Having a set schedule with time windows for each section makes a lot of sense. I like the idea of starting the interview with setting an agenda with the candidate, but should you share the timeline (even the vague timeline) of each part of the agenda beforehand? It sounds like you don't want to have the candidate watching the clock nor corner yourself into these timeframes. In your experience, how does the interview change if you do not share the timeline with the candidate?
One more quick question; if within the first few minutes it is clear that the candidate is not the right fit for the job, do you continue to with the prepared agenda to keep things proper, or can you shorten the process knowing it is likely wasting everyone's time?
1) I like to share a higher level agenda with the candidate ahead of time, basically just who they are meeting and what their roles are. This gives the candidate a chance to find you on linkedin and signals their investment in the interview process. I haven't given timelines at that point, but it's totally reasonable to share what topics you'll cover. For example, "During your interview we'll talk about your past projects in some depth and answer technical questions collaboratively." included in the interview invite is sufficient.
2) Before I started sharing the agenda at the beginning of the interview, about 80% of them went the same. The other 20% were subject to a lot more control on the part of the candidate with additional interjections, tangents, and life stories. I ran long much more often and felt less confident in cutting off sections of the interview.
3) I'll go more in depth on this one in a future post, but for now, a direct answer. Usually I'll continue with the interview but pivot it into a teaching moment, helping the candidate through the problem more aggressively. They've invested time to apply to the job and take the interview. Helping them along should leave them feeling better about their experience with your company, and you never know if you'll see them again later. The one case where I cut off the interview early is when the candidate and I agree that the position isn't what they want early on. This can come from their own introduction and what they're looking for followed up by questions about the role and "is that something you're interested in?" type probing. In either case, these types of failures are good feedback for earlier on in your process through the job description, screening, or role clarity with a recruiting agency.
Great work Dan well done
Dan, thank you for this.
Having a set schedule with time windows for each section makes a lot of sense. I like the idea of starting the interview with setting an agenda with the candidate, but should you share the timeline (even the vague timeline) of each part of the agenda beforehand? It sounds like you don't want to have the candidate watching the clock nor corner yourself into these timeframes. In your experience, how does the interview change if you do not share the timeline with the candidate?
One more quick question; if within the first few minutes it is clear that the candidate is not the right fit for the job, do you continue to with the prepared agenda to keep things proper, or can you shorten the process knowing it is likely wasting everyone's time?
Hi Josh,
Thanks for reading and for your questions!
1) I like to share a higher level agenda with the candidate ahead of time, basically just who they are meeting and what their roles are. This gives the candidate a chance to find you on linkedin and signals their investment in the interview process. I haven't given timelines at that point, but it's totally reasonable to share what topics you'll cover. For example, "During your interview we'll talk about your past projects in some depth and answer technical questions collaboratively." included in the interview invite is sufficient.
2) Before I started sharing the agenda at the beginning of the interview, about 80% of them went the same. The other 20% were subject to a lot more control on the part of the candidate with additional interjections, tangents, and life stories. I ran long much more often and felt less confident in cutting off sections of the interview.
3) I'll go more in depth on this one in a future post, but for now, a direct answer. Usually I'll continue with the interview but pivot it into a teaching moment, helping the candidate through the problem more aggressively. They've invested time to apply to the job and take the interview. Helping them along should leave them feeling better about their experience with your company, and you never know if you'll see them again later. The one case where I cut off the interview early is when the candidate and I agree that the position isn't what they want early on. This can come from their own introduction and what they're looking for followed up by questions about the role and "is that something you're interested in?" type probing. In either case, these types of failures are good feedback for earlier on in your process through the job description, screening, or role clarity with a recruiting agency.