Equal opps in interviewing - only one on panel instead of two

[sophierosie]

I went to an interview last week where one of the members of the panel was taken sick earlier in the day so was only interviewed by one person.

I didn't say anything at the time, but now I'm a bit worried as how can I have been given the same interview as others who have had two people interview them?

What if the person interviewing me didn't like me, but didn't have anyone to compare their opinion with.

Interview was quite difficult as had to give a presentation to one person and then as she asked me each question she was busy writing down my answers so I kind of felt like I wasn't being listened to fully.

They were interviewing for a number of posts all week so should hear the outcome next week, but if I didn't get the job should I say something about equal opps? They didn't even have a HR person in there and its for a reasonably senior position...

[llareggub]

Well, good luck. I think the interviewer was probably concentrating harder because she was on her own. And, she'll certainly remember you because of the odd situation.

Best of luck.

[sophierosie]

Email received - thank you

I think I feel that I haven't been fairly treated as other candidates will have been interviewed by two people, although, yes, we will have all been asked the same Q's, but I feel it was certainly offputting responding to Q's as the interviewer was so busy making notes so I'm not 100% positive they were listening to everything I was saying iyswim.

Those who would have been interviewed by 2 people would have had the full attention of the interviewer.

I should hear back by Tuesday at the v latest so fingers crossed!

[llareggub]

I don't think this is an issue unless you feel you have been treated unfairly. Having one person on the panel isn't ideal or best practice but in itself a reason for a complaint.

A fair interview isn't necessarily about having a panel of people asking everybody the same questions. If so we could get robots to do it.

[flowerybeanbag]

I'm not suggesting anyone, no. I'm suggesting an HR person or another manager, which I think is what I said. Whether they have been on a recruitment training course or not, someone like that sitting there even if they don't say anything at all, can take notes and, should the recruitment be challenged, can verify what was said.

I am not sure where the question of speculating about someone else's interview came in? As far as I was aware we were having a discussion about what was preferable, one trained person on their own, or one trained person with one non-trained person.

Sophie have emailed you

[ScottishMummy]

blimey im not going to be drawn into speculating about someone else interview. i am realistically telling you not all staff have done the recruitment training so technically not trained to interview, or are you suggesting anyone just to make up numbers?is that worse than one trained interviewer?

[flowerybeanbag]

That's not always realistic SM, saying it must always be people who have been trained or whatever, and my advice would always be that another manager or an HR person, whether interview trained or not, is preferable to no one at all. At the very least they can take notes, form an opinion and provide corroboration to what the other interviewer said should there be any problem, avoiding a 'he said she said' situation.

Sophie have got your email will email you back

[sophierosie]

Yes, that's what concerned me - there should have been someone around to act as backup surely?

Will email you details now...

[ScottishMummy]

but finding appropriate interviewer at short notice can be difficult, they need to be tried and understand process. not just any body happens to be available

good luck sophierosie

[flowerybeanbag]

sophie email me which charity if you can flowery dot beanbag at ntlworld dot com. I'm not working at any of them at present but may have some insight.

A grid is positive but still no indicator of rigorous sytems necessarily. It's a bit weird if they do have a decent recruitment procedure for that procedure not to also include a requirement for 2 people. . Even if the normal person was not available I would think it wouldn't be too difficult to find another person to be there, another manager/HR person/anyone really.

Let me know a bit more about it if you can by email.

[sophierosie]

Thanks

Its a national charity - they did have a grid with interview questions on so I think they have quite rigorous systems. They have requested references prior to the interview so do you think they will take those into account?

Its just so intense being interviewed by one person - I've been used to panel interviews which I generally find easier.

[flowerybeanbag]

What kind of organisation is it sophierose? I wish I could agree that questions all approved/all same questions/person spec and checklist submitted is always true but it isn't necessarily sadly. Hopefully it will be, but the kind of organisation will give a bit of insight into how rigorous the recruitment procedures are likely to be.

Don't worry about no HR, there's no reason why an HR person has to be in any interview particularly.

I would not panic at the moment - wait and see how you do. If you are not successful, ask for detailed feedback on your performance and see how fair you think that is. It's not ideal obviously, as you point out, but it doesn't necessarily mean there's a problem either. Wait and see what happens.

[ScottishMummy]

at short notice it is unavoidable someone missing. panel need to comprise of interviewers who have attended appropriate selection/recruitment training, and are familiar with the post they are interviewing for.we don't use HR at all on the interview panel for any grade of post, interviewers are all all senior experienced clinicians.

don't worry - the questions are all approved, and each candidate given same q's. also a person spec and checklist will be submitted by interviewer as check and balance.

all interviewers do try maintain fairness/equality