How to fix the broken interview process in enterprises

Agree or not, in most enterprises, the interview process is broken. 60% of hiring managers admit to deciding on a candidate within the first 15 minutes of an interview (affinity bias). Additionally, 74% of employers say they’ve hired the wrong person for a position.

All of these stem from one single issue: a broken interview process. Problems like relying too much on gut instincts, judging candidates based on their first impression, etc, continue to affect companies on a larger scale. 

According to studies, a single bad hire can cost an organization up to 30% of that role’s annual salary. And that’s just the financial hit. When you factor in the time, resources, and opportunity cost of misaligned hiring decisions, the total effort easily doubles. 

For enterprises, this inefficiency doesn’t just affect team productivity, it erodes business outcomes at scale. This blog explains how to fix the broken interview process while busting its myths. 

Summarise this post with:

Myth 1: Gut instinct-based hiring is the best way

Gut instinct-based hiring is probably the first broken interview process. Majorly because this issue is rooted deeply in people, to rely on their gut. Such a broken hiring process takes away objectivity and shifts the entire concept to being subjective. 

62% of hiring managers and HR professionals admit to relying on gut feeling when hiring employees. But research from HBR and Schmidt & Hunter shows that gut-based interviews have only a 14% success rate in predicting job performance. Compared to structured hiring, particularly skills tests, which can reach up to 65% predictive accuracy. 

Fix: Conduct structured skills assessments instead of gut-based interviews

By doing so, organizations can standardize evaluations, reduce bias, and significantly improve the quality of hire. This isn’t just a process fix, it’s a bottom-line advantage. Use tools like Testlify to introduce skills assessments in the pre-hiring process. Testlify has over 3000+ tests to assess over 4000+ roles, and offers 100+ ATS integrations (with popular tools like Greenhouse, Workday, etc). 

Myth 2: If the interview goes well, they’ll perform well in the role

A confident interview performance often creates the illusion of competency. But the reality is, interviews tend to reward charisma over capability. Many qualified candidates struggle with nerves or aren’t comfortable self-promoting, while those with less relevant skills might impress simply through polished delivery.

Such a halo effect often reinforces unconscious biases; interviewers subconsciously favor those who mirror their personality or communication style, ultimately limiting diversity. The result is a hiring process that prioritizes presentation over performance.

Related: Read about halo and horn effect

Fix: Replace personality-driven impressions with skill-based, scenario-focused questions

Structured interviews that simulate real-world challenges allow candidates to demonstrate how they’ll actually perform in the role, offering hiring managers a much more accurate, consistent basis for comparison.

Myth 3: Clever interview tricks reveal true character

Gimmicky tactics like surprise tests or “gotcha” questions are still used under the assumption that they reveal hidden qualities. But in reality, such methods only inject stress, confusion, and inconsistency into the process.

For example, Snapchat’s CEO, Evan Spiegel, purposely throws off new hires by setting them up to fail on their first day. By asking them to do impossible tasks (creating a presentation with new ideas in minutes), he analyzes how well new hires react when put under pressure. 

These techniques rarely correlate with job performance and often penalize strong candidates who may simply not respond well to curveballs. There’s no scientific basis to support their effectiveness in predicting success on the job.

Fix: Use validated behavioral and cognitive assessments combined with structured interviews

These methods provide measurable insights into both job fit and culture alignment, resulting in more confident, data-backed hiring decisions.

You can also use video interviews or AI-powered voice-based questions to evaluate how candidates respond in real-time, situational scenarios. Tools like Testlify’s Chat Simulation replicate realistic workplace challenges, allowing you to assess candidates in environments that mirror actual job demands.

To gain a holistic view of a candidate’s potential, combine soft skills, psychometric, behavioral, and cognitive assessments, or use them independently based on your hiring goals. Testlify also offers cultural fit assessments, helping ensure that new hires align with your organization’s values and team dynamics.

Try cognitive ability tests to identify top performers with real problem-solving potential.

Myth 4: Candidates prefer relaxed conversations over structured interviews

It’s often assumed that casual, free-flowing interviews provide a better experience for candidates. But what feels natural to one interviewer may feel disorganized and ambiguous to candidates. Unstructured interviews introduce inconsistency, making it difficult to compare candidates or assess job fit objectively.

In contrast, candidates appreciate interviews that feel professional and purposeful. Research shows that what matters most is not how “casual” the conversation is, but clarity, fairness, and structure.

Fix: Design structured interviews that are clear, engaging, and consistent

Set expectations, allocate speaking time fairly, and provide timely feedback. A well-organized process builds trust and enhances your employer brand.

Myth 5: Interviewing is an art, not a science; a good interviewer doesn’t need to prep

Some interviewers rely entirely on experience and intuition, walking into interviews unprepared, believing they can “read” candidates in real time. But the absence of structure leads to inconsistent questions, missed evaluation opportunities, and a poor candidate experience. This will easily be one of the common example of broken interview process.

Interviewing may involve human judgment, but it shouldn’t rely solely on it.

Fix: Treat interviews as a process grounded in science

Prepare in advance using structured question sets, job-relevant scenarios, and clear scoring rubrics. This ensures that every candidate is assessed on the same criteria and that decisions are made based on performance, not perception.

Myth 6: Interviewing doesn’t need data; it’s about human judgment

Without data, your hiring process is operating in the dark. Subjective decisions, untracked metrics, and inconsistent feedback loops mean HR leaders can’t measure effectiveness, ROI, or even basic fairness in interviews.

Fix: Use interview analytics and feedback loops

Track metrics like time-to-hire, interview-to-offer ratios, and candidate drop-off points. Use this data to continuously refine your process, reduce bias, and align hiring outcomes with business goals.

Modern interview formats that works best

Traditional interviews are evolving. To better simulate actual work environments and evaluate real skills, many enterprises are adopting video, audio, and chat-based interviews.

These formats offer dynamic ways to assess candidates:

• Video interviews: Ideal for evaluating communication, presentation, and interpersonal skills in real-time or asynchronous formats.
• Audio interviews: Great for assessing tone, clarity, and how candidates respond without visual cues, crucial in roles involving client or phone interactions.
• Chat interviews: Simulate workplace messaging environments to test clarity, responsiveness, and written problem-solving.

Unlike traditional Q&A sessions, these methods provide structured, measurable data on performance in realistic contexts. They also improve scalability and candidate convenience while keeping the process fair and unbiased.

Platforms like Testlify offer all three formats as part of their assessment suite, combining scenario simulations with standardized scoring to deliver actionable hiring insights.

Final takeaway

If it is evident that the interview process is broken. The next inevitable question is, what do we do to fix this? That’s where skills assessments come into the picture. 

One of the most effective ways to fix a broken interview process is by eliminating unnecessary interview rounds. Just as enterprises compete for top talent, candidates also weigh multiple opportunities. Prolonged, repetitive interviews not only increase time-to-hire but also risk losing high-potential candidates to faster-moving organizations.

Integrating skills assessments early in the hiring funnel can significantly reduce redundant interviews. These assessments provide objective, role-specific insights that help filter and prioritize candidates based on merit, not just impressions.

When multiple stakeholders need to be involved in interviews, consider consolidating feedback through a panel or “gang” interview format. If interviews must be split, minimize the time gap between rounds to maintain candidate engagement and decision-making momentum.

Try Testlify’s free trial, no credit card needed.