Hidden Costs of Unstructured Interviews.

-By Lalitha Varshini

Hidden Costs of Unstructured Interviews: Hiring is one of the most crucial decisions any organization make, and yet, many companies still rely heavily on unstructured interviews, where conversations meander freely without a consistent framework. These interviews might feel more “personal” or “natural,” but they come at a steep price. The hidden cost of unstructured job interviews extends far beyond just time wasted. It can lead to poor hiring decisions, bias, legal risk, and long-term productivity losses.

Hidden Costs of Unstructured Interviews: 63% of Hiring Managers Still Rely on Gut Feeling: Here’s Why That’s a Problem

According to a 2023 LinkedIn Global Talent Trends report, nearly 63% of hiring managers admit to relying on gut feeling over structured methods when making final hiring decisions. While intuition has its place, over-dependence on unstructured interviews can quietly erode the quality of hires. An unstructured interview is one in which the interviewer does not follow a predetermined set of questions or evaluation criteria. Instead, the conversation flows freely, often based on the interviewer’s instincts as follow-up questions. Unlike structured interviews, where each candidate is asked the same set of questions and rated against specific competencies, unstructured interviews are subjective, spontaneous, and inconsistent. 

Unstructured Interviews Introduce Unconscious Bias

On the surface, this style might appear conversational and candidate-friendly. It allows interviewers to build rapport and gauge the candidates intuitively. However, the very flexibility that makes unstructured interviews appealing is also what makes them unreliable. Without standardization, interviewers introduce unconscious bias, make inconsistent judgments, and fail to assess candidates on comparable grounds. To top it off, unstructured interviews fall on the pricey side of interviews. 

Further Read: How AI is Transforming HR Processes

Many managers defend unstructured interviews on the grounds that they help reveal a candidate’s personality and help understand whether their ideas align with the organization’s overall objectives.  While this seems reasonable, there is a catch. Research shows that interviewers form first impressions within seconds, often based on non-verbal cues such as appearance, tone, or handshake, and spend the rest of the interview subconsciously trying to confirm those impressions. This phenomenon, known as confirmation bias, makes unstructured interviews more about validation than evaluation.

Why ‘Liking’ a Candidate Doesn’t Always Mean They’re the Right Hire

A candidate who shares similar interests or background with the interviewer may appear more competent, while others are unconsciously sidelined. As a result, organizations risk hiring people who mirror the interviewer rather than those who are most qualified for the job. To reiterate the fact, none of this is conscious or purposeful.

That is why it is called “unconscious bias”. Ironically, what appears to be a “human connection” often becomes a barrier to diversity and performance. Homogeneous teams may feel comfortable but are less innovative and resilient in the long run. This is because, in the long run, talent and skill are factors that make the most sense. 

Further Read: Unqualified Respondent: Posting a Job and Getting 300 Totally Random Applications

Every bad hiring decision has a price tag, and unstructured interviews are one of the biggest culprits behind them. Studies have estimated that a bad hire can cost up to 30% of the employee’s first-year earnings when accounting for recruitment expenses, training time, and productivity loss. For senior roles, that number can climb much higher.

Why Lack of Structure in Interviews Leads to Costly Hiring Mistakes

When interviews lack structure, interviewers fail to assess critical skills objectively. They might prioritise other factors over the primary factor, which is skill. This leads to a higher number of qualified candidates being rejected and unqualified candidates being selected. Over time, these errors create compounding damage: turnover rises, team morale declines, and hiring costs spiral upward. Some of the most common biases that thrive in unstructured interviews include:

1. Affinity Bias: Favouring candidates who share similar interests, backgrounds, or personalities.
2. Halo/Horns Effect: Allowing one positive or negative trait to overshadow the overall evaluation.
3. Anchoring Bias: Being overly influenced by a single piece of information, such as the candidate’s previous employer or previous post.
4. Gender and Racial Bias: Making assumptions based on demographic characteristics, often unconsciously.

Such biases affect the organization heavily by reducing diversity, hindering inclusivity and ultimately crushing growth. Additionally, they increase the risk of discrimination claims, adding legal liabilities to the already steep hidden cost of unstructured interviews.

How Unstructured Interviews Can Cost You More Than Just a Bad Hire?

Beyond bias and inefficiency, unstructured interviews expose organizations to legal risks. Inconsistent questioning can inadvertently lead to discriminatory inquiries or uneven treatment of candidates. Structured interviews, by contrast, are defensible. They demonstrate that each candidate was assessed on identical criteria, reducing the likelihood of discrimination claims. In industries where compliance and fairness are critical, such as finance, healthcare, and government, the lack of structure can translate into significant legal and reputational costs.

From the candidate’s perspective, unstructured interviews can feel confusing and unfair. Without clear expectations or consistency, candidates often leave the process feeling anxious, confused, or misjudged. This damages the employer brand, especially in today’s era, where candidate experiences are shared widely on social media and job review platforms.

Why Structured Interviews are a YES?

On the other hand, structured interviews are like a breath of fresh air as candidates are aware of what to expect. Even though the criteria are not given out explicitly, candidates are assured that the same or a very similar line of evaluation will be followed for the other applicants as well. This means that there is no added pressure in the applicants’ minds about the fairness of the interview. Hence, this transparency boosts the company’s image. In other words, structured interviews are not just fairer, they are smarter. They allow organizations to:

• Evaluate candidates on relevant competencies.
• Gather comparable data across applicants.
• Reduce interviewer bias and improve hiring consistency.
• Strengthen legal defensibility and fairness.

How to transition from an unstructured to a structured interview? Let us understand:-

1. Define Core Competencies

Start by identifying the key competencies required for success in the role, both technical and behavioural. Examples might include problem-solving, adaptability, teamwork, or client orientation.

2. Develop Standardised Questions

For each competency, create a set of behavioural or situational questions that assess real-world capabilities. It will help interview experts understand real-world connections better.

3. Create Rating Scales

Use numerical rating scales or rubrics to evaluate responses consistently. This allows multiple interview experts to score candidates independently and objectively.

4. Train Interviewers

Train hiring managers on unconscious bias, structured questioning, and objective evaluation. Role-playing and calibration sessions can help ensure alignment across panels.

5. Combine Data with Discussion

Encourage panel members and interview experts to discuss their ratings post-interview, but always base decisions on documented evidence, not impressions.

6. Leverage Technology

Modern applicant tracking systems (ATS) and interview intelligence platforms can automate scoring, track interviewer performance, and ensure consistency.

Read our latest Blog: How to Turn ‘Tell Me About Yourself’ into Your Strongest Interview Moment

To conclude, unstructured interviews may feel authentic, but authenticity without accountability is costly. They drain time, perpetuate bias, and erode the quality of hiring decisions. The hidden cost of unstructured job interviews lies in every missed opportunity that prioritises a misfit over a talented candidate.