Sample 1:

As the younger generations struggle to apply for jobs, they begin to wonder if holding interviews is the best way to assess candidates. I moderately agree that in some cases, interviews are not the best method.

There are many reasons why people are skeptical about using interviews to examine candidates’ qualities. Firstly, an interview does not fully reflect candidates’ abilities, especially for candidates applying to technical positions in the IT and engineering industries. For these positions, the best way to assess their abilities is through tests, such as programming tests, case studies, or teamwork sessions with other candidates. Secondly, it is hard to evaluate candidates through interviews because they can lie. Many people admitted to having lied at least once, especially when asked about their past experiences or projects. For example, many told recruiters that they significantly contributed to projects that they hardly participated in.

However, I still think that recruiters should combine interviews with other evaluations because they are still efficient. The first advantage is that the interview gives both employers and applicants a chance to see if applicants are suitable for the company’s culture. For example, employers can observe candidates’ manners, dress codes, or attitudes, whereas candidates can see how other workers are treated. Another advantage of interviews is that they are quick and easy to conduct. Most employers will spend only 30 minutes interviewing candidates before usually giving a tour around the workplace. This is also the most direct way to communicate with applicants because both parties can discuss sensitive topics that otherwise would be inappropriate to touch on, such as salary, benefits, or workplace culture.

In conclusion, I agree that for technology companies, using only interviews as an assessment during their hiring process is not sufficient. However, recruiters should not eliminate or replace interviews.