Ten Suggestions for Interviewing Job Candidates

A crucial step in making a faculty appointment is the initial interviewing of candidates. The process typically takes place at a professional conference or by Skype. Usually several faculty members will talk individually for 30 to 40 minutes with a dozen or so candidates.

Those being interviewed can perform well or poorly, but so can those conducting the interviews. Much has been written about how to be interviewed, but here I want to concentrate on how to conduct an interview. Forthwith some suggestions:

(1) Ask all applicants the same basic questions, set in advance. Follow-ups will differ in each case, but by structuring all interviews alike, a source of unfairness is minimized. Suppose, for instance, that candidate A is preferred over candidate B, and one reason is that B offered a weak answer to a particular question. If A was not asked the same question, why presume A’s answer would have been better than B’s? Perhaps the question itself was problematic.

(2) Keep notes on what was said. As the hours wear on, attention wanders, and one candidate begins to blur into another. Weeks later, when the candidates are evaluated at a department meeting or in discussion with a dean, the written record will prove invaluable.

(3) Ask one question at a time, thereby avoiding this sort of pile-up: “Why did you choose to write about Plato’s theory of forms? What is the theory? And, by the way, what do you think of Aristotle’s criticisms of the theory?”

(4) The best questions are short. If a question requires a long set-up, it’s probably not an effective question.

(5) Interviewers may be tempted to engage in an extended philosophical discussion of a comment made by the candidate, but that temptation should be resisted. Time is limited, and the purpose of an interview is not to offer departmental colleagues the opportunity to display their erudition or philosophical skills. As a rule of thumb, interviewers should talk much less than the candidate.

(6) Asking about a candidate’s dissertation is sensible, but concentrating on it almost exclusively is limiting. How about asking: “Tell us something about your areas of interest outside the field of your thesis.” Or even: “Do you have intellectual pursuits beyond philosophy?” After all, a candidate is being considered for an appointment not only to a department but to an entire faculty. As such, the individual may be called on to participate in interdisciplinary programs, offer lectures on broad themes, or share in decisions affecting the departmental or college curricula. Some attention, therefore, should be paid to the range of a candidate’s intellectual horizon.

(7) Candidates are expected to be effective teachers, thus some pedagogical questions should be asked. For example, “What materials would you cover in an introductory philosophy course?” Or, “What do you think of the practice of grading students?”

(8) Candidates are also expected to assume a fair share of the day-to-day tasks that are an inescapable part of academic life. Hence a revealing question might be: “Would you be eager to serve on the library committee, assessing our holdings and recommending works to be acquired?” If one candidate replies, “I would rather spend time on my research,” and another says, “I’d be happy to help in any way I can,” you’ve learned what you need to know.

(9) Do not ask personal questions that have no bearing on performance as a faculty member. For example, no one should inquire, “Do you think you might be too old for this position?” Or, “Will your spouse be living with you?” If a colleague poses such an inappropriate question, other interviewers should intervene and return the discussion to suitable topics.

(10) Always be polite. Never engage in insults, laugh derisively at an answer, act in a condescending manner, or display a lack of interest in the proceedings. Remember that you, too, were once an applicant.

In sum, interviewers should make every effort to be kind and fair. They should not, however, be credulous. Challenging questions should be asked and cogent answers expected. Those candidates who do not provide them should be eliminated from consideration, not out of animosity but from a commitment to appointing new colleagues who give evidence of excelling as scholars, teachers, and contributors to the academic community.

Steven M. Cahn is professor emeritus of philosophy at the City University of New York Graduate Center. He is the author of Inside Academia: Professors, Politics, and Policies (Rutgers University Press).

Steven M. Cahn

Steven M. Cahn is Professor Emeritus of Philosophy at the Graduate Center of the City University of New York. The most recent books he has authored are Religion Within Reason (Columbia University Press, 2017); Teaching Philosophy: A Guide (Routledge, 2018); Inside Academia: Professors, Politics, and Policies (Rutgers University Press, 2019); The Road Traveled and Other Essays (Wipf and Stock Publishers, 2019); Philosophical Adventures (Broadview Press, 2019); A Philosopher’s Journey: Essays from Six Decades (Wipf and Stock Publishers, 2020), and Navigating Academic Life (Routledge, 2021).