Behavior Description Interview Essay

You cede invested the time of several experienced employees and a good deal of expense to question a number of promise entry-level accountants. However, you wonder if your hearinging techniques are really helping you hire the patronage candidates that go away be superior performers and help your organization remain profitable. Your concerns may be justified if you are using a typical interviewing dodging in which at that place is no standard set of questions or a strategy in which interview questions do not explicitly focus on the medieval style of the applicator. Yet, there is an alternative. Studies in human-resource management suggest that appearance description interviewing may help you identify better performers from the rest of the applicators PRINCIPLES OF THE style DESCRIPTION INTERVIEWThe first principle of the Behavior Description (BD) interview is interviewers standardize or structure the interview. The most important aspect of standardization is renting a pplicants the same or passing Similar questions. This allows all applicants to drop a chance to provide info round certain job-related concerns and allows interviewers to equal similar types of information. The alternative of severally interviewer asking their own questions will devote your organization comparing apples and oranges when trying to discombobulate hiring decisions. Often this leads to lower prize hiring decisions. An organization may in like manner seek to standardize the location of the interview, the individualist who conducts the interview, etc. Any efforts to ensure similar treatment of applicants should be encouraged. An supernumerary benefit of standardizing interview questions is that the interview is more defensible in court. In the past, organizations that had interchangeable questions won employment discrimination lawsuits more often than those without standardized questions. The chip principle of BD interviewing is to explicitly focus on past way. BD enthusiasts recollect that past way is the best predictor of in store(predicate) behavior.They also suppose more recent behavior is a better predictor of future behavior than older behavior and that longstanding trends are better predictors of behavior than isolated incidents. The belief in the effectiveness of using past behavior to predict future behavior leads BD interviewers to ask certain questions. These questions use a superlative adjective (e.g. most, least, toughest, etc.) to focus the applicant on one extra incident of behavior. For example, accounting firms need staff members who are willing to dispense both internal and client problems. To gather relevant information about an applicant, a BD interviewer exponent ask the applicant to govern me about the at pass time a sensitive idea of yours helped an organization or group organize better. The interviewer might also be ready with follow-up questions frequently(prenominal) as how did you mount this idea, how did you convince your supervisor or client to reach after it, and how did it help the organization? The follow-up questions may be answered as the applicant discusses a particular situation, but their presence alerts the interviewer that this information is important. In some other(a)(a) instance, accounting professionals are often called upon to get up presentations to groups such as inspect committees or boards of directors.Accordingly, an interviewer might ask a job candidate to signalise me about the most difficult presentation you flip ever had to perk up to a group of five or more people. Probes might take what was the presentation about, how did you prepare for it, and was the presentation evaluated or circled? In each human face, the BD approach to interviewing should yield a self-aggrandizing heart and soul of high tonus information to the interviewer and can help the somewhat anxious applicant acquire a particular incident to discuss. The BD ap proach to interviewing can be potently contrasted with more typical interviewing strategies. First, typical strategies suggest interviewers let candidates take the interview where they want to, go with the flow, or let the interviewee talk about both subject they desire so that you can best assess their genius. era this advice is encountered frequently, it is highly inaccurate. Studies contrasting BD interviewing to this approach show that the BD interview does a oft better job of predicting job performance. In addition, studies that statistically combine the moments of 10,000+ interviews from more an(prenominal) smaller studies strongly suggest that various styles of interviews that standardize questions or other aspects of the interview work much better than the nonstandardized interview styles. Second, BD interviewing seeks to avoid qualification judgments of applicants personalities.Assessing personality characteristics in a 345 minute interview would be highly difficul t for a psychologist. As a resultant role, m whatsoever professionals rely on well established tests to measure personalitythey are cheaper to use and much more accurate. Additionally, m either personality characteristics do not have a history of predicting job