Based upon work started in Canadian medical schools over 10 years ago, there is an increasing use of serial brief structured interviews for admissions purposes. Called the multiple mini-interview (MME), each candidate rotates through a series of 8 interview rooms. Prior to entering the room, candidates  have 2 minutes to review a non-medical scenario  posted on the door that taps into non-clinical skills like critical thinking and ethics (e.g., should a doctor endorse herbal remedies if her patients fervently believe in them even though she knows they are ineffective?) and then discuss it for 8 minutes.  Each interviewer is trained in the use of a standardized rating scale.

There are several motivations behind the MME. First, it has been well-documented that unstructured interviews are poor predictors of work performance and are prone to all sorts of biases, including bad weather on the day of the interview.  Secondly, it has become broadly recognized that non-cognitive skills—such as empathy and the ability to work in teams—are critical success factors in a wide variety of jobs, including medicine.

Initially, it was hoped that the measures derived the MME would be independent of GMAT scores. However, subsequent research has found some shared variance between the two (which really shouldn’t be surprising given the broader I-O literature indicating that cognitive ability is able to partially predict virtually every aspect of job performance). Regardless, the MME does appear to bring value to the medical schools that use it, and its practice has spread to other medically-related fields such as dentistry, physical therapy, and veterinary science.  This is also another interesting example of how a structured interviewing can be incorporated into a selection process.

Reid Klion