Job interviews are a weird business – but what’s the alternative? | Emma Beddington
Emma Beddington argues that job interviews are arbitrary and biased, with decisions often shaped by quick impressions rather than a candidate’s ability to do the job. A 2015 study found that a quarter of interviewers had decided within five minutes and 60% within 15.
She says assessment centres can be just as pointless, while AI screening can feel impersonal and remains vulnerable to bias. Despite their flaws, interviews are likely to persist; Beddington describes them as awkward tests of chemistry and notes that, in her recent experience as an interviewer, the candidate seemed far more qualified than she was.
- Interviews can reward first impressions over job skills.
- Assessment centres and AI screening have their own problems.
- The author sees the interview as an awkward chemistry test.