success. Currently, many human resource management professionals debate in see to itigence and dependability do dissimilariate higher(prenominal) performers from lower performers. Extroversion, considered by many to be a positive trait for auditing personnel, also differentiates higher versus lower performers in some situations. Other traits should be viewed with caution until they intelligibly are shown to relate to job performance. Care should also be interpreted in trying to match the personality type of an applicant to the personality of the office. While it is super difficult to measure either of the above, it is also potentially hazardous. The resultant role to this problem is to avoid using most personality trait s and ask applicants about past behavior that may be similar to behavior required on the job.Finally, the BD interviewer tries to avoid mantic and self evaluative questions. In most cases, there is midget evidence to suggest that most hypothetical questions actually distinguish between better and poorer performing individuals. This may be due to the difficulty of injecting decorous reality in the situation to make it a good predictor of job success. Self-evaluative questions such as pick out yourself or are you data addressor literate also have no history of predicting job performance. In addition, they ask the applicant to do your job for you. You should decide how competent applicants are in a particular theatre of operations since you are worried about their contribution to your organization. Applicants answers are influenced to a large degree by their desire to land a job. BD interviews differ from situational interviews. new-fangled literature has conf employ the two app roaches. While the BD interview focuses on past applicant behavior, the situational interview asks applicants how they would behave in future situations (extensive research is apply to create real situations). The situational interview can also require different types of rating scales to be used at the end of the interview. While there are several differences between BD interviewing, situational interviewing, and typical interviews, there are also similarities. BD interviewers also believe it is important to break the ice with applicants, that they should ask for an applicants preferred name, that they should take notes, and they should close the interview in a professional manner. These guidelines are important in any style of interview. steps TO CONSTRUCTING A BD INTERVIEWThree steps should be used to develop a BD interview. They are illustrated in the following hypothetical example involving the hiring of entry-level accountants in a CPA . Interviewers need to analyze the job a nd determine the headstone results areas. Key results areas are the major tasks or behaviors that an entry-level accountant must be able to accomplish. Key results areas may be defined by many different strategies including a discussion among recruiters, managers, and partners. Key results areas might include 1. authorise with other individuals-a. In communicatory and written forms with other accountants including supervisors and peersb. In verbal and written forms with clients 2. Diagnoses organizational problems 3. Recommend dissolvents to organizational problems and 4. Use common computer software product (e.g., spreadsheet programs, data retrieval software, on-line services, or tax-preparation packages). The above behaviors or tasks should be examined to determine the knowledge, skills, and abilities (KSAs) that will enable them to be accomplished. Thus, an entry-level accountant should have 1. Written communication skills to interact through letters and reports to clients a nd other accountants 2. oral communication skills to communicate with clients and other accountants (not necessarily including making presentations to large groups) 3. cleverness to diagnose problems in complex situations4. Ability to solve problems on an individual basis and in groups 5. Ability to attend to large amounts of detail 6. Ability to manage triplex tasks 7. Knowledge of common software programs The KSAs required lead to a woof plan that involves a series of BD questions. In this example it is assumed that there will be two interviews a recruiting interview at the educate and an invitation to the firms office. To evaluate the candidates KSAs the following questions and probes might be used. 1 Written communication skillsa. Ask for a adjudicate of writing from a professional or educational setting in the beginning the second interview.2. Verbal communication skillsa. Watch for verbal communication skills passim each interview and rate them at the end of the first and second interviews.3. Ability to diagnose problems in complex situationsa. Tell me about the come through time you recognized a problem in an organization in which you were involved.* How did you recognize the problem?* How did you study the problem?* How did you determine a solution to the problem?b. Tell me about a time in the uttermost year in which you were gathering information from a person who was existence uncoopeative.* What was the situation?* Why were they being uncooperative?* How did you feel?* How did you get the information you needed?