No, this is not about R&B! We all know that R&V (Reliability and Validity) are important when it comes to selecting suitable Psychometric Tools… but how many people ask ‘How Reliable and Valid are my Interviews’? Can the same ‘tool evaluation’ methods be applied to Interviews? Should they? Here’s an attempt to transfer the concepts which are used for Psychometric test design and evaluation to Interviews:
Reliability = Consistency – ensuring that every candidate gets the same opportunity, no matter when, where or by whom the Interview is held.
Validity = An indication as to what extent the Interview is ‘Fit for Purpose’ (does it measure what it is supposed to measure) There are 4 kinds of validity in Psychometrics. This is how they might these be used to valuate an Interview process:
- Face validity – does the Interview feel like it was a fair assessment (in the opinion of the Interviewee)?
- Content validity – were the discussion topics relevant to the job requirements? (in the opinion of the Selection Panel)?
- Construct validity: Do the Interview questions provide data which actually informs the criteria being measured? (To be proven through validity study)
- Criterion Related validity: Does the data gathered actually correlate with future performance? (To be proven through validity study)
Standardisation is another key concept behind generation of R&V data: If we apply this to Interviews, we would look for standardisation of:
- Interview Execution
- Interview Scoring
- Interview Score Interpretation
i.e., outcomes will not be differentially influenced by who is conducting the interview, when/where it is conducted, who is scoring it or who is interpreting the results.
So, how does your interview process rock?