Is Being The First To Be Interviewed A Good Or A Bad Thing ?

jobbingmusician

^^^^^^^ I am amazed - the above is not spam and does actually contribute to the discussion at hand!

http://datagenetics.com/blog/december32012/

SueC_2

Years ago, when I first started interviewing people, I was advised by a very senior HR person to always see my preferred candidate first in the day, and my second favourite candidate last in the day - as these will be the ones that stick in your mind.

Slinky

fordred wrote: »

If you want to get geeky, check out this puzzle:
datagenetics dot com slash blog slash december32012

I sent this to my OH which got us talking.

He sometimes has to interview people for jobs but is not an HR person. He says he never picks his strongest candidate as his first interviewee as he's honing his interview technique and questions in the first interview having either not interviewed for a while, or recruited for that particular vacancy before.

Jamie94

jobbingmusician wrote: »

^^^^^^^ I am amazed - the above is not spam and does actually contribute to the discussion at hand!

http://datagenetics.com/blog/december32012/

True, but the situation described is unlikely in real life.

I don't think any interviewer would burn their bridges by refusing to hire a candidate they didn't wish to appoint immediately before seeing the remainder of candidates (assuming the candidate was not totally useless that the interviewer already decides they would never employ that applicant)

However, it has been known that an applicant gets given the job without bothering to waste time & effort seeing other candidates (e.g. where the applicant fully meets the requirements of the position vacant)

In the theoretical example given in that blog, it follows that you would be 63.21% likely to not select the best candidate ... demonstrating why it would be a poor process to follow.