Interesting topic Diana!

Some thoughts:

Would like to learn more about how you plan on using this feedback. Would you use this to measure the performance of the interviewer? In that case, I don't think that's a great idea, for several reasons: the candidates, in most cases, wouldn't be able to provide accurate and objective feedback b/c they may not appreciate the questions and their relevance as much as an experienced interviewer does. Moreover, their responses can be subjective. The candidate may not know the background of the interview - specific goals of the interview, selection criteria, specific reasons for asking certain questions, the answers the interviewer received from other competing candidates, etc.

So, if your goal is to evaluate the performance of the interviewer, there must be better ways of doing it. Here are some examples:

Evaluation by members of your senior team. Pick members with excellent interviewing skills and request them to sit through a few interviews. While the interviewer (who needs to be evaluated) interviews the candidate, they can watch, evaluate, and suggest improvements in strategy, technique, language of the questions, non-verbal communication, etc.

Similar evaluation by an external consultant.

Role play - mock interviews where the interviewer under review interviews current employees pretending to be candidates.

Open to more discussion and sharing of ideas.

RK

Timely exchange of ideas and brain stroming within team lead by the leader may be a serious leaning point.

Hi Diana

My initial reaction -

"Great Idea...but........................When do you intend to do this?

If it's done immediately after the interview, when impressions are freshest some candidates will think this is part of the process No Matter What They Are Told! A few will even think it a few days later, if it happens prior to the Select/Regret Letters.

After the Select/Regret process is complete it's is going to become an emotionally charged response. Coloured with emotions like frustration, anger, depression, elation and thankfulness. This again could compromise the process and any conclusions drawn from the results.

I'm not against it I just think it is nearly impossible to avoid the complex emotional charge which is inherent within the interview process.


------------------------------------------------------------------

To me the things you want to address:-

"The main questions would be asking about the interview itself::

1) The interviewer.
2) Relevance of the questions.
3) How comfortable were you with the interviewer?
4) Weak/strong points of the interview/interviewer.
5) If you needed any information about the Co. was the given info clear enough?
6) How would you rate your performance? (out of ten)
7) How would you rate the interviewer? (out of ten) ….etc"

- can be better addressed by other processes. If these are issues within your organisation, or you suspect they might be, then some sort of Mentoring/Coaching program possibly using skilled external consultants at least initially would be a better way to address the problems flagged here.

Neil

hi Diana,

Your thought about taking feedback for interviews is a welcome concept.

As you must have seen there are both sides to this. My perception is that you need the feedback if there is any least bit of doubt about the interviewer or the process . In that case it might help you in doing it better. However I feel we can have it at the end of induction and mentorship programme for a select few by sampling out the number and try getting a honest feedback. Again there may be biased feedback at times but this can be overcome by more people to people contact.

All this is overcome by a non biased more people friendly system.

I will welcome your thoughts and feedback. Thanks

Further to my earlier posting I would like to add and clarify that a feedback for a specific HR may not be a good idea but can be on the overall recruitment and induction process as such.