Houston Business Journal

Over my 30 years in the recruiting industry, I’ve come across virtually every conceivable interviewing method. From situational interviews to panel interviews to role playing and behavioral interviews, it seems every interviewing technique has, at one time or another, been billed as the silver bullet for finding the perfect match for your organization.

The truth is that there is no “one size fits all” interviewing method — there are strengths and limitations of each. Job function, position level and company culture should all drive the appropriate interviewing technique to be used for a particular role.

That said, there is one interviewing methodology that I hope companies begin phasing out, as its benefits are typically outweighed by the long-term damage it can do to an employer’s reputation. The specific techniques may vary, but it is most commonly referred to as a “stress” interview.

The concept behind stress interviews is to present a set of questions or situations that break the candidate out of his comfort zone, ostensibly revealing how well he handles real life situations. It can take the form of hostile questioning, uncomfortable body language on behalf of the interviewer, or the manufacturing of an awkward situation.

Let me share a real life example to illustrate why such an interview can be so damaging.

A few months ago we were approached by a company to help them build their sales team. Following a comprehensive search we located and presented a candidate who met all the company’s requirements and who was excited about the opportunity. The client agreed to interview the candidate, and the meeting was set.

Following the interview we received a distressed call from the candidate. She recounted how each person with whom she had interviewed seemed to have the clear goal of scaring her away. One interviewer told her she wouldn’t be happy at the company. Another kept asking her why she would ever want to work there. The department head tried to intimidate her by staring blankly and giving abrupt, awkward responses to the candidate’s answers. The candidate quickly recognized the pattern and was sure there was a deliberate interviewing methodology in place.

We called the client to get a grasp of what was happening. Apparently the firm believed that if a candidate could successfully navigate through its unsettling interviewing process, the candidate would be more likely to thrive in the company’s competitive, aggressive environment.

But, the client continued, “the good news is, we loved her!” The candidate had passed the interviews with flying colors. A difficult feat, we were assured.

Upon hearing the company’s positive feedback, the candidate was surprised but unmoved. She asked why she would ever want to work for a company whose employees seemed to embrace an interviewing philosophy of intimidation and deceit. The company had, in effect, scared away a top candidate, in spite of its admitted struggles in attracting employees and building a team.

We explained that if the company continued its interviewing approach, it would risk discouraging others from seeking employment with the firm, only exacerbating its difficulties in attracting talent. Unfortunately, the company could not be convinced, and ultimately we parted ways.

To be clear, I’m not arguing that interviews should be a cake walk or that candidates’ responses should never be challenged. In fact, tough interview questions can help job seekers separate themselves from the rest of the candidate pool by giving them an opportunity to display their intellectual depth and problem-solving skills. However, it is the fabrication of an intentionally hostile interviewing environment that holds little value and typically proves counterproductive.

In my experience, the companies we most admire give as much thought to their hiring processes as they do to their customers. Leading companies recognize that the best talent has choices and that the hiring process is as much about the company “selling the opportunity” as it is about the candidate, impressing their interviewers.

Fortunately, the vast majority of our clients do a tremendous job of balancing a highly challenging interviewing process with ensuring that candidates exit the process with a positive impression of the company. They understand that talent is difficult to find and that all candidates are potential business partners, customers and members of their communities.

In fact, one of our clients is so determined to never squander an opportunity to hire a talented employee, that it will create a position for a star candidate, even when no current openings fit his or her background.

That’s a company that recognizes the value of strong people.

Marsha Murray is founder and president of Houston-based recruiting and staffing firm, Murray Resources, mmurray@murrayresources.com.