Structured and unstructured interviews are two distinct methods used to evaluate job candidates. While both have their strengths and weaknesses, structured interviews have been shown to be more effective in assessing job-related skills and qualifications, reducing bias, and ensuring consistency in evaluation.

According to a study by the Society for Human Resource Management (SHRM), structured interviews are used by 64% of organizations, while unstructured interviews are used by 44%. 

Another study by the Harvard Business Review found that structured interviews are more predictive of job performance, with a correlation coefficient of 0.43 compared to 0.24 for unstructured interviews.

In this context, understanding the characteristics and advantages of both structured and unstructured interviews is crucial for organizations to make informed decisions about which method to use and how to effectively conduct them.

A structured interview is a standardized interview process where all candidates are asked the same predetermined set of questions in a consistent manner. The questions are typically designed to assess specific job-related competencies, skills, and behaviors required for the role.

• Predetermined Questions: Each candidate is asked the same set of questions in a predetermined order to ensure consistency in the evaluation process and reduce the risk of bias towards certain candidates.
• Standardized Rating System: Structured job interviews often use a standardized rating system to evaluate each candidate’s responses, allowing for a more objective assessment of each candidate’s skills and experience.
• Job-Related Questions: The questions in such interviews are designed to assess the candidate’s abilities and experience as they relate to the job requirements, ensuring that the evaluation process is focused on the skills and experience that are most important for the position.
• Mix of Question Types: Structured interviews may include a mix of open-ended and closed-ended questions, providing a more comprehensive evaluation of the candidate.

• Consistency in Evaluation: Structured interviews ensure that all candidates are evaluated based on the same criteria, leading to more consistent and objective hiring decisions.
• Reduction of Interviewer Bias: By using a standardized set of questions, structured interviews reduce the potential for interviewer bias and favoritism, ensuring that candidates are evaluated based on their qualifications rather than personal characteristics.
• Ease of Comparing Candidates Objectively: Structured interviews enable objective comparisons between candidates by using a standardized evaluation process, making it easier to identify the most qualified candidate for the job.
• Predictive Validity: Research has shown that structured interviews are more predictive of job performance than unstructured interviews, allowing employers to feel confident that they are hiring the right person for the job.
• Time-Saving: Structured interviews are typically shorter than unstructured interviews, allowing employers to screen more candidates in less time.

An unstructured interview is a type of interview where the questions are not predetermined before the interview. Instead, the interviewer asks open-ended questions and relies on the spontaneity of the conversation to gather information about the candidate. This type of interview is often used to get a more personal and in-depth look at the candidate, focusing on their personality, skills, and fit with the company culture

• Predetermined Questions: Each candidate is asked the same set of questions in a predetermined order to ensure consistency in the evaluation process and reduce the risk of bias towards certain candidates.
• Standardized Rating System: Structured job interviews often use a standardized rating system to evaluate each candidate’s responses, allowing for a more objective assessment of each candidate’s skills and experience.
• Job-Related Questions: The questions in such interviews are designed to assess the candidate’s abilities and experience as they relate to the job requirements, ensuring that the evaluation process is focused on the skills and experience that are most important for the position.
• Mix of Question Types: Structured interviews may include a mix of open-ended and closed-ended questions, providing a more comprehensive evaluation of the candidate.

• Consistency in Evaluation: Structured interviews ensure that all candidates are evaluated based on the same criteria, leading to more consistent and objective hiring decisions.
• Reduction of Interviewer Bias: By using a standardized set of questions, structured interviews reduce the potential for interviewer bias and favoritism, ensuring that candidates are evaluated based on their qualifications rather than personal characteristics.

