Parts of an Interview
The Introduction
This is a rapport establishing phase where the employer seeks to create an environment that will make the interviewee feel comfortable. In their 2018 review, the Headhunters noted that this is an ice-breaking phase that seeks to ease the formality of the interview session for the candidates to provide honest responses. In this stage, the interviewer welcomes the candidate for the interview session, opens up the interview by introductions from those involved in the process, and outlines the purpose as well as the structure of the interview (Headhunters, 2018). Further, the discussions in this stage may range from a small talk about the weather or traffic to the basics about the company. The employer will be analyzing the candidate with regard to the company culture, and any positive or negative variance to the standard (Collegegrad, 2018).
Information Gathering
In this phase, the employer shall be seeking answers to questions that are agreed prior to the interview, while matching the candidate's responses against their success factors for benchmarking with other candidates. The questions will be open-ended or closed-ended with the intention of probing deep into the candidate's background and even extending past the interview to bring out the candidate's honesty and sincerity, intelligence, attitude and work ethic (Collegegrad, 2018). In this review, the author further suggests that the questions in this phase will include behavioral, experience, case, opinion or competency related questions among others. The questions are tied to the position the candidate is being interviewed. For instance, the candidate can be asked to mention the competencies they feel are key to the position. This is the most critical stage as the candidate’s success will entirely depend on how prepared the candidate is in terms of the information gathering and approach to the questions with precision.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Interview Closure
This stage entails a short wrap-up signaling the end of the interview session. The candidate will retaliate against the interest of the company and the position and ask any relevant question. The interviewer will respond to questions raised by the candidate in addition to explaining the next phase of the recruitment process as well as to when and how the candidate shall be contacted to be informed of the outcome from the interview (Collegegrad, 2018).
The Differences between an Interview and an Interrogation
While there are many differences between interviews and interrogations, both are strategies that investigators have at their disposal to gather information from persons of interest or the suspects in their investigations. There are a number of distinguishing characteristics between them. This section will discuss the main differences between these terms.
Presence of accusations
The presence or absence of accusations sets apart interviews from interrogations. Buckwalter (1992) stated that an interview is a one on one interaction between the interviewer and the subject where the interviewer takes a neutral position with the aim of getting information about a given subject matter without accusing the subject. On the other hand, an interrogation is accusatory in nature and the interaction between the interrogator and the subject revolves around the accusations leveled against the subject.
The goal of the process
The main goal of an interview is to collect information that is regarded important to the matter under investigation, whereas the main goal of an interrogation is to use available information and evidence to persuade the subject to bring out the truth about the details of the crime the subject is accused of having an involvement. In some instances, the truth may entail a confession from the subject about involvement in the crime (Gehl & Plecas, 2017).
Duration of the process
In most scenarios, interviews last a maximum of sixty minutes because it is a one on one conversation between two people where both engage in a question and answer session. Interrogations are not limited in time as the process is structured with specific questions to be answered. The interrogations are usually concluded once the subject confesses (Inbau et al., 2013).
Time of the process
In their works, Inbau et al. (2013) stated that an interview can be undertaken at any given time of the investigation into a subject matter. This is contrary to an interrogation which should be undertaken once the investigator is reasonably convinced and certain that the subject has some involvement in the matter. The interview should come before the accusatory interrogation (Inbau et al., 2013).
Structure of the process
In some instances, both the interview and interrogation may involve the same subject. In this case, the interview precedes the interrogation and once the investigators are convinced that the subject has involvement in the matter under investigation they then proceed to an interrogation. Of contrast, however, is that interviews do not follow a particular structure as both parties involved engage in a question and answer discussion with none dominating while interrogations conform to a structured version with the interrogator dominating the interrogation process (Inbau et al., 2013).
Miranda Admonishment
Miranda consists of a combination of rights that are guaranteed to a suspect in the U.S Bill of Rights as provide by the Fifth and Sixth Amendments. According to Stuart (2013), Miranda admonition constitutes warning the suspect that they can remain silent and that their utterances can be used against their wish in the court. Similarly, a suspect can appoint an attorney or if they cannot afford they can have a counsel. Once the suspect is aware of his/her rights, they can willingly speak to the police officer in the absence of the attorney. When a suspect is in custody, without the Miranda admonishment any statements that may follow will not be admissible in court. This means that the state cannot compel the suspect to testify against oneself (Stuart, 2013). Similarly, the author noted that for Miranda to be applicable the suspect must be in custody of the state and the police must be trying to elicit information from the suspect.
Problems Associated with an Improper Admonition
Miranda admonishment requires that investigating officers communicate the Miranda warnings to the suspect in custody prior to an interrogation after which the suspect can waive or invoke his or her rights (Maoz, 2012). However, the author states that in some cases the investigating officer may ignore the suspect's invocation of his/her rights and continues to interrogate the suspect. In such a case, any information elicited from the suspect cannot be presented before a court as it is regarded to be in contravention of the rights of the suspect.
Suspects may claim that they were not Mirandized leading to the collapse of the case. In cases where the suspect fails to properly invoke his or her rights, or where the suspect claims not to have been warned, investigators face a task of establishing that the suspect waived the right for the information obtained from the suspect at the time of the interrogation to be used as evidence (Maoz, 2012).
In some cases, especially where the investigating officers are seeking witness statements about a subject matter, the officers may Mirandize a witness who ends up invoking his or her rights thereby frustrating the process of gathering information about the matter. Maoz (2012) states that this approach is misguided as the witness are not in custody at that moment and Miranda warning is not required.
References
Buckwalter, A. (1992). Interviews and interrogations (1st ed.). Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann Ltd.
Collegegrad. (2018). The Three-Step Interview Process - CollegeGrad.com. Retrieved from https://collegegrad.com/jobsearch/mastering-the-interview/the-three-step-interview-process
Gehl, R., & Plecas, D. (2017). Introduction to the criminal investigation: Processes, Practices, and Thinking . New Westminster, BC: Justice Institute of British Columbia.
Headhunters. (2018). The Four Parts of an Interview | The Headhunters Recruitment. Retrieved from https://www.theheadhunters.ca/blog/the-four-parts-of-an-interview/
Inbau, F., Reid, J., Buckley, J., & Jayne, B. (2013). Criminal interrogation and confessions . Burlington, MA: Jones et Bartlett Learning.
Maoz, A. (2012). Empty Promises: Miranda Warnings in Noncustodial Interrogations. Retrieved from https://repository.law.umich.edu/mlr/vol110/iss7/3/
Stuart, G. (2013). Miranda: The Story of America's Right to Remain Silent . University of Arizona Press.
