Open interviews are my default now
I’ve been running open, structured competency interviews recently.
“Structured” means that I have a predefined set of questions with a guiding rubric. These questions try to cover the competency space in the limited time available (~25-45 minutes). Here’s one question and rubric from a manager interview:
Question: Tell me about a time you had to deal with conflict with people outside of your team? Prompt: Can you give an example?
Prompt: What was the impact?
Prompt: Did it get worked out?
Listen for: Listening. Influence. Translating + communicating. Speaking to the impact on their team, department, the business.
“Open” means that I’ve been sharing the questions, including the tech test, with candidates before they get to the interview—by default. I’ve found that a well-prepared candidate means better interview outcomes: I get higher quality answers that help me evaluate their competency more accurately.
Aside: This is the “curb cut effect” for interviews. The curb cut effect is the idea that adaptations we make for disabled folk end up being helpful to all kinds of people, not just those with disabilities. I choose open interviews to support anxious and neurodivergent peeps, but sharing questions benefits all candidates. When you force candidates to disclose disability to get accommodations you make the process harder for them, and you risk additional bias, especially towards invisibly disabled folk. You only get the “curb cut” benefits when you are open by default.
Anyway, it’s been satisfying to see clearly nervous candidates giving confident answers. I recently saw how different the experience is between transparency and the old “surprise” method. In this interview the candidate seemed ready and engaged, but as I asked the questions he looked surprised. I initially wrote it off as me misunderstanding his facial expressions. Then the tech test left him flustered, and he told us he froze up. We reassured him about how artificial coding in an interview is, that we’re not trying to solve a problem but rather evaluating his communication skills. But the incongruity confused me. His overall energy was calm and confident, but the signals of surprise, and then the typical interview anxiety response … had we made a mistake and not sent him the interview questions? So I asked him. He switched to his inbox, dug out the invite and saw the prep sheet with the questions we’d just asked. I later discovered that our recruiter had reminded him verbally too. I think his approach to interviews relied on his confidence and improvisation skills. He lacked the experience we needed, but I believe he would have had better quality answers, and possibly not frozen, if he’d prepared.
This experience suggests to me that open interviews also reduce the advantages confident extroverts have. Open interviews are better in many ways.
P.S. Whatever format you’re faced with, please come prepared.
