interviews have always been the most common way to choose among job candidates. Some people now think there are better ways of finding the right person for a job. To what extend do you agree or disagree?

In our today's world, employers always seek ways to hire the proper person for job positions. Opinions widely differ as to whether interviews are the best approach for recruiting the right person or not. While there are certainly valid arguments to the contrary, I believe there, as such, exist other viable options associated with the mentioned subject. Admittedly, interviews play an integral role as the most ready-made tool to choose the best candidate in the headhunting process. Indeed, it is believed that by meeting a person face-to-face, the employer can better identify the potential job seeker's personality through speeches and body language. However, it is a well-known fact that by no means can we rely on just one method as people can be really complicated at times and it would be quite impossible to recognize all the required qualifications in a simple meeting. Regarding the other potential alternatives, it seems that the internet has revolutionized our means of communication in this technology-focused world, with no exception to headhunting. As a case in point, recruiters asked people to send their resumes online in order to choose the practical person with their qualifications instead of just interviews. Furthermore, the survival of a business in our today's competitive market is of paramount importance, so an employee who can increase companies' output is crucial. That is why some significant elements ranging from interpersonal skills to problem-solving abilities during tough times and even working as a part of a group can be recognized through psychological tests, which cannot achieve by conventional interviews. In conclusion, while it is true that an interview is a superficially attractive way to choose a person for a job, we should not neglect the other feasible courses of action as a supplement.