We should not have an untrained interviewer in Three-on-one's just because the other interviewers are experienced.. IMPLEMENTING THREE-ON-ONE COMPREHENSIVE INTERVIEWS PRE-INTERVIEW All
Trang 1October 7, 1997 (Updated May 3, 2000)
FILE MEMORANDUM
Subject: Comprehensive Interviews via "Three-on-one's" vs Three "One-on-one's"
This evaluates the relative strengths of these two approaches to day visit comprehensive interviewing and sets forth some important requirements to successfully implement Three-on-one interviews Both of these
approaches have been used in management selection Although three separate One-on-one interviews is used predominately, U.S Customer Business Development switched to Three-on-one's for all day visits in 1994/95, and U.S Human Resources has been using Three-on-one's regularly Global Recruiting has experience with both approaches in selecting its own staff, and some U.S Product Supply recruiters have had experience with both approaches
Three-on-one interviews typically require about 1.5 hours with a candidate One-on-one's each require about an hour Therefore, interviewers spend more time doing Three-on-one's, while candidates spend less
Assessment
Properly executed Three-on-one interviews can provide several benefits compared to a series of three One-on-one's
1 Candidates spend less time under interrogation and do not have to repeat the same information on separate occasions
2 Potentially more time is available during the day for candidate selling activities
3 Administratively, it is easier to consistently meet the objective of giving an offer before the day visit
concludes
4 Each decision maker may be exposed to more assessment information in the Three-on-one versus what they would likely have covered in their shorter One-on-one
5 The Three-on-one situation probably helps motivate each interviewer to do their job well
6 The Three-on-one situation provides an opportunity for less experienced or less skilled interviewers to learn from the others
7 The obtained information may be more completely and accurately recorded by those listening, while others are asking questions
There are also potential risks with Three-on-one interviews
1 Candidates may be more anxious, particularly if they have never done it before
2 There may be a subtle "group think" dynamic in which interviewers of lower rank are less willing to
disagree, since they all heard the same information
3 Some degree of diversity in the information probed may be lost
Training and Preparation for Three-on-one's
A Three-on-one only happens once for the candidate, so there is a greater risk that poor execution could
dramatically affect decisions (by P&G and by the offered candidates) Excellence in execution can largely nullify the risks inherent in Three-on-one's But, there is clearly a need for quality training and management of interviewers to achieve it Just having three interviewers show up together won't do it
Trang 2Comprehensive Interviews: "Three-on-one's" vs "One-on-one's" Page 2
A coaching tool for Three-on-one interviews is attached It is based on U.S CBD's training and covers:
1 How interviewers should prepare (including a pre-interview meeting)
2 How to divide the responsibilities among the interviewers while maintaining a sensible sequence of topics
3 What interviewers must do post-interview, prior to meeting for a decision
4 How information will be shared and decisions reached in the meeting
We also strongly encourage every interviewer (in either Three-on-one's or One-on-one's) to attend a Total Assessment Interviewing course (classroom or CD-ROM version) as a requirement for interviewing We should not have an untrained interviewer in Three-on-one's just because the other interviewers are experienced
Armed with this, and alerted to the risks inherent in Three-on-one's, many recruiting organizations may be capable of providing the interviewer training and administrative support required to effectively use the Three-on-one approach
Attachment
Trang 3IMPLEMENTING THREE-ON-ONE COMPREHENSIVE INTERVIEWS
PRE-INTERVIEW
All three interviewers meet to review the candidate's file and agree to an interview process This includes deciding who will have the leader role, and who will have the roles of interviewer 2 and 3
INTERVIEW
All interviewers record notes on an Interview Assessment Form during the interview
Lead Interviewer
− Introductions
− "Small talk"
− Explains how interview will work (e.g., interviewers will rotate asking questions; can address each answer to the person who asked the question)
− Starts - asks questions concerning any areas on resume or C.V which are not clear
− Asks other interviewers if he/she has questions
− Ask about career objectives why this Function? why P&G?
− Asks questions concerning skill area # 1 (Leadership), and # 2 (Solutions)
− Asks other interviewers if they have any additional questions concerning these areas
− Turns over interview to 2nd Interviewer
2nd Interviewer
− Asks questions concerning skill area # 3 (Innovation) and # 4 (Risk-Taking)
− Asks other interviewers if they have any additional questions concerning these areas
− Turns over interview to 3rd Interviewer
3rd Interviewer
− Asks questions concerning skill area # 5 (Collaboration) and # 6 (Capacity)
− Asks other interviewers if they have any additional questions concerning these areas
− Turns back interview to Lead Interviewer
Lead Interviewer
− Asks questions concerning skill area # 7 (Mastery - if applicable)
− Asks other interviewers if they have any additional questions concerning this area
− Closes - tells candidate this concludes the questions; asks candidate if he/she would like to add anything that may not have been brought up before; asks if candidate has any questions (Note: questions should be answered by any interviewer as appropriate)
− Outlines next steps for candidate
− Thanks applicant for interviewing, for interest in our Company, and any other appropriate remarks based on the interview
− Escorts candidate to next event on schedule
POST INTERVIEW EVALUATION
Each interviewer individually completes the Interview Assessment form, computes the RQ score and band, and records their recommendation regarding the offer decision before discussing the candidate with other
interviewers
Trang 4OFFER DECISION MEETING
(These guidelines are equally applicable to the meeting following three One-on-one's.)
1 Lead Interviewer convenes meeting of all interviewers and makes sure a Rating Guide is available
2 All interviewers share the conclusion of their interview (beginning with the junior member when job levels are mixed) They only say "Yes" if they want to offer the candidate, "No" if they don't want to offer the candidate No additional explanation is given At this stage, no intermediate responses are allowed (Yes, but )
3 If all interviewers say "Yes," every interviewer still should share any concerns In most cases this will be SAW factors where the candidate scored only "Moderate."
4 If all interviewers say "No" (which is very unlikely if the screening has been done properly), each
interviewer quickly summarizes his/her point of view on the candidate, just to clarify/calibrate
5 When there are mixed votes, proceed as follows:
a All interviewers focus on demonstrated behaviors in the SAW areas in question
b The "No" voters list the SAW where they have given a "Weak" or "Moderate." No additional explanation is given until everyone has shared their areas of concern
c If there are SAW factors where the "No" voters agree upon, they explain their concerns for those SAWs, and refer to the Rating Guide to help calibrate
An example:
− The 2 "No" voters are interviewers 1 and 3
− Interviewer 1 gives "Moderate" on Leadership and "Weak" on Collaboration
− Interviewer 3 gives "Moderate" on Leadership, "Moderate" on Collaboration and "Moderate" on Risk-Taking
− They first explain their concerns about Collaboration, then about Leadership and then about Risk-Taking
− When the "No" voters have explained their concerns, the "Yes" voters explain why they had a higher score, if they indeed had a higher score This is done SAW per SAW
− If after full discussion there still is at least 1 "No" vote, the candidate should not be offered
An example building on the above:
− Interviewer 2 is also "Moderate" on Leadership, so not much discussion is needed on this SAW She is however "Very Strong" on Collaboration and Risk-Taking She explains the evidence she heard on those 2 SAWs
− No offer should be issued unless the "No" voters can be convinced of the contrary and unless there
is at least one strong advocate of the candidate
What if
Do not offer the candidate At least one interviewer should be convinced the candidate can succeed at P&G We are looking for top people, not for average people
department/function?
Refer the candidate to the department that would be more appropriate Do this only if the interviewers really think highly of the candidate and have good reasons to believe the candidate would succeed there