Selecting staff.

The authors examined the relationship between the admission interview scores for 62 students in the 1986 entering class at Dartmouth Medical School and the students' dean's letter ratings given four years later; they found the relationship to be significant (V = .372, p = .014) and the interview scores to be better independent predictors of the ratings than were total Medical College Admission Test scores or science grade-point averages. Among the 17 students receiving "strong" admission interview scores, 53% received dean's letter ratings in the top one-third and 47% received ratings in the lower two-thirds. Of those 34 who received "medium" interview scores, 68% received ratings in the lower two-thirds; all 11 students who received "weak" interview scores received ratings in the lower two-thirds. The authors suggest (1) that admission interview scores help schools to identify more clearly those applicants most likely to become strong, competitive performers in residency and (2) that the significant relationship between interview scores and dean's letter ratings indicates a need to discover what qualities the interview actually measures and to consider the methods by which interviewers are trained, rather than to forsake the interview.

Interviews as Topic↗

PubMed1992

Can selection of medical staff be improved?

Selection procedures for medical staff have been reviewed. Much can be learnt from industrial practices, including the adoption of 'person specifications', improved references, structured interviews and training for interviewers. Possible supplementation with personality assessments is discussed. The clinical (and financial) importance of appointing the best candidate increased with the seniority of the post.

Interviews as Topic↗