That is, conducting interviews ...
is actually modestly interesting because of what it says produces useful information.
- structured behavioral interviews, where you have a consistent rubric for how you assess people, rather than having each interviewer just make stuff up.
- Behavioral interviewing also works — where you’re not giving someone a hypothetical, but you’re starting with a question like, “Give me an example of a time when you solved an analytically difficult problem.” The interesting thing about the behavioral interview is that when you ask somebody to speak to their own experience, and you drill into that, you get two kinds of information. One is you get to see how they actually interacted in a real-world situation, and the valuable “meta” information you get about the candidate is a sense of what they consider to be difficult.
- and this: one guy was highly predictive because he only interviewed people for a very specialized area, where he happened to be the world’s leading expert