Competency based interviews

[Daisymasie]

I'm just wondering if anyone with experience of interviewing has any strong views on competency based interviews? They're used for promotion where I work and I'm really disappointed at the latest promotion panel just announced. Some of my really good staff aren't on it, and other people who I would describe as average all rounders made the grade.
I'm just wondering how effective these interviews are perceived to be at selecting candidates.? DH reckons they often don't pick up the more original and creative people because of the rigorous marking system.

I find them easier because you know exactly what the questions will be so you can prepare a lot better

I think that's the point though. They don't really test people's ability to think outside the box or demonstrate new ideas or anything like that. It's really about learning examples off by heart and having answers ready to trot out. I think a lot of competent but not particularly original or lateral thinkers tend to do well, but there's a need for other types of people as well in more senior positions. I'm just not sure if they're a bit narrow in their scope.

They've stopped using them where I work. People were going into them very 'coached', and some interviewers felt that because they had to stick to this 'marks out of ten under set headings' system people who were getting average marks under every heading were doing better than people who really shone at most competencies, but slipped below the bar in one or two.

It's easy to coach candidates to do well in them. They're often used as a means of linking real examples of experience to the required skills but you have to look beyond just marking positive indicators.
We use them but only as one part of an overall interview process so doing well in the competences by no means guarantees you the job.

I agree, once you know what the competencies are you basically know what the questions are and can prepare really well.

You need to have examples of where you have demonstrated each competency but actually, if you rehearse well it's not at all difficult to "build your part" i.e. you were personally involved in a situation where one of the competencies was ably demonstrated but it was a team effort in which you played only a small part - it's not difficult to change "we" to "I" and make it seem like you led the project.

As a line manager, I see it as my job to coach the people I want/need to pass the interviews...

That's part of the problem though. I know of people who've been coached by managers very familiar with the competency interview techniques who have done well at interviews; but sometimes at the expense of candidates who didn't have managers who could coach them well but who are equally good or better at doing their job.

I think competencies should only be part of the process. They test certain things about a candidate but not everything, so they can be a bit one sided.