* What was the result in this situation?4. Ability to solve problems individually and in groups/teams a. What was the most successful solution that you and a group of other individuals developed to a particular problem?* What was the problem?* What was your role?* What was the result of your solution?b. What is the toughest problem that you as an individual have solved in an educational or work setting?* What was the problem?* What was the result of your solution?5. Ability to attend to large amounts of detaila. Tell me about the work time when you had to gather large amounts of information to complete a check.*What was the nominate?*How did you organize the details?* What was the end result?* Did anyone assign you a line for the project?b. Which class of yours required the most attention to detail. enchant tell me how you dealt with the demands of the class.* How did it require attention to detail?* What was your strategy to deal with the detail?*What was the result?6. Ability to manager multiple tasksa. Tell me about how you managed your school work and extracircular activities during your busiest semester.* What made the semester so busy?* Did you have any priorities?* Where there any strategies that helped you cope?* How did the semester turn out (in terms of grades, activities, etc.)? b. Tell me about the last time you had to juggle several different responsibililties when you held a job.* What were the responsibilities?* Did you have any priorities?* Where there any strategies that helped you cope?7. Knowledge of computer software programsa. enjoy tell us about the most involved computer project that you have been involved with in school or in an organization.* What software was involved?* What was your role?* What was the result or grade?4. Please tell us about the last time you learned a new piece of software.* What did it help you accomplish?* How did you learn it?* Did you enjoy the experience?c. Please tell us about any time that you used a spreadsheet program such as Lotus 1-2-3, Quattro Pro, or Excel. * Was individually or a group?*What did you need to accomplish?* What was the result or grade?Once the questions are developed, recruiters should organize the questions and probes into some logical order on an interview form. The form may provide reminders to greet the applicant warm and any other reminders desired by the recruiters. It should definitely leave enough ro om for notes about the answer to each question. These notes can be extremely helpful when recruiters are trying to remember the remarks of each person of late interviewed. We recommend that recruiters practice with the new interviewing form. Recruiters may pair off and take turns playing the interviewer and the applicant, or they may wish to enlist a learner to go through an interview.The trial interviews could be recorded on a video camera. The feedback from the video playback is often a very valuable learning experience. Lastly, an interviewer military rank report should be designed to record ratings for each candidate. The process is relatively unsubdivided once the knowledge, skills, and abilities (KSAs) required by the job have been listed. We suggest that recruiters list all the KSAs down one side of the physical composition as seen in Figure 1. (Figure omitted) This will allow a magisterial consideration of each applicant against job requirements. Next, recruiters shou ld choose a rating scale. We have chosen a five-point scale anchored by very little of the KSA on one end of the scale and a great amount on the other end of the scale Scales should have from five to seven points and anchors meaningful to the recruiters.A place for notes or comments and a set of sincere instructions is also recommended. Finally, there should be a place for an general evaluation of the candidate. There are several different methods which can be used to generate an overall evaluation score. A recruiter can make an overall evaluation of the candidate on the same scale used for each KSA. Unfortunately, past research has suggested that this method is not very reliable. some other option is presented in the figure on page 77. In this case the recruiters add their ratings to form a final evaluation. This approach is relatively simple and often yields final recommendations quite similar to more complex methods.Furthermore, individual KSAs can be weighted differently. I n this case, each KSA evaluation score could be multiplied by its weight. All scores would be summed to obtain an overall score For example, assume that the first four KSAs in the figure were assigned weights of .2 and the last three KSAs weights of .1. A candidate might be given a rating of 5 on the first two KSAs and ratings of 4 on the other KSAs. The candidates overall evaluation score would equal 4.8 (5 x .2 + 5 x 2+ 4 x .2 + 4 x 2 + 4 x .1+ 4 x .1+ 4 x .1). Either of the last two approaches is recommended. The authors would like to thank Paul Osting (Vice-Chairman, human race Resources, Ernst & Young, New York, NY), J. Breck Boynton (Director of Human Resources, Elliot, Davis, & Company, Greensville, SC) and Patricia G. Roth (Clemson University) for their comments and suggestions.