Interviews form the basic selection criteria for most large companies. However some people think that interview is not a reliable method of choosing whom to employ. To what extent do you agree or disagree

It is a well-known fact that being interviewed is one of the most influential factors in being assigned for a job in renowned organizations. Although many people agree with it, some do not. In my opinion, I believe that despite there being other preferable options, being interrogated still the most efficient way. I will summarize my points below. To begin with, During an interview, the employer receives first hand impression of the potential employee and gets to know him or her, not only through his qualifications or past achievements but on a personal level which is crucial for a proper work surroundings. Hence, how the individual presents himself and interacts s is a direct reflection of his personality, social skills as well as intelligence Other alternate methods include, written tests, which I do not believe provides sufficient assessment for official recruitment by itself, but combining both oral and written exam can be an excellent way of measuring one’s abilities. In addition, Assessment through practical field works is one less practised still effective option, especially for jobs that require both skill and experience, for example, civil or mechanical engineering. However, this method can be time-consuming and financially draining and thus not commonly practised. In conclusion, my point stands that oral meeting is the single most efficient, cost-effective, and practical mean of recruitment, in varying situations. In fact, when conferences are used in conjunction with other identity tests, they will definitely help businesses find the best candidates. Organisations should also consider hiring fresh graduates on a probationary basis. Those who deliver excellent performance during the probationary period should be hired to fill permanent positions.