Interviews form the basic selecting criteria for most large companies. However, Interviews form the basic selecting criteria for most large companies. However, some people think that the interview is not a reliable method of choosing whom to employ and there are other better methods. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

Companies usually select talents through

interviews

, whereas it is regarded by some people that there could be some better methods to substitute

interviews

. From my perspective, I only partly concur with

this

opinion. The

interview

definitely has its drawbacks.

To begin

with, the interviewing period usually lasts too short to thoroughly examine one's technical skills.

Consequently

, companies are likely to hire those who are not actually equipped with the basic skills that they demand.

However

,

this

issue can be resolved by holding an examination with ease.

That is

to say, the

interview

is literally not the only one to select employees.

Nonetheless

, it cannot be totally replaced yet due to the fact that

interviews

play an indispensable role in employment.

Firstly

, the

Interview

is to some extent the most efficient method to test a candidate synthetically.

For instance

, an

interview

tends to inspect not only a person's basic technical skills but

also

his capability of enduring pressure, which can be vital in his future career path.

Furthermore

, most international corporations have implemented the method of holding

interviews

several times to test one's general abilities.

Although

a single

interview

may let some unqualified candidates pass successfully, the multiple tests won't neglect those employees. In conclusion, Even though there are shortcomings in

interviews

, which means it may fail to examine the candidates' authentic abilities.

However

,

this

issue can be tackled by mixing different forms of tests or increasing the number of

interviews

.