Interview is the basic form of selecting procedure for most large companies. Some people think it is unreliable. There are some other better methods. Do you agree or disagree?

　　雅思大作文模板范文参考：

　　It has been a wide-spreading method for many large companies to select potential employees through interviews. Nevertheless, the reliability of this means is among some people’s consideration and they suggest there exist other superior ways in completing the process of selection.

　　From my point of view, interviews are a comparatively reliable means to select talents and should still be regarded as a main method for companies. First of all, unlike some other selection methods, for instance, taking written exams, interviews produces instant and mutual communication between interviewers and interviewees which not only allows interviewers to know better about the interviewees’ responding competence but also their true personal abilities since the answers could not be prepared in advance and there are not the so-called “standard answers”.

　　Additionally, interviews enable interviewers to meet interviewees in person. It is quite important because interviewers can use this opportunity to observe interviewees from a more comprehensive way including their appearance, manners, etc, especially for some positions which need employers to communicate with other people for instance teachers and those who work in the PR section.

　　Moreover, interviews make it possible for interviewers to ask further questions which make the whole selection process more personal-oriented and flexible. Undoubtedly, people may give various answers towards the same question, with the means of interviews, interviewers can bring forward different further down questions and dig in as much as they want so as to better test the interviewees’ problem-solving competence.

　　Based on the several aspects discussed above, the reliability of interviews is comparatively high and should be carried on in the process of selecting employees.