Chemistry is King When it Comes to Interviewing Successfully

Pornography is "hard to to define," but "I know itInterviews with executive-level candidates tend to be
when I see it," wrote former Supreme Court Justicemore conversational in nature as opposed to
Potter Stewart in 1964.rapid-fire Q & A sessions. The participants
Chemistry between two individuals is another graygenerally view themselves as business-equals and
area that can be equally difficult to explain. In themost employers recognize that candidates at this
context of a job interview, how is it you can havelevel, particularly those recommended by a search
two candidates with comparable backgrounds,firm, are highly qualified and in-demand. It was during
experience and skill sets: one the client loves whilethis 90 minute meeting that I watched the chemistry
the other they could care less if they ever see again.between these two parties begin to develop, then
You may be thinking, "That's obvious: it's atake a dramatic turn downward, only to slowly
personality issue"--and I would agree, to an extent.reignite and begin to build the foundation for a
But you don't have to dislike someone's personalitybusiness relationship.
to not have chemistry with them. I've interviewed aGood conversation should unfold like a tennis match
number of very likable (and capable) people that forwith the two players volleying equally back and forth,
whatever reason did not make a favorablenot like being shot at on the other side of the net by
impression on the client. I'm always trying to uncovera ball machine. When one side either dominates the
the criteria (experience and skill sets notwithstanding)conversation or doesn't equally contribute with their
that the hiring manager is going to use to determineown thoughts and observations, chemistry rarely
the candidate's suitability for their job.develops. No one likes to be interrogated. An
Psychologist Albert Mehrabian said that 93% ofacquaintance of mine is a reporter with a local
communication is non-verbal--the spoken word onlytelevision station and talking with him is like being on
accounts for a mere 7% when delivering a message.trial for aggravated homicide: one intensive question
I agree that body language and tone of voice areafter another with him rarely giving any commentary
significant factors when it comes to effectiveor opinion of his own. Almost as bad is sitting on the
communication (and developing chemistry), but Ireceiving side of an "information dump", where the
believe the spoken word plays an equally importantother person goes into mind-numbing detail about
part. Not just the quality of the message, but thetopics and issues that are hardly relevant to the
quantity of words used. Let me explain: I recentlydiscussion.
had the opportunity to participate in a groupAn interview is but a snapshot of both parties
interview with a client who is hiring for a VP-levelinvolved: it's a first impression to determine whether
position. Since the majority of the companies I workor not a potential relationship can develop and flourish.
with are outside of South Florida, I don't often getWhether you're a hiring manager or job seeker, keep
the chance to sit-in on the candidate/client meeting.the "volleying" analogy in the back of your mind
But after this particular one I think I'm going to startduring your meeting. Give chemistry every
insisting on it because the insight I gained wasopportunity to develop and you'll find yourself making
invaluable.better employment decisions.