interviews form the basic selecting criteria for most large companies. However, some people think That interview is not a reliable method of choosing whom to employ and there are other better methods. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

Model Answer 1:-

Recruiting new employees can be a long and painful process. The success of any business or organization depends on the quality of its staff. Some employers conduct interviews to select new workers. I agree with the given statement which says that there are various other approaches. This essay intends to analyze methods of hiring new employees.

Undoubtedly, an interview is an important method of recruitment. if a selection has to be done merely on an interview, then the interview has to be well executed. lt requires a detailed understanding of the organizational needs as well as a careful grasp of the prospective employees’ responses. lt is not an easy task. if the recruitment is small scale and only a few employees are needed, it can prove fruitful otherwise alternative methods to hire have to be taken into account.

There are many other methods, which can be employed to hire new personnel. These hiring methods are a combination of several step-by-step tests. initially, job vacancies are advertised, after which the recruiters select resumes, which meet the basic requirements for that particular job position. Then the written test is conducted to judge the skills and knowledge of the person. This is followed by group discussions and some other skill tests. Then the shortlisted candidates are interviewed. After this, background checks and reference checks are done of those shortlisted after the interview. lt is important to check the credit record and criminal record. The reference checks are done to ascertain the authenticity of what is written in the resume. Finally, the selected candidates are sent for a health check to rule out any communicable diseases.

Analyzing the above-mentioned methods it can be seen that no single method is perfect. Each job has its requirements. Some jobs require qualification and some require experience. Big companies have a department devoted to human resources, which takes care of the hiring issues, but for small businesses finding the right employees at the right times can be an especially time-consuming and frustrating struggle. External recruitment agencies can be assi8ned the task of searching for suitable candidates for jobs, but it may be very expensive. However, I believe that spending on the recruitment of new employees can prove to be a good investment, as good employees can breathe new life into your business.

To sum up, it can be reiterated that finding suitable employees is an arduous task and has to be a combination of written tests, group discussions, interviews, and reference checks.

Model Answer 2:-

Recruiting new employees can be a long and painful process. But it is important for all organizations and In IT companies. Because the success of any organization depends on the quality of its staff. So, most employers conduct interviews for hiring new staff. I disagree with the given statement which says that interview is not a reliable method and other methods are better. Several arguments surround my opinion.

To begin with, there are many reasons why an interview is an important method for the recruiter. First and foremost, the interview is the only method in which employers can get an idea about the personality and social skills of the potential candidates. In interviews, there is face-to-face interaction and candidates have to answer the impromptu questions, which leaves very little scope for hiding personality traits. Also, employees can judge traits like the ability to handle pressure, confidence, and ability to think outside the box, and so on by asking some study-type questions. On the other hand, there are many other selection methods with varied advantages. One of the other common methods is preferred
when the focus is on jugging theoretical knowledge of the person. For example, in some IT companies, theoretical knowledge is very important because employees have to send an email to their clients. Last but not least, there can be a combination of all the three methods like written tests, followed by group discussion and final interview.

To conclude, I cannot agree that interview is not a reliable method
and other methods are better. It depends upon the job and company requirement, in some situations conducting interviews is more opt
and in some situations the other methods may be more advantageous.

Model Answer 3:-

Companies provide employment to a large number of people. The success of any business depends on the quality of the staff so employers conduct the interview to select new workers. Few individuals think that interview is not only a way to appoint somebody on a job. I disagree with the given statement, which says that an interview is not a reliable method but there are other better methods also for hiring an employee in a company.
To begin with, there are numerous reasons that why the interview is being always preferred by the big enterprises; because it is face-to-face communication where an employer who held the interview and an employee answered the questions regarding his field. Moreover, a person who is taking the interview can easily judge the personality traits such as skills, confidence, behavior, IQ, self-awareness, self-confidence, attitude, and many more. After reviewing the qualities of an interviewee the interviewer put the right person on the right job according to his traits. Big companies like reliance company appointed their workers through taking an interview and accordingly to their studies it is a mention-worthy example to cite over here. Hence, this is the main aspect that why an interview is being preferred.

Admittedly, if face-to-face talk is not a dependable method to recruit a person on a job then there are multifarious methods that can be used to appoint an individual on a job. Firstly, the written test method can be applied by the large companies for recruiting the workers in which multiple-choice questions would be given to them for testing their knowledge and capability of understanding. Secondly, assessment centers would be preferred in which the team activities would be done as well as competency-based skills would be judged. It is a good paradigm to mention here is in the field of marketing these tests would be mostly applied in which employee traits can be judged. Ergo, that are some tests that are better than the interview.

From my book of experience, I think so that the face-to-face conversation is better than the other tests which are applied because in an interview an interviewer can easily judge the personal traits of the person whilst through the other tests which are applied a person can only be judged about the knowledge of that person in the particular field. If a company applied both of these tests would be too expensive that a company can not conduct these to hire an employee.

In a conclusion, I do not agree that the interview is not a reliable method while other methods are better. In some situations, conducting an interview is more apt and in some situations, the other methods may be more advantageous.