Okay, the title is intentionally provocative: While it is within the realm of possibility, it has become increasingly difficult to hoodwink experienced interviewers. Recently, an HR director recited the few times he had been bamboozled by new hires, but it did not take long to correct his hiring faux pas. To minimize future missteps, he implemented a multi-tiered hiring process.

1. Fooling HR
Okay, the title is intentionally provocative: While it is
within the realm of possibility, it has become increasingly
difficult to hoodwink experienced interviewers. Recently, an
HR director recited the few times he had been bamboozled by
new hires, but it did not take long to correct his hiring faux
pas. To minimize future missteps, he implemented a multi-
tiered hiring process.
Statistically speaking—I hate citing statistics—but once an interviewer surpasses
approximately 300 interviews, the recruiter encounters repetitive behaviors, responses
and outliers. Once armed with such experience, the interviewer can zero in on a candidate
in as little as five or six probing questions.
There is nothing magical about interviewing. As the quantity of interviewing
sessions increase, fewer surprises surface. Seasoned corporate screeners will encounter
everything. By 300, they have heard it all, often countless times.
At this quantity, behavioral patterns emerge. When the interviewer is attentive to
behavioral responses, and then compares those patterns to previous applicants, accurate
conclusions follow. We know, for example, that most people will respond to a direct
question honestly. That same question, asked indirectly however, will produce a
substantially less truthful response.
Example: “Do you have a criminal record?” All but an outlier will respond to this
truthfully. Should the question be posed indirectly, “Is there anything negative in your
background, we should know about?” When questions are presented in this manner, there
is a greater chance job applicants will avoid responding candidly.
For edification, 2% of job seekers qualify as outliers. If an interviewer were only to
screen 50 or 60 applicants, it is conceivable an interviewer might not encounter one. By
the time the individual reaches 100 or more interviewers however, the statistical odds
become overwhelming. The interviewer will encounter at least one or more, even though
the interviewer may have initially failed to identify such individuals at the onset.
Usually, outliers are exposed during routine background checks. The college has no
records the individual graduated, or a criminal records check reveals the individual has an
undisclosed substance abuse issue, or the Credit Bureau shows an undisclosed debt
problem, etcetera. The rest are subsequently exposed in the workplace.
As a result, skilled interviewers will not rely solely on first impressions. Given
enough one-on-one interviews, and the collective experience of hearing evasive or vague
responses, skilled interviewers inevitably acquire intuitive instincts. In most cases, their
ability to spot subtle, yet reoccurring behaviors prove difficult to conceal.
Copyrighted © 2013 by Robert James
Link to website