Practical Exercise: Error Detection (Case Analysis)

Introduction to the Exercise

This case study analysis is designed to consolidate learning about the keys to a productive interview and common mistakes to avoid.

The following is the case of "Paloma", a manager who, not being trained in interviewing techniques and acting under pressure, makes a series of critical mistakes before, during and after the selection process.

The objective is to read the case and analyze the specific failures at each stage.

Case Presentation: The Manager "Paloma".

Paloma is a marketing manager and faces a high-pressure situation: she has a vacancy for a "Community Manager" and the company's new product launch is in two weeks.

Her first step is to send an urgent chat message to David, the recruiting coordinator, asking for "NOW" candidates.

It is important to note that in this initial communication, Paloma omits the critical context: that the real need is for the launch and that the candidate must run specific marketing automation software (e.g. HubSpot).

Two weeks later, David informs her that he has two candidates who meet the general Community Manager profile.

Paloma, moved by the urgency of the pitch, asks to set them both up for 20-minute video calls that same day, and explicitly admits in the chat that she could barely glance at the resumes seconds before connecting .

The Conduct of the Interviews

Paloma makes several serious mistakes during the execution of the interviews:

Lack of Investment: she spends only 20 minutes on each one, wrongly assuming that David's filtering work is already enough, demonstrating ignorance of the HR process.

Premature Judgment Bias: Before starting, sees that one of the candidates worked at a well-known competitor startup and immediately thinks "this one must be innovative and fast" (Halo Effect).

Disengaged Behavior: During interviews, he answers emails (multitasking), interrupts candidates several times and constantly looks off-camera.

Superficial Questions: His questions were generic, closed and ineffective: "Well, tell me about yourself", "Do you handle social networks?", "Do you consider yourself a creative person?", "What would you say is your biggest weakness?".

The Result: Frustration and Lack of Alignment

At the end, Paloma is frustrated. The reason is that, although both candidates handled social media, neither had experience with the specific automation platform (HubSpot).

This was the critical requirement she needed due to its urgency, but never communicated to HR.

Her final action is to write another message to David, implicitly blaming the filter ("neither has the profile I'm looking for") and demanding more candidates, again without providing constructive feedback.

Error Analysis

The case analysis reveals systematic errors at all stages of the process:

Before the Interview:

• Paloma never met with HR to clearly define the profile.
• She did not communicate the critical, situational element: the need for specific software expertise.
• She did not prepare at all, reviewing CVs seconds before.
• Was biased by an irrelevant factor (a previous employer), demonstrating a clear bias (Halo Effect).

During the Interview:

• Did not follow any interview structure or methodology.
• Did not ask competency-based (behavioral) questions to obtain real evidence of past performance .
• Did not assess motivational compatibility.
• Had unprofessional behavior (multitasking, interruptions), damaging the company's empl