When hiring for a role, it’s not only critical to identify candidates with the right skills, but also those who will thrive in and contribute to your organization long-term. Two approaches to conducting interviews—structured and conversational—can yield different insights about a candidate. Here’s what both methods can reveal, their limitations, and when you might want to use each one.
 
Structured interviews tend to rely on an organized set of questions that are consistent across candidates and interviewers. This approach makes it easy to compare candidate responses, helps ensure that each interviewer covers distinct areas without redundancy, and allows for a more thorough exploration of key topics. However, it can feel rigid—and it may not uncover a candidate’s true communication style or personality.
 
Conversational interviews, where you engage the candidate in a discussion about a real problem your organization is facing or has faced, encourage more natural communication. They can provide key insights into a candidate’s curiosity, listening skills, and problem-solving abilities. But the success of this method hinges on the interviewer’s ability to maintain a supportive environment and avoid harmful biases.
 
How can you choose the right approach? Early-career positions may benefit from structured interviews to assess candidates’ specific skills and knowledge, while more senior candidates, who are expected to be strategic, may be more thoroughly assessed through the conversational style. A balanced approach that combines both methods throughout the interview process will give you the most holistic perspective on applicants.
This tip is adapted from “Choosing Between a Structured or Conversational Interview,” by Marlo Lyons
Spread the love