“The organisation will conduct an equal opportunities interview – asking all interviewees the same questions and scoring their responses against pre-arranged criteria.”
This form of ‘Equal opportunities recruitment’ is a whole lot more than the form you fill in on a job application asking about ethnicity, disability, age etc. It affects the way applicants are selected for interview and the way in which the interview is conducted. Many organisations choose which candidates to interview by anonymously scoring their applications. The candidates with the highest points get interviewed. In the interview set questions are asked and no further conversation is engaged in. The above statement, lifted from at least 3 different organisation’s policies, is taken to extremes.
When I have questioned this, it has been explained that to give a truly “equal” interview you can only ask questions that you can ask all the candidates; questioning something on a CV is not equal as you can't ask the other candidates the same question.
I believe that this recruitment process wastes the organisation’s time and does a disservice to applicants. The extreme focus on equal opportunities stifles the candidates and creates an environment in which it is actually too easy to miss key talents or gaps in a candidate’s skillset.
A CV allows you to see at a glance whether someone can promote themselves in a visually coherent, easy to read and succinct way. An application form takes away this freedom. One job I applied for had 17 points on the person specification, and we were asked to write “at least a paragraph, ideally more” showing how we met each one. I did not get an interview, as “I did not meet point 17, part a”. Seriously? That’s a lot of form to read before you realise no interview will be given.
There is more to doing a good job than meeting every specification with mountains of examples. Approach, attitude and transferable skills are important too, which leads me to the interview. I confess to finding the ‘equal opps’ interview perplexing. The fact that the panel asks a question and then passively watches the candidate answer, with no further interaction belies real workday situations and thus can only give a skewed representation of the candidate’s skills and capabilities. An interview should not be about candidates memorising their experience with relevant buzzwords thrown in to score highest on the equal opportunities forms.
There should of course be set questions to ask each candidate, but a CV (or application form) should be questioned on an individual basis. Bold statements should be examined. For example, an application form that says the applicant can demonstrate computer literacy because she has experience of teaching a group of year 8 children computer skills, has to be questioned: Has she shown children with special educational needs how to use word or excel at a basic level, taught a year 8 group how to give a presentation using powerpoint, or taught advanced level skills to a gifted and talented group? The difference is staggering, yet all can be encompassed in that one sentence. By not delving further into the stated experience the organisation risks being dangerously short on information and can result in employing someone unsuitable for the role.
I’m not saying abandon Equal Opportunities. I am saying that more consideration should be given to the human element rather than the box ticking. Request a CV, not 20 page application forms. Have your 10 basic questions for everyone, but don’t be frightened of saying “Tell me more about that”. Probe a little deeper and your score sheet may change shape dramatically.
Monika Neall is is a community engagement specialist and freelance project manager.
@NeallM