Blending Skills-Based and Competency-Based Interviewing: Similarities, Differences, and Benefits

Introduction

Job interviews are undergoing a significant transformation. Traditional approaches—emphasising personality, presentation, and educational qualifications—are being re-evaluated in favour of methods prioritising skills and competencies. One movement driving this change is the “Tear the Paper Ceiling” initiative, which advocates recognising candidates based on their skills and experiences rather than formal degrees. The increasing focus on skills-based and competency-based interviews reshapes hiring processes across industries and sectors. However, confusion persists about these two seemingly similar approaches. This essay delves into the similarities, differences, benefits, and practical strategies for implementing a blended approach that leverages the strengths of both methods.

Understanding Skills-Based and Competency-Based Interviews

“Skills-based” and “Competency-based” interviewing are often used interchangeably, but they serve distinct purposes in the hiring process.

Skills-Based Interviews

Skills-based interviews evaluate specific technical and practical abilities required for a job. These skills, such as proficiency in software applications, analytical techniques, or project management tools, are typically observable and measurable. For example, a candidate for a software developer position might be asked to write code or solve a programming problem during the interview. This format aims to determine whether a candidate can perform the day-to-day tasks required for the role.

Competency-Based Interviews

On the other hand, competency-based interviews assess a broader range of attributes, including behaviours, attitudes, and underlying traits that contribute to job performance. Competencies encompass skills, knowledge, motives, traits, self-concepts, and values (Boyatzis, 1982). This type of interview delves into areas such as leadership, teamwork, problem-solving, and adaptability—traits indicative of a candidate’s potential for long-term success in various scenarios. For instance, candidates might be asked to describe a situation where they overcame a significant challenge, focusing on how they applied their competencies to achieve a positive outcome.

Similarities Between Skills-Based and Competency-Based Interviews

  1. Standardisation and Structure: Both methods employ structured formats to reduce subjectivity and bias. Structured interviews, which use predetermined questions and evaluation criteria, have been shown to improve the selection process’s reliability and validity (Campion, Palmer, & Campion, 1997). Standardisation ensures all candidates are assessed on a level playing field.
  2. Evidence-Based Evaluation: Both approaches require candidates to provide concrete examples of past performance. Skills-based interviews might involve practical tests or demonstrations, while competency-based interviews rely on behavioural questions that elicit detailed narratives of how candidates handled specific situations.
  3. Alignment with Organisational Needs: Effective skills-based and competency-based interviews are closely aligned with the company’s strategic goals and the position’s specific requirements. For example, a role requiring innovative thinking might assess technical creativity skills and problem-solving competencies.

Differences Between Skills-Based and Competency-Based Interviews

  1. Focus and Application: Skills-based interviews concentrate on specific technical abilities and task execution—what a candidate can do. Competency-based interviews take a broader perspective, examining how a candidate’s combination of skills, knowledge, and behaviours contributes to overall job effectiveness—how they do it.
  2. Contextual Understanding: Skills-based interviews are often transactional, asking “Can you perform this task?” In contrast, competency-based interviews are relational, exploring “How do you approach challenges, and why?” This distinction is crucial for roles where cultural fit and adaptability are critical.
  3. Measurement of Potential: Competency-based interviews are future-focused and explore potential by assessing how a candidate might behave in hypothetical scenarios. Skills-based interviews assess current capabilities based on observable technical proficiencies.

Theoretical Underpinnings

The competency approach is grounded in the work of psychologists like David McClelland (1973), who argued for assessing competencies rather than traditional intelligence measures. Competencies are seen as better predictors of job performance because they encompass underlying characteristics that drive behaviour. Additionally, the Competency Iceberg Model suggests that observable skills are just the tip of the iceberg, with underlying traits and motives forming the larger, unseen portion that significantly impacts performance (Spencer & Spencer, 1993).

Why Blend the Two Approaches?

A blended interviewing approach can yield a more holistic view of a candidate’s suitability. Here’s why integrating skills-based and competency-based methods is beneficial:

  1. Comprehensive Talent Evaluation: Combining both methods allows organisations to assess what a candidate can do (skills) and how they do it (competencies). This dual perspective enables employers to evaluate technical readiness, cultural fit, and long-term potential.
  2. Enhanced Fairness and Reduced Bias: Blended interviews reduce reliance on subjective factors like gut feelings. Structured interviews decrease bias and increase the likelihood of selecting the best candidate (Schmidt & Hunter, 1998). Organisations can make more informed and equitable hiring decisions by evaluating a more comprehensive range of qualities.
  3. Better Predictive Validity: Research indicates that combining skills and competency assessments improves the predictive validity of the hiring process (Spencer & Spencer, 1993). This is because it captures observable actions and underlying motivators, leading to a more accurate prediction of future job performance.

Potential Drawbacks and Ethical Considerations

While blending these approaches offers many benefits, there are challenges to consider:

  1. Standardisation Difficulties: Competency assessments can be subjective and more complex to standardise compared to skills assessments. Ensuring consistent evaluation requires well-defined competencies and trained interviewers.
  2. Unconscious Bias: Competency-based evaluations may be influenced by unconscious biases related to gender, race, or cultural background. Organisations must be vigilant in training interviewers to recognise and mitigate these biases (Lievens & Chapman, 2010).
  3. Resource Intensiveness: Developing and implementing a blended approach can be time-consuming and resource-intensive. It requires careful planning and possibly more extended interview processes.

