I wonder what job interviewers talk about after the candidate has left the room…

[beeonmybonnett]

I always wonder this when I leave the room after my interview has concluded.

So job interviewers of MN, even if there are still more candidates to interview, do you have a fair idea as to whether or not you’re going to hire that one person that is sat in front of you?

when the candidate leaves the room, do youse say stuff like “OMG he/she was truly awful” or “that person was really good!”

Genuinely curious lol

"So what did you think?" 😂

Usually I have an opinion about how well it went. However I find that it's easier to say "no absolutely not" than "yes definitely" - sometimes you see some aspects that were good but they didn't tick all the boxes so you still have a few queries about them that you might want to get your co-interviewer's opinion on, or you might want to call them back for a second round interview.

Can say immediately absolutely not write notes about each candidate .Score them out of 5 and then big discussions at the end who is best candidate .
General chat when candidates are no shows which is just so rude just phone and let people know .

Pretty much as above. Usually can sense whether they're a 'no' or a 'maybe.' I've experienced a day of 'no' and 'hmmm maybe' and then the last interviewee was excellent so it was my first ever 'definitely!' after they left the room.

I know how tough it can be to be interviewed, but I also dislike being the interviewer really! I hate having to let people down afterwards, especially if they seemed so eager during the interview, and try to give them as good feedback as I possibly can.

do you have a fair idea as to whether or not you’re going to hire that one person that is sat in front of you?
Not necessarily absolutely sure they will be hired (might be better person seen afterwards) but will know by end whether they are employable or not (never been involved in interviews where there's been disagreement between interviewers at end of who is / isn't employable)

when the candidate leaves the room, do youse say stuff like “OMG he/she was truly awful” or “that person was really good!”
Not directly (public sector so quite restricted in what we are and aren't supposed to do) but have certainly had some glances at each other and raised eyebrows over particularly unusual interviews. This wouldn't be to do with people being nervous or answering poorly but more when people have been outright rude or inappropriate in interviews!

The scoring of each question is the starting point, so I’d need to compare that with the other interviewers. If there are candidates who score pretty much the same, there’d be a discussion about best fit.

Easier to rule out rather than rule in.

I have sat on an interview board a couple of times and it was really interesting - nobody starts pulling anyone down as soon as they leave the room though it just isn't done

It's mostly scoring and then a big discussion at the end.

The last batch of interviews I did (think it was six in one day) we knew immediately after the first one that he was the right fit. He left the room and my colleague and I looked at each other and both said ‘yes’ without hesitation. In my time interviewing I’ve never heard anyone be nasty (unless that interviewee doesn’t turn up and hasn’t let us know- they aren’t highly thought of!), it’s more often ‘I’m not sure I got the right feeling from them’ or similar. Generally speaking people will talk more about the person they do like than speak negatively about the one they don’t.

Usually just a "yes, possibly" or "definitely not." We wouldn't call off other interviews as no matter how impressed you are, the next one could be even better.

On the rare occasion we disagree on the yes/no, we'll have a bit of a longer discussion. If the naysayer isn't won round, they'll get the veto.

A few years ago it was normal to discuss as soon as the interview was finished and yes, comments such as 'OMG they were amazing', 'Well, that was a waste of an hour' or 'hmm, not too sure but could be worth seeing again' were all normal. I can also remember having a notebooks opened / closed signal at a certain stage to show each other whether we wanted to continue with additional questions etc.

However, there is now a much wider focus on fairness and lack of bias (certainly at the companies I've worked for recently) and in a way this is also made easier with remote interviewing. It's now expected that each person writes up notes and scores asap after the interview without conferring and only after everyone has done this would any discussion take place if needed.

It means the interviewers are less likely to be influenced by others on the panel which is a good thing.

I do the same as @Bluevelvetsofa, then scores are compared with another 2 interviewers.

Applications are also scored pre interview.