• Time-Consuming: Structured interviews can be time-consuming, especially if the interviewer needs to prepare detailed questions and rating systems.
• Difficulty in Analyzing Data: The detailed information collected in structured interviews can be challenging to analyze and summarize, especially if the questions are not well-designed.
• Risk of Bias: Structured interviews can still be influenced by interviewer bias if the questions are not carefully designed to minimize this risk

When evaluating candidates, both structured and unstructured interviews have distinct strengths and weaknesses in terms of effectiveness:

Assessing Job-Related Skills and Qualifications:

• Structured interviews excel in evaluating specific job-related skills and qualifications.
• Questions are tailored to assess technical knowledge, experience, and other competencies directly related to the job role.
• Example: For a software developer position, structured interviews may include questions about programming languages, problem-solving techniques, and project management skills.

Reduced Bias and Consistency:

• They help minimize interviewer bias by ensuring all candidates are evaluated using the same set of questions and evaluation criteria.
• This consistency allows for fairer comparisons among candidates.
• Example: A structured interview for a customer service role might include questions about handling customer complaints or resolving conflicts, providing a clear framework for assessing each candidate's ability to handle specific job tasks.

Assessing Soft Skills and Fit:

• Unstructured interviews are effective in assessing soft skills such as communication abilities, adaptability, and interpersonal skills.
• They allow for a more natural flow of conversation, enabling interviewers to gauge how candidates engage in dialogue and handle various situational challenges.
• Example: An unstructured interview for a sales role might involve discussing past experiences in handling difficult customers or negotiating deals, providing insights into the candidate's interpersonal skills and sales approach.

Exploring Creativity and Problem-Solving:

• These interviews can uncover a candidate's creativity, problem-solving abilities, and innovative thinking.
• By allowing for open-ended questions and discussions, interviewers can observe how candidates approach unfamiliar scenarios and generate solutions.
• Example: For a marketing position, an unstructured interview might involve discussing hypothetical marketing campaigns or brainstorming strategies for reaching a target audience, revealing the candidate's creativity and strategic thinking.

Designing Clear, Job-Related Questions:

• Ensure questions directly relate to the specific skills, experiences, and competencies required for the job.
• Use behavioral questions that ask candidates to provide examples of past behavior in relevant situations.
• Example: "Can you describe a time when you successfully resolved a complex technical issue under tight deadlines?"

Training Interviewers on Evaluation Criteria:

• Provide interviewers with comprehensive training on the evaluation criteria and desired competencies.
• Ensure consistency in how questions are asked and responses are evaluated.
• Conduct mock interviews to practice applying the evaluation criteria effectively.
• Example: Role-play scenarios where interviewers assess candidate responses based on predefined criteria like problem-solving ability or teamwork skills.

Allowing Flexibility While Maintaining Focus:

• Start with a general framework of topics or themes to cover during the interview.
• Allow the conversation to flow naturally while ensuring key areas of interest and job requirements are addressed.
• Remain flexible to explore unexpected but relevant topics that arise during the discussion.
• Example: Begin by discussing the candidate's career trajectory and interests before diving deeper into specific examples of past projects or challenges faced.

Balancing Structured Feedback with Open-Ended Exploration:

• After each interview, document key insights and observations regarding the candidate's strengths and areas for further exploration.
• Provide structured feedback based on how well the candidate demonstrated desired competencies.
• Incorporate open-ended questions to delve into the candidate's motivations, career aspirations, and cultural fit.
• Example: Ask the candidate to describe their approach to handling conflicts within a team environment and how they have influenced team dynamics positively.

• Consistency in Evaluation: Regardless of the interview type, maintain consistency in evaluating candidates against predetermined criteria to ensure fairness.
• Engage Candidates Effectively: Create a positive and engaging environment where candidates feel comfortable sharing their experiences and perspectives.
• Document and Compare Responses: Take detailed notes during interviews to facilitate comparison among candidates and inform decision-making.

Choosing between structured and unstructured interviews depends on the specific needs of the hiring process. Structured interviews offer reliability in assessing job-related skills and reducing bias, making them effective for roles demanding specific competencies. On the other hand, unstructured interviews provide deeper insights into soft skills and cultural fit, albeit with potential variability in evaluation.