Surgeon's Glasses Reflecting Multiple Faces

Surgeon's Compass: How Structured Interviews Can Sharpen Your Hiring Decisions

Q: What were the key findings regarding surgical faculty's knowledge of structured interviews before and after the training program?

The study highlights the transformative impact of structured interview training on surgical faculty at Baylor College of Medicine and Houston Methodist Hospital. Before the training, faculty demonstrated limited knowledge of structured interview techniques, averaging only 35% on a knowledge assessment. However, after a half-day course that included evidence-based strategies, interactive formats, and bias awareness, post-course knowledge assessment scores more than doubled to 80%.

Q: How do structured interviews revolutionize surgeon hiring, and what specific components contribute to their effectiveness?

Structured interviews are designed to enhance fairness, reliability, and validity in the surgeon hiring process by standardizing the evaluation of candidates. This involves using evidence-based strategies to improve interview reliability and validity. Structured Interviews also include training on crafting questions directly related to position requirements and educating faculty on identifying and mitigating common biases in the interview process.

Q: What impact did the structured interview training have on interrater agreement among faculty members regarding applicant competency?

The interrater agreement on applicant competency significantly improved after the structured interview training. Initially, there was a noticeable lack of agreement in how faculty rated applicant competencies. However, following the course, 80% of interview ratings aligned within two points of each other. This marked improvement demonstrates the program's effectiveness in aligning faculty perceptions and standardizing the evaluation process, showcasing that faculty members were more aligned on the strengths of the candidates.

Q: What steps can institutions take to enhance the quality and reliability of their surgeon hiring decisions?

Institutions can enhance the quality, fairness, and reliability of surgeon hiring decisions by implementing structured interview training programs for surgical faculty. These programs should include key components such as evidence-based strategies, interactive formats, training on question development, and bias awareness education. The focus should be on methods proven to enhance interview reliability and validity. This comprehensive approach enables faculty to make more informed, data-driven hiring decisions.

Q: How do structured interviews differ from traditional, unstructured interviews, and why are they considered more effective?

Traditional, unstructured interviews often rely on subjective assessments and gut feelings, which can lead to variability, biases, and unfair selection processes. In contrast, structured interviews use objective assessment and standardized evaluation. They ensure that all candidates are evaluated using the same criteria, reducing the influence of personal biases and improving the overall quality of hiring decisions. Traditional interviews lack standardized questions and evaluation metrics, contributing to inconsistency in the selection process.

Samir D’Costa in Health & Wellness November 2025 • 4 min read.

"Navigate the complexities of surgeon hiring with proven techniques to standardize your interview process and ensure you're selecting the best talent for your team."

In the high-stakes world of surgical practice, the ability to pinpoint the right talent isn't just an administrative task—it's a cornerstone of patient care and institutional success. Traditional hiring methods, often steeped in unstructured interviews, can be unreliable, leading to variability and potential biases. This creates not only a challenge in ensuring a fair selection process but also poses risks to the overall quality of surgical teams.

The need for a more rigorous, evidence-based approach to surgeon selection has never been more critical. Recognizing the limitations of conventional methods, a team of researchers embarked on a study to explore the effectiveness of structured interview training for surgical faculty. Their goal was ambitious: to transform a process often guided by gut feeling into one driven by objective assessment and standardized evaluation.

This research, conducted at Baylor College of Medicine and Houston Methodist Hospital, offers a beacon of hope for institutions striving for excellence in their surgical departments. By developing and implementing a structured interview training program, the study provides a clear pathway toward enhancing the quality, fairness, and reliability of surgeon hiring decisions. It's a practical guide for those ready to leave behind the pitfalls of subjectivity and embrace a future of data-driven talent acquisition.

The Quest for Objectivity: Designing a Surgeon-Specific Interview Course

Surgeon's Glasses Reflecting Multiple Faces

The study's methodology was carefully constructed to address the inherent challenges in surgical faculty interviews. Researchers designed a comprehensive training program involving faculty members responsible for selecting fellows in minimally invasive and bariatric surgery. The program began with a stark revelation: a 20-item knowledge assessment revealed that faculty possessed limited baseline knowledge of structured interview techniques, averaging a mere 35% ± 6.12%. Furthermore, there was a noticeable lack of agreement in how faculty rated applicant competencies before the training.

