How and Why Do Interviewers Try to Make Impressions on Applicants? A Qualitative Study
How and Why Do Interviewers Try to Make Impressions on Applicants? A Qualitative Study
Annika Wilhelmy and Martin Kleinmann Universität Zürich
Cornelius J. König Universität des Saarlandes
Klaus G. Melchers Universität Ulm
Donald M. Truxillo Portland State University
To remain viable in today’s highly competitive business environments, it is crucial for organizations to attract and retain top candidates. Hence, interviewers have the goal not only of identifying promising applicants but also of representing their organization. Although it has been proposed that interviewers’ deliberate signaling behaviors are a key factor for attracting applicants and thus for ensuring organiza- tions’ success, no conceptual model about impression management (IM) exists from the viewpoint of the interviewer as separate from the applicant. To develop such a conceptual model on how and why interviewers use IM, our qualitative study elaborates signaling theory in the interview context by identifying the broad range of impressions that interviewers intend to create on applicants, what kinds of signals interviewers deliberately use to create their intended impressions, and what outcomes they pursue. Following a grounded theory approach, multiple raters analyzed in-depth interviews with interview- ers and applicants. We also observed actual employment interviews and analyzed memos and image brochures to generate a conceptual model of interviewer IM. Results showed that the spectrum of interviewers’ IM intentions goes well beyond what has been proposed in past research. Furthermore, interviewers apply a broad range of IM behaviors, including verbal and nonverbal as well as paraverbal, artifactual, and administrative behaviors. An extensive taxonomy of interviewer IM intentions, behaviors, and intended outcomes is developed, interrelationships between these ele- ments are presented, and avenues for future research are derived.
Keywords: employment interview, impression management, signaling theory, recruitment, qualitative study
The employment interview continues to be the most popular selection tool used by both applicants and organizations to assess and select one another (Macan, 2009). It is characterized by social exchange processes between applicants (who want to get hired) and representatives of the organization (who want to attract and select the best candidates). To reach their goals, applicants and
interviewers try to detect what their interaction partner is interested in and try to use this information to send appropriate signals (Bangerter, Roulin, & König, 2012).
Signaling processes in the interview have mainly been studied in terms of impression management (IM) efforts (Delery & Kacmar, 1998). Scholars have repeatedly pointed out that interviewers frequently use IM and that these deliberate behaviors are a key factor for attracting applicants and thus ensuring an organization’s economic success (e.g., Dipboye & Johnson, 2013; Rosenfeld, 1997). However, it is striking that past interview research has rarely addressed the phenomenon of interviewer IM, as most prior studies have limited their focus on how applicants use IM (Ko- slowsky & Pindek, 2011). Furthermore, research has assumed that interviewers use the same IM behaviors as applicants (e.g., Ste- vens, Mitchell, & Tripp, 1990) without taking a closer look at what interviewers actually do when they interact with applicants.
We define interviewer IM as interviewers’ deliberate attempts to create impressions on applicants (cf. Schlenker, 1980) and argue that it is important to identify and explain interviewer IM. As outlined below, we argue that interviewers’ aims and opportunities may be different from those of applicants, and therefore their IM efforts should be somewhat different as well. Furthermore, schol- ars have noted that signaling theory, which is most often used to explain recruitment phenomena (Bangerter et al., 2012; Spence,
This article was published Online First October 5, 2015. Annika Wilhelmy and Martin Kleinmann, Department of Psychology,
Universität Zürich; Cornelius J. König, Department of Psychology, Uni- versität des Saarlandes; Klaus G. Melchers, Institute of Psychology and Education, Universität Ulm; Donald M. Truxillo, Department of Psychol- ogy, Portland State University.
We thank Talya N. Bauer and Adrian Bangerter for their helpful com- ments on earlier versions of the paper. We are grateful to Stéphanie Weissert, Lisa Juliane Schneider, Romana Nussbaumer, and Sabrina Engeli for their help with data collection and analysis and to Michel Hunziker for his help with data analysis. We would also like to thank Susanne Inglin, Domenico Amendola, and Roger Keller for technical and methodological consultations.
Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Annika Wilhelmy, Department of Psychology, Universität Zürich, Binzmuehlestrasse 14/ 12, 8050 Zurich, Switzerland. E-mail: a.wilhelmy@psychologie.uzh.ch
Looking for a Similar Assignment? Order now and Get 10% Discount! Use Coupon Code “Newclient”
