[IPAC-List] Manager-level interviews involving peers or rank-and-file ...

RPClare at aol.com RPClare at aol.com
Wed May 2 10:53:34 EDT 2012

I don't believe the composition of the panel would necessarily change our
obligations regarding the functions of the panel. it does give the advantage
of varied perspectives (and perhaps more "accurate" ones). Wouldn't
leadership/management style be important to have the perspective of those to be
led/managed? Our real challenge is to determine how we structure the panel
and to ensure that our analysis is designed to uncover the characteristics
that can be better tapped with the panels competency. Regardless of the
composition of the panel, the issue of controlling "hidden agendas"(and some
not so hidden)/bias/feelings among panelists is a continuing and difficult
challenge. This type of panel in "merely" the selection equivalent of a 360
performance evaluation.

In a message dated 5/2/2012 10:03:18 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
ppluta at hr.lacounty.gov writes:

I believe this would qualify as a 'fit' type of evaluation, rather than a
competency-based assessment. If it is part of an overall selection
battery, I would certainly make it the last hurdle. I would also develop some
structure for the panels to provide their evaluations, such as ratings on
specific indexes of person-organization fit. The extant literature (e.g.,
Adkins, Russell, & Werbel, 1994; Amiot, Vallerand, & Blanchard, 2006; Chatman,
1991; Hult, 2005; Westerman, & Cyr, 2004) indicates that values congruence
is one of the best indicators of person-organization fit. So identifying
your organization's shared values and identifying the extent to which the
candidate shares those values may be helpful. I believe there are potential
pitfalls to leaving these interactions completely unstructured and making
it an evaluation of how the people "feel" about the candidate.

Paul E. Pluta, ABD
Human Resources Analyst
Department of Human Resources
Talent Management Division
Phone: 213.738.2021
ppluta at hr.lacounty.gov

-----Original Message-----
From: ipac-list-bounces at ipacweb.org [mailto:ipac-list-bounces at ipacweb.org]
On Behalf Of keith.poole at phoenix.gov
Sent: Tuesday, May 01, 2012 3:10 PM
To: ipac-list at ipacweb.org
Subject: [IPAC-List] Manager-level interviews involving peers or
rank-and-file employees

We (central HR) occasionally get asked by departments to bless "synergy"
interview panels or discussions with candidates. Usually this is for a
management level position, and the department wants to invite all employees,
or a cross-section of employees, to meet candidates and have either
structured or unstructured Q&A with that potential manager. Another
variation: a panel of the existing, equivalent-level managers in that
department will interview and assess candidates, potentially picking their
next coworker/peer.

The trick seems to be, how do we incorporate their feedback and assessment

into the overall selection decision, while avoiding hidden agendas. In
some cases the synergy panels do seem to reveal fatal flaws. In other
cases you get camps rooting for candidate A vs B vs C and everything just gets

Is there an industry term for this type of interview? Any research or
suggestions on how this can be a meaningful part of the selection process?

Keith Poole
Human Resources Supervisor
City of Phoenix HR Department
135 N 2nd Ave
Phoenix, AZ 85003
Phone: (602) 262-7140
Fax: (602) 495-5498
Email: keith.poole at phoenix.gov
IPAC-List at ipacweb.org
IPAC-List at ipacweb.org

More information about the IPAC-List mailing list