielding nothing about how they really acted in the past.
Numbers 6 and 8 are problematic for two reasons. First, they invite a yes or no answer. Second, the answer to each is obvious. (If you were applying for a job, how would you answer?)
Number 7 assumes that the person does try to build harmonious relationships with people. And you don’t have to be a brain surgeon to figure out the right answers.
Number 9 is problematic in several ways. First, it tells the applicant you want to know if they understand how to close a sale.
There are many different types of sales. Selling a refrigerator is totally different from selling a large consulting project to the government.
The most skilled salespeople don’t focus on closing. They follow a series of steps that, if done properly, will most often lead the prospect to close the sale themself.
The second part of the question leads the person by signalling that something should happen after the close. It tells the candidate that there are things that should be done. Would they have thought of this without the prompt? We’ll never know.
Number 10 is obviously problematic. First, it asks for an either-or choice, which is rarely effective. Most candidates will talk about how both are important but will emphasize the pleasure they get from their work. Second, it is entirely theoretical.
Okay, so what about number 5? That is not leading. Yes, it does point the applicant to an area you are interested in. It does not, however, suggest anything about what the correct answer is.
The Impact of the Answers You Receive
When leading questions slip into an interview with candidates, the damage can be considerable. Here’s a conversation that I overheard in a coffee shop not long ago.
Two professionally dressed people shared a table. They spoke quite loudly. Sitting at the next table it was impossible to not overhear them. It soon became clear that this was a job interview. It was entirely a spontaneous conversation, with no obvious structure. No written notes were being made. About ten minutes into the meeting, the person doing the hiring threw in this question:
“This job requires you to work with people from all different social backgrounds and ethnic groups. I can see from your resume that you’ve had a lot of experience in this area. I don’t suppose that would be a problem for you then, would it?
Not surprisingly, the candidate gave an immediate assurance that “No, this is certainly something that I have gotten quite good at.”
Here is the problem: The interviewer thinks they have obtained some objective data that would support the conclusion that the candidate has these abilities. This entirely wrong conclusion then contaminates the choice about whether to hire this person. It might even be the one that tips the decision.
The Most Revealing Fact
All of the questions, except number 5, are taken from books written by “experts” on how to hire staff. None are described as leading. All are recommended.
If the experts aren’t picking up that their recommended questions are leading, no wonder it’s so easy for these to slip into an interview with candidates.
Dr Byrne has been a Corporate Psychologist for over forty years. This article is adapted from his forthcoming book Psychological Hiring: How to Build a Strong Team Using Behavioral Science”
For the last 40 years, Ken has specialized in serving as a second opinion to clients making a hiring or promotion decision. In Australia his advice has been sought by the ANZ Bank, Coles-Myer, The Walt Disney Company, Tattersalls, Optus, Telecom, Wrest Point Casino and a host of businesses in the SME market. For over twenty-five years he consulted to many Australian police departments and a range of other public safety agencies.