The intervention was a half-day course meticulously crafted to instill the principles and skills of structured interviewing. Key components included:

Evidence-Based Strategies: Focus on methods proven to enhance interview reliability and validity.
Interactive Format: Active participation through discussions, video analysis, and role-playing scenarios.
Question Development: Training on crafting questions directly related to position requirements.
Bias Awareness: Education on identifying and mitigating common biases in the interview process.

Following the course, faculty members were re-evaluated. The results were transformative. Post-course knowledge assessment scores more than doubled, reaching an impressive 80% ± 9.35% (p < 0.01). Equally significant, interrater agreement on applicant competency soared, with 80% of interview ratings aligning within two points of each other. This marked improvement demonstrated the program's effectiveness in aligning faculty perceptions and standardizing the evaluation process.

Investing in Clarity: The Future of Surgeon Selection

The findings of this study carry profound implications for the future of surgeon selection. By demonstrating the tangible benefits of structured interview training, the research underscores the importance of investing in comprehensive, evidence-based hiring practices. Institutions that prioritize structured interviews are not only enhancing the fairness and reliability of their selection processes but also positioning themselves to attract and retain the most qualified and competent surgical talent. The path forward is clear: embrace objectivity, standardize assessments, and empower your faculty with the tools they need to make informed, data-driven hiring decisions.

About this Article -

This article was crafted using a human-AI hybrid and collaborative approach. AI assisted our team with initial drafting, research insights, identifying key questions, and image generation. Our human editors guided topic selection, defined the angle, structured the content, ensured factual accuracy and relevance, refined the tone, and conducted thorough editing to deliver helpful, high-quality information.See our About page for more information.

This article is based on research published under:

DOI-LINK: 10.1016/j.jsurg.2017.06.006, Alternate LINK

Title: Can We Get Faculty Interviewers On The Same Page? An Examination Of A Structured Interview Course For Surgeons

Subject: Education

Journal: Journal of Surgical Education

Publisher: Elsevier BV

Authors: Aimee K. Gardner, Brenna C. D’Onofrio, Brian J. Dunkin

Published: 2018-01-01

Everything You Need To Know

What were the key findings regarding surgical faculty's knowledge of structured interviews before and after the training program?

The study highlights the transformative impact of structured interview training on surgical faculty at Baylor College of Medicine and Houston Methodist Hospital. Before the training, faculty demonstrated limited knowledge of structured interview techniques, averaging only 35% on a knowledge assessment. However, after a half-day course that included evidence-based strategies, interactive formats, and bias awareness, post-course knowledge assessment scores more than doubled to 80%.

How do structured interviews revolutionize surgeon hiring, and what specific components contribute to their effectiveness?

Structured interviews are designed to enhance fairness, reliability, and validity in the surgeon hiring process by standardizing the evaluation of candidates. This involves using evidence-based strategies to improve interview reliability and validity. Structured Interviews also include training on crafting questions directly related to position requirements and educating faculty on identifying and mitigating common biases in the interview process.

What impact did the structured interview training have on interrater agreement among faculty members regarding applicant competency?

The interrater agreement on applicant competency significantly improved after the structured interview training. Initially, there was a noticeable lack of agreement in how faculty rated applicant competencies. However, following the course, 80% of interview ratings aligned within two points of each other. This marked improvement demonstrates the program's effectiveness in aligning faculty perceptions and standardizing the evaluation process, showcasing that faculty members were more aligned on the strengths of the candidates.

What steps can institutions take to enhance the quality and reliability of their surgeon hiring decisions?

Institutions can enhance the quality, fairness, and reliability of surgeon hiring decisions by implementing structured interview training programs for surgical faculty. These programs should include key components such as evidence-based strategies, interactive formats, training on question development, and bias awareness education. The focus should be on methods proven to enhance interview reliability and validity. This comprehensive approach enables faculty to make more informed, data-driven hiring decisions.

How do structured interviews differ from traditional, unstructured interviews, and why are they considered more effective?

Traditional, unstructured interviews often rely on subjective assessments and gut feelings, which can lead to variability, biases, and unfair selection processes. In contrast, structured interviews use objective assessment and standardized evaluation. They ensure that all candidates are evaluated using the same criteria, reducing the influence of personal biases and improving the overall quality of hiring decisions. Traditional interviews lack standardized questions and evaluation metrics, contributing to inconsistency in the selection process.