Article archive / October 2018
Originally published: . Volume 9, No. 10. Source pages: 9, 16.
Louisiana State University Assistant Professor, Dr. Don Zhang and co-authors have uncovered an element of the dark side in seemingly innocent employment interviewing methods.
Zhang found that brainteaser questions, frequently used by companies such as Xerox, Microsoft, and Zappos, are related to characteristics of the “Dark Triad.”
The Dark-Triad is a composed of measures of Machiavellianism, psychopathy, and narcissism. Machiavellianism items include “It’s not wise to tell your secrets,” and “Avoid direct conflict with others because they may be useful in the future.” Psychopathy items include “People who mess with me always regret it,” and “People often say I’m out of control.” And, narcissism items include “I have been compared to famous people”, and “I insist on getting the respect I deserve.”
Brainteaser questions are a variant on the “stress” interview. Zhang and co- authors explain that the brainteaser items have the “goal of keeping the candidate off-balance and examining his or her ability to tolerate high-pressure interview tactics,” note the researchers.
The study, published in Applied Psychology, relied on employment questions such as “Why is a tennis ball fuzzy?” “Why are manhole covers round?” and “How many cows are in Canada?”
Brainteaser interview questions include those like “Estimate how many windows are in New York” and are just one example of aggressive interviewer approaches that lack “evidence for validity and is unsettling to job applicants.”
What does Dr. Zhang think is most important about the findings? “We found that managers’ willingness to use the ‘brainteaser’ interview questions was a reflection of their so called ‘dark traits,’ which are: narcissism, sadism, and Machiavellianism.”
“Our data shows that managers who ask these questions are on average less able to empathize with the interviewee. I think these results support our expectation that differences in personality, specifically the dark traits, may play a role in a manager's decision to ask these brainteaser questions during employment interviews.”
The employment interview has been a standard method in applicant assessment for many decades. However, there is ample evidence, the authors explain, that the regular, unstandardized interview has very little predictive value, only about four percent of the variance for job performance.
Why do so many hiring managers continue to use these methods, despite their lack of usefulness?
“There are many explanations,” Zhang said. “First, the academic field could do a better job communicating the research findings to practitioners and stakeholders. Most practitioners may not be aware of the research evidence nor are they equipped to interpret the evidence in the context of their work.”
“Second, people have innate need for control and autonomy, which can bias their preference toward using their own interview questions, despite the lack of validity,” he said.
“And third, there are individual characteristics, such as the ones we examined in our paper, that may influence a manager's preference for these types of questions. Often, the job interview serves multiple purposes, one of those is to fulfill the interviewer's motivational need to exert influence or authority over the interviewee. The type of questions that get asked––for example, brainteaser questions––may partly reflect those motivations.”
What would help more managers use better and friendlier techniques for employee selection? “I think media exposure of research helps,” Zhang said. “But more importantly, researchers need to find more ‘customer- friendly’ ways to communicate the value of their research findings.”
Dr. Zhang’s lab is conducting research on various aspects of the interview process. “Specifically, we are interested in managers' reaction toward evidence-based interview questions and how to bridge the gap between research and practice in job interview practices. We are also interested in job applicants' reactions to nontraditional interview questions. When companies use stressful questions, they may turn away good applicants. We hope that our research will better inform interview practices in organizations by making them more valid, more fair, and more friendly.”
“My lab is always looking for organizational collaboration in engaging in mutually beneficial research. If any local organizations are interested, I would love to get in touch.”
Those interested can reach Dr. Zhang at (zhang1@lsu.edu) or check out some of the recent research in his lab at his website (https://sites01.lsu.edu/faculty/zhanglab/)
This article is part of a historical newspaper archive. Read the original issue for its original layout, photographs and graphics.