Implementing a Blended Approach

To effectively implement a blended interviewing strategy, consider the following steps:

  1. Analyse Job Requirements: Begin by thoroughly analysing the job description to identify the necessary skills and competencies. Tools like competency models can aid in defining the attributes required for success in the role (Lievens & Chapman, 2010). For example, a project manager might need technical skills in scheduling software and competencies in leadership and communication.
  2. Develop Mixed-Question Frameworks: Create an interview framework that includes skills- and competency-focused questions. Skills-based question: “Can you demonstrate how you would use Excel to perform data analysis?” Competency-based question: “Describe a time when you had to persuade team members to adopt a new process. How did you approach it?”
  3. Use Multi-Modal Assessments: Incorporate various assessment methods, such as technical tests, behavioural simulations, and situational judgement tests. This approach provides a fuller picture of skills and behavioural tendencies (Pulakos, 2005).
  4. Train Interviewers: Ensure those conducting interviews are trained to assess skills and competencies effectively, recognising and mitigating potential biases. Training can include workshops on structured interviewing techniques and diversity awareness.
  5. Implement Standardised Scoring Rubrics: Use clear, standardised rubrics to evaluate responses consistently. For instance, skills might be scored on technical proficiency levels, while competencies are rated based on behavioural indicators demonstrated during the interview.
  6. Learn from Successful Implementations: Study organisations that have successfully implemented blended approaches. For example, companies like Google and IBM have integrated skills and competency assessments into their hiring processes, leading to more effective talent acquisition (Lievens & Chapman, 2010).

The “Tear the Paper Ceiling” concept promotes skills-based and competency-based hiring. This campaign advocates recognising the millions of Skilled workers Through Alternative Routes (STARs), such as community colleges, military service, or on-the-job training. It challenges the “paper ceiling” created by rigid degree requirements, which often exclude capable candidates.

The initiative encourages organisations to broaden their view of talent by emphasising competencies and practical skills. Skills-based and competency-based interviews help realise this vision, enabling employers to tap into a more diverse and often overlooked talent pool. This shift enhances diversity and inclusion and addresses talent shortages in critical areas.

The Benefits of Skills- and Competency-Based Hiring

  1. Increased Retention and Engagement: Employees hired through these approaches are more likely to stay longer and be engaged at work because they fit well with the job requirements and company culture (Gallup, 2017). When employees’ skills and competencies align with their roles, job satisfaction and productivity tend to increase.
  2. Greater Diversity and Inclusion: Removing unnecessary degree requirements opens opportunities to diverse candidates with varied experiences, contributing to a more inclusive workforce. This diversity can enhance team creativity and problem-solving (Cascio & Aguinis, 2019).
  3. Improved Performance: Studies have shown that structured, evidence-based selection methods improve job performance (Schmidt & Hunter, 1998). Organisations can improve overall performance and competitiveness by accurately matching candidates to job demands.
  4. Addressing Skill Gaps: Skills-based hiring allows companies to fill critical skill gaps by accessing a wider talent pool, including STARs. This approach is particularly valuable in fast-evolving industries where specific technical skills are in high demand.

Conclusion

As job interviews evolve, blending skills-based and competency-based approaches emerges as a strategic way to enhance the hiring process. This method offers a balanced view of a candidate’s capabilities and potential. With initiatives like “Tear the Paper Ceiling” leading the charge, organisations recognise that effective hiring requires looking beyond traditional qualifications to uncover true talent.

Implementing a blended approach can unlock a broader talent pool, reduce bias, and lead to better hiring decisions. By integrating skills and competencies, companies can build a more inclusive, effective, and future-ready workforce—one that truly reflects the diversity and dynamism of the modern job market.

More on Interview Techniques

Skills-Based Hiring: Transforming Ireland’s Employment Landscape

Exploring the Perfect Fit: Insights on Workplace Culture and Personal Growth with Dr. André Martin – Podcast

Lars Schmidt: Redefining HR and Empowering the Next Generation of People Leaders– Podcast

Sources

Tear the Paper Ceiling. (n.d.). “The Paper Ceiling.” Retrieved from https://www.tearthepaperceiling.org/the-paper-ceiling.

Boyatzis, R. E. (1982). The Competent Manager: A Model for Effective Performance. John Wiley & Sons.

Campion, M. A., Palmer, D. K., & Campion, J. E. (1997). “A Review of Structure in the Selection Interview.” Personnel Psychology, 50(3), 655–702.

Cascio, W. F., & Aguinis, H. (2019). Applied Psychology in Talent Management. Cambridge University Press.

Gallup. (2017). State of the American Workplace Report. Retrieved from https://www.gallup.com.

Lievens, F., & Chapman, D. S. (2011). Recruitment and selection. In S. Zedeck (Ed.), APA handbook of industrial and organizational psychology (Vol. 2, pp. 135–176). American Psychological Association.

McClelland, D. C. (1973). “Testing for Competence Rather Than for Intelligence.” American Psychologist, 28(1), 1–14.

Pulakos, E. D. (2005). Selection Assessment Methods: A Guide to Implementing Formal Assessments to Build a High-Quality Workforce. SHRM Foundation.

Schmidt, F. L., & Hunter, J. E. (1998). “The Validity and Utility of Selection Methods in Personnel Psychology: Practical and Theoretical Implications of 85 Years of Research Findings.” Psychological Bulletin, 124(2), 262–274.

Spencer, L. M., & Spencer, S. M. (1993). Competence at Work: Models for Superior Performance. John Wiley & Sons.

About the author

Avatar photo

Shay Dalton

Partner

Shay has placed over 200 successful C-level candidates and is one of the best known and respected executive recruiters in the market.