Recruiting new employees can be a long and painful process. But it is important for the all organizations and In IT companies. Because the success of any organization depends on the quality of its staff. So, most of the employers conduct a interviews for hiring a new staff. I disagree with the given statement which says that interview is not a reliable method and other methods are better. A number of arguments surround my opinion.
To begin with, there are many reasons why interview is an important method for the recruiter. First and foremost, interview is the only method in which employers can get an idea about the personality and social skill of the potential candidates. In interview, there is face to face interaction and candidate have to answer the impromptu questions, which leaves vey little scope for hiding personality traits. Also employees can judge traits like ability to handle pressure, confidence and ability to think outside the box and so on by asking the some study type questions.
On the other hand, there are many other selection methods with varied advantages. One of the other common method is prefferd when the focus is on jugging theoretical knowledge of the person. For example, in some IT companies theoretical knowledge is very important because employees have to send a email for their clients. Last but not least, there can be combination of the all the three methods like written tests, followed by group discussion and finally interview.
To conclude, I cannot agree that interview is not reliable method and other methods are better. It depends upon the job and company requirement, in some situations conducting interviews is more opt and in some situations the other methods may be more advantageous.
Recruiting new employees can be a long and painful process.
But
it is
important
for the all organizations and In IT
companies
.
Because
the success of any organization depends on the quality of its staff.
So
, most of the employers conduct a
interviews
for hiring a new staff. I disagree with the
given
statement which says that
interview
is not a reliable
method
and
other
methods
are better. A number of arguments surround my opinion.
To
begin
with, there are
many
reasons why
interview
is an
important
method
for the recruiter.
First
and foremost,
interview
is the
only
method
in which employers can
get
an
idea
about the personality and social
skill
of the potential candidates. In
interview
, there is face to face interaction and candidate
have to
answer the impromptu questions, which
leaves
vey
little
scope for hiding personality traits.
Also
employees can judge traits like ability to handle pressure, confidence and ability to
think
outside the box and
so
on by asking the
some
study type questions.
On the
other
hand, there are
many
other
selection
methods
with varied advantages. One of the
other
common
method
is
prefferd
when the focus is on jugging theoretical knowledge of the person.
For example
, in
some
IT
companies
theoretical knowledge is
very
important
because
employees
have to
send
a
email for their clients. Last
but
not least, there can be combination of the all the three
methods
like written
tests
, followed by group discussion and
finally
interview.
To conclude
, I cannot
agree
that
interview
is not reliable
method
and
other
methods
are better. It depends upon the job and
company
requirement, in
some
situations conducting
interviews
is more opt and in
some
situations the
other
methods
may be more advantageous.