Since the 19th century, the science of Human resources selection has evolved over time. On the contrary, decision-makers still tend to play it by ear or believe in tools that might be outdated and have little academic rigor. People perceive that measuring talent more scientifically is complicated and it is time-consuming. Hence the managers prefer the subjective evaluation seems to be a viable option.

Can Motivational instinct be validated?

However, measuring the right kind of motivation is a great challenge. To a great extent, the motivation is contextual in nature. For example, the leaders of a large charity and of an investment bank will need different kinds of motivation. This predictor can’t easily be rated or compared meaningfully across individuals.

How can we make Job Interviews effective?

Competency tests are already quite common in many fields. But interviewers tend not to accord them sufficient importance. They come after an interview, or they’re considered secondary to it. A bad interview can override a good competency test. At best, interviewers accord them equal importance to interviews. Yet they should consider them far more important. There are at least 15 different meta-analytic syntheses on the validity of job interviews published in academic research journals. These studies show that structured interviews are very useful to predict future job performance. In comparison, unstructured interviews, which do not have a set of predefined rules for scoring or classifying answers and observations in a reliable and standardized manner, are considerably less accurate.

Psychologist Ron Friedman explains in The Best Place to Work: The Art and Science of Creating an Extraordinary Workplace some of the unconscious biases that can impact hiring.

We tend to rate attractive people as more competent, intelligent, and qualified. We consider tall people to be better leaders, particularly when evaluating men. We view people with deep voices as more trustworthy than those with higher voices.

In addition, despite the growing irrelevance of physical attributes, we still unconsciously look for them. for instance, Fortune 500 CEOs are on average 2.5 inches taller than the average American, and the statistics on military leaders and country presidents are similar. Implicit bias is pernicious because it’s challenging to spot the ways it influences interviews. Once an interviewer judges someone, they may ask questions that nudge the interviewee towards fitting that perception. For instance, if they perceive someone to be less intelligent, they may ask basic questions that don’t allow the candidate to display their expertise. Having confirmed their bias, the interviewer has no reason to question it or even notice it in the future. Hiring often comes down to how much an interviewer likes a candidate as a person. This means that we can be manipulated by manufactured charm. If someone’s charisma is faked for an interview, an organization can be left dealing with the fallout for ages.

In nutshell, the make job interviews effective, we should consider the following

• Discrimination and bias

• Gut feelings aren’t accurate

• Experience ≠ expertise in interviewing

Better hiring leads to better work environments, less turnover, and more innovation and productivity. When you understand the limitations and pitfalls of the job interview, you improve your chances of hiring the best possible person for your needs.

Instinctview enables Talent Decisions by leveraging Data Sciences and Artificial Intelligence Technologies. We develop an eponymous software application that generates AI-powered insights on psychological attributes formulated by deep learning algorithms. Our distinctive Algorithm provides real-time, functional, and scientifically demonstrated unconscious behavioral traits towards implicit motives.

• Our report enables effective interviews thereby better decision making.

• Our application intends to measure the "Motivational instinct" which is the primary indicator of potential to learn new skills.

for further details on how can you leverage the Instinctview for better impact in decision making towards Talent Management, please write to us .

References :

• Davidshofer, K. R. and Murphy, C. O. (2005). Psychological testing: principles and applications.

• Fernández-Aráoz, C. (2014). 21st-Century talent spotting. Harvard business review, 92(6):46–54.

• Gatewood, R. D., Feild, H. S., and Barrick, M. R. (2008). Human Resource Selection. Thomson/South-Western.

• McClelland, D. C. (1973). Testing for competence rather than for" intelligence.". American psychologist, 28(1):1.

• Miller, A. P. (2018). Want less-biased decisions? use algorithms. Harvard business review, 26.

• Pink, D. H. (2006). A whole new mind: Why right-brainers will rule the future. Penguin.