OBJECTIVE: To discover whether applicants regard structures interviews as a fair method of selection for jobs. DESIGN: Audit study of short-listed candidates for postgraduate specialty training programmes in the London Deanery. SETTING: Postgraduate applications for the London Deanery. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Satisfaction or otherwise with the application and selection process for postgraduate specialty training programmes amongst short-listed candidates in the London Deanery. Questions were asked under five categories: the applicant, the advertisement, the application form, the short-listing process, and the interview. RESULTS: 89 of 118 forms were completed and analysed. Candidates thought the advertisement was clear on who to contact (97%), when short-listed candidates would be notified of their interview (66%) and when interviews would occur (93%). The design of the application form and the short-listing process both scored a median of 1 or 2 (strongly agree or agree) on all points. The interview process itself also scored well, with most candidates scoring broadly positively. CONCLUSIONS: As in the previous study, the overall response was broadly a positive one from the candidates' perspective, with the majority of candidates finding the system fair and objective.
OBJECTIVE: To discover whether applicants regard structures interviews as a fair method of selection for jobs. DESIGN: Audit study of short-listed candidates for postgraduate specialty training programmes in the London Deanery. SETTING: Postgraduate applications for the London Deanery. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Satisfaction or otherwise with the application and selection process for postgraduate specialty training programmes amongst short-listed candidates in the London Deanery. Questions were asked under five categories: the applicant, the advertisement, the application form, the short-listing process, and the interview. RESULTS: 89 of 118 forms were completed and analysed. Candidates thought the advertisement was clear on who to contact (97%), when short-listed candidates would be notified of their interview (66%) and when interviews would occur (93%). The design of the application form and the short-listing process both scored a median of 1 or 2 (strongly agree or agree) on all points. The interview process itself also scored well, with most candidates scoring broadly positively. CONCLUSIONS: As in the previous study, the overall response was broadly a positive one from the candidates' perspective, with the majority of candidates finding the system fair and objective.