One-Way Interviews Are Terrible

Imagine this scenario: You’re sitting in front of your laptop, with a list of generic questions on the screen. There’s no one on the other side, no human interaction, no feedback, and no way to ask for clarification. All you have is a timer ticking down, and you’re expected to answer each question flawlessly as if it were a live interview. Welcome to the dreaded one-way interview—a modern recruiting tool that has taken a significant chunk of the job market by storm, and not in a good way.

The concept seems simple: pre-record your answers to a set of questions, and submit the video for a recruiter or hiring manager to review later. On paper, it offers companies the benefit of reviewing more candidates in less time. But in reality, these interviews are one of the most dehumanizing and inefficient ways to evaluate a candidate.

The Stress of the Silent Screen

The first glaring issue is the complete lack of human interaction. Traditional interviews allow for the exchange of ideas, body language, and clarification. If you misunderstand a question, you can ask for clarification. If you’re nervous, the interviewer might offer reassurance or even lighten the mood with a smile. These small, human elements are entirely missing from one-way interviews.

In a one-way interview, you’re essentially talking to a blank wall. You can’t gauge reactions, modify your tone, or even tailor your responses based on the flow of the conversation because, well, there is no conversation. You feel like you're performing a scripted role rather than engaging in a genuine, interactive experience. For many, this is a nerve-wracking and alienating experience that doesn’t bring out the best in candidates.

The Problem with Timed Responses

Then there’s the timing. Most one-way interviews impose a strict limit on how long you can take to answer each question. It’s meant to simulate a real-time interview setting, but the truth is, most people don’t talk in sound bites. It’s not uncommon to stumble, lose your train of thought, or need a moment to organize your answer in a live interview. The ticking clock in a one-way interview doesn’t offer you that luxury. Candidates often feel pressured to deliver the "perfect" answer within the time constraints, leading to rushed, incomplete, or robotic responses.

This timer creates unnecessary stress and adds another layer of anxiety, which disproportionately affects individuals who may be brilliant but require a bit more time to formulate their responses. Instead of revealing a candidate’s potential, these interviews often highlight their nerves.

Limited Opportunity for Expression

A traditional interview allows for the exchange of ideas, feedback, and questions from both sides. In a one-way interview, however, there’s no room for candidates to ask questions about the role, the company culture, or any specifics related to the job. Interviews should be two-way streets where both parties evaluate if the match is right. By eliminating the candidate's ability to ask questions, companies are not only doing a disservice to the interviewee but also to themselves. They miss out on seeing how inquisitive or insightful a candidate may be when given the chance to probe deeper into the company's operations or expectations.

The Dehumanization of Candidates

Perhaps the most troubling aspect of one-way interviews is how they dehumanize the candidate. They reduce people to mere talking heads, stripping away all the personality and spontaneity that can make a great interview great. In this format, candidates are judged solely on their ability to perform well in front of a camera, rather than their ability to think on their feet or engage in meaningful dialogue. It's an approach that prizes efficiency over empathy, and in doing so, it overlooks the very qualities that make someone a good team member.

Moreover, it turns the recruitment process into a conveyor belt of sorts, where candidates are passed through an assembly line of predetermined questions. There's no room for nuance, no ability for a hiring manager to dig deeper into an interesting point, and certainly no room for improvisation.

Bias and Inconsistent Judgments

One-way interviews can also exacerbate bias. Because recruiters are often reviewing the videos at different times, under different circumstances, their moods, energy levels, or personal biases could impact how they perceive a candidate. One candidate might be reviewed on a good day when the recruiter is relaxed and focused, while another might be judged after hours of watching similar videos, making it easier to nitpick minor flaws.

Furthermore, some candidates naturally come off better on camera, which might unfairly benefit extroverts or those with media experience. This format can penalize introverted candidates or those who may not feel comfortable speaking into a camera without the usual human cues that make conversations flow more naturally.

Technical and Accessibility Issues

There’s also the issue of technology. Not everyone has access to a high-quality camera, microphone, or even a quiet space in which to record their answers. Candidates without these resources are at an immediate disadvantage, even if they’re the best person for the job. Moreover, technical glitches—like poor internet connections or software bugs—can further stress candidates and even cost them the opportunity if they’re unable to complete the interview.

Accessibility is another concern. For candidates with disabilities, especially those affecting communication or vision, these interviews can present significant challenges. The lack of accommodation or flexibility in one-way interviews may unintentionally exclude highly qualified individuals from even being considered.

A Case Against Efficiency

Companies often turn to one-way interviews in the name of efficiency. The argument goes that this method allows recruiters to screen a large number of candidates quickly. But this so-called efficiency comes at the cost of quality. Rushing through interviews without allowing for natural dialogue leads to poor hiring decisions. A candidate who might thrive in a traditional interview setting could easily be overlooked due to the artificial constraints of a one-way interview.

Moreover, the efficiency argument assumes that reviewing recorded videos is somehow faster or more effective than conducting live interviews. But this isn’t necessarily true. Video reviews still take time, and without the back-and-forth of a live conversation, recruiters often have less information to base their decisions on, leading to additional rounds of interviews or, worse, high turnover when the wrong candidates are hired.

Better Alternatives to One-Way Interviews

So, what’s the solution? Live video interviews are an obvious improvement. They allow for real-time interaction, which helps candidates feel more comfortable and gives recruiters a better sense of who they’re talking to. Even better, structured phone interviews can offer similar benefits without the added stress of being on camera.

Another option is blind hiring, where candidates are assessed solely on their skills and experiences without ever having to appear on camera. This method has been shown to reduce bias and lead to more diverse hiring outcomes.

Finally, companies should remember that nothing beats a face-to-face conversation, whether it's virtual or in-person. In the quest for efficiency, we must not lose sight of the fact that hiring is, at its core, a human process.

Conclusion: Time for Change

One-way interviews may be marketed as the future of recruiting, but the truth is they are far from ideal. They strip away the human elements that make interviews valuable, create unnecessary stress, and often lead to poor hiring decisions. It’s time for companies to rethink this method and consider more effective, empathetic approaches to hiring.

Candidates deserve better than to be reduced to pre-recorded answers on a screen, and companies deserve better insights than what these sterile interviews provide. By moving away from one-way interviews and embracing more interactive and inclusive formats, we can create a hiring process that is not only more effective but also more human.