Selling and Smooth-Talking: Effects of Interviewer Impression Management from a Signaling Perspective

Abstract

Prior research suggests that interviewers play an important role in representing their organization and in making the interview a pleasant experience for applicants. This study examined whether impression management used by interviewers (organization-enhancement and applicant-enhancement) is perceived by applicants, and how it influences applicants' attitudes, intentions, and emotions. Adopting a signaling perspective, this article argues that applicants' positive attitudes and intentions toward the organization increase if interviewers not only enhance the organization, but if the signals they sent (i.e., organization-enhancement) are actually received by the applicant. Similarly, applicants' positive emotions should increase if interviewers not only enhance the applicant, but if the signals they send (i.e., applicant-enhancement) are actually received by the applicant. A field study that involved video coding interviewers' impression management behavior during 153 selection interviews and pre- and post-interview applicant surveys showed that the signals sent by interviewers during the interview were received by applicants. In addition, applicants rated the organization's prestige and their own positive affect after the interview more positively when they perceived higher levels of organization-enhancement during the interview. Furthermore, applicants reported more positive affect and interview self-efficacy after the interview when they perceived higher levels of interviewer applicant-enhancement. We also found an indirect effect of interviewers' organization-enhancement on organizational prestige through applicants' perceptions of organization-enhancement as well as indirect effects of interviewers' applicant-enhancement on applicants' positive affect and interview self-efficacy through applicants' perceptions of applicant-enhancement. Our findings contribute to an integrated understanding of the effects of interviewer impression management and point out both risks and chances in selling and smooth-talking toward applicants.

Does It Take Two to Tango? Examining How Applicants and Interviewers Adapt Their Impression Management to Each Other

“…Amount of Applicant IM Our coding scheme, coding rules, and coder training for assessing applicant IM were in line with study 1 and analogous to previous studies on IM in employment interviews (Ellis et al, 2002;McFarland et al, 2005;Peeters & Lievens, 2006;Stevens & Kristof, 1995;Wilhelmy et al, 2017). One I/O graduate student and one I/ O undergraduate student served as raters (see Table 11 in the Appendix for an overview of all raters involved in study 2).…”

“…Our IM coding system was designed based on Ellis, West, Ryan, and DeShon (2002) and expanded based on insights from Wilhelmy et al (2016) to also acknowledge the interviewers' perspective. We followed procedures from past research (Ellis et al, 2002;McFarland, Yun, Harold, Viera, & Moore, 2005;Peeters & Lievens, 2006;Stevens & Kristof, 1995;Wilhelmy et al, 2017) to code IM as self-focused, other-focused, and job/organizationfocused. Self-focused IM included statements promoting oneself such as statements about one's skills, competences, or experiences (e.g., "I have a lot of work experiences as far as human resource" from the applicant, "I've been the marketing coordinator for four years now" from the interviewer); other-focused IM included statements promoting one's interaction partner(s) such as statements about the similarity between oneself and the interaction partner(s) or praising the partner(s) (e.g., "Cool, that's great that you have done that" from the applicant, "Your enthusiasm is there, that's for sure" from the interviewer); organization-focused and jobfocused were later combined into job/organizationfocused IM and included statements promoting the job/ organization such as statements about the qualities of the organizations and the fit or attraction between oneself and the job/organization (e.g., "This is a big firm, so that's gonna make this job dynamic" from the applicant, "We have a hundred and thirty year history, we have two offices" from the interviewer).…”

“…Similarly, interviewers often use other-focused IM-such as praising applicants' experiences-to signal likability, as well as organization-focused IM-such as promoting company benefits or organizational culture-to signal prestige or status (Tsai & Huang, 2014). Existing research suggests that IM use can lead to positive interview outcomes on both sides of the interview table; that is, applicants increase their chances of getting a job offer and organizations increase their chances of filling a position (e.g., Barrick, Shaffer, & DeGrassi, 2009;Wilhelmy, Kleinmann, Melchers, & Götz, 2017).…”

Selektion und Attraktion

“…Das IM-Verhalten von Organisationsvertretern kann dazu beitragen, dass Bewerbende nach dem Interview positiv gestimmt sind und sich von der Organisation angezogen fühlen (Wilhelmy et al 2017). Eine offene Forschungsfrage ist jedoch, welche Konsequenzen sich für die Validität eignungsdiagnostischer Verfahren ergeben.…”

A glimpse into social interactions in the selection interview : disfluencies, storytelling, laughter and their impact on interview outcomes

“…In the selection interview, signal exchange occurs via verbal and nonverbal IM on the part of both recruiters and applicants. Applicant verbal IM has been extensively studied, and tactics vary along two main dimensions: Assertive vs. defensive (Bolino, Kacmar, Turnley, & Gilstrap, 2008) and honest vs. deceptive (Leary & Kowalski, 1990;Levashina & Campion, 2006 (Wilhelmy, Kleinmann, Melchers, & Götz, 2017) suggested recruiters try to build images of attractiveness and authenticity, and try to signal both closeness (rapport, trustworthiness) and professional distance in the interview interaction.…”