Straight to yes/no every time I’d interviewed, had a big disagreement with my boss about which candidate I wanted to work in my department, I won, I was right. I knew I wouldn’t work as well with the other candidates. I left 5 years ago, but I’m still very friendly with the guy we took on, met for lunch last week.

Lunch, usually 😂

Honestly, it’s a mix. Often there’s no time between interviews to chat.

It can be comments on who we’ve just seen- positive or negative.

I've sat probably hundreds of interviews over the years, some on my own, some as a pair/team. On my own I immediately jot down any additional thoughts/comments and add to to the rejection or second interviews/hire pile. Team, usually discuss each others thoughts and pros/cons. Can honestly say I've never sat an interview with a team and then taken the piss or ripped apart their personality or looks when they have left. We have had situations where its been an immediate and obvious no from all and we have had some comedic moments and comments from applicants which we have had a short laugh about, but not so much at the applicant, rather at the situation or at ourselves. No one is sitting there taking the piss or making personal comments.

If there's a gap between candidates perhaps on how well they met the criteria or anything else which stood out. I'd always keep it professional. Not like omg she was awful!

Often not a lot of chat between candidates to be honest.

Sometimes it is an obvious "no", but if someone does very well it's never a definite "yes" because you don't know who's coming next.

Really interested to know what makes someone an immediate no. Is it role specific or are there certain things that transcend the role?

I once interviewed someone who was asked a question about team working. They went on to talk about how awful their team is, how they don't get on with certain people for whatever reason, and how it would be better if everyone just worked in isolation/ they get more done on their own. Needless to say that was a 'no' from the whole panel.

The last set of interviews I was in, as soon as the candidate left we continued discussing where was best for the interviewing group to go for dinner!

Usually it's a quick chat about the candidate

The run to the loo and fetch a coffee.

Mostly you know whether they are in the yes, maybe or no pile within the first 15 minutes of the interview.

Sometimes there will be a stand out interview and you feel relief that you are going to be able to hire and then think that's the candidate to beat for subsequent interviewees.

Sometimes there will be a dreadful interview and you can feel a variety of things - annoyance that your time has been wasted, sympathy for the person, amusement.

I've done a lot of interviewing for the last few years, both in my previous job and current one. Normally it's first interviews on my own, and then second/final interviews with someone else. So by that point it's usually been filtered down anyway.

I normally just chat with my fellow interviewer about whether the person came across as suitable both technically and personality fit. We might comment if someone was really bad, but like I say for me it's normally already been filtered down by that point.

Although I did have one not long ago who was great in first interview with just me. I think a whole different person turned up to the second interview, even now my colleague jokes about it as I said how great this person seemed for the role and then was just terrible in the second interview.

Usually it's been role specific. They don't fit the criteria, can't do the required hours etc. We usually pick this up through the application stages, sometimes not for a variety of reasons.
I've not had too many that are immediate no's for other reasons. I had one guy I interviewed alone due to my colleague going home sick that afternoon. He was chauvinistic and cocky, told me I wouldn't understand something he has said as I was "much older" than him (I was 28) and a women (mostly male industry). He swore throughout. He was a no.
I do try to give the benefit of the doubt if the person seems nervous or a bit lost. It can be really intimidating sitting in an interview. I try to make people feel comfortable and relaxed. One of the last hires we made was so nervous and quiet and came in a little scruffy -but he knew his stuff and has been one of the best hires we ever made. A real gem.

I usually talk about my nails and ask the other members what their plans are for the weekend

😃

Well yeah we chat about how they did haha.
It’s very rare you get an outright bad candidate. It’s happened to me once (his application was outstanding - he must have had a lot of help. He came across deeply mentally ill).
Usually people give crap interviews because they’re incredibly nervous so in those cases we just kind of go oh no poor thing. It’s an awkward thing to watch people shake and blank.

Generally we have a quick show of hands for yes, no, maybe and put their CV on the relevant pile. If someone has something particularly pressing to say we will discuss that. Generally most of the discussion happens afterwards as our receptionist seems to like to herd them in quite quickly one after another.