Are Online Competency-Based Behavioral Interviews (CBBIs) as Robust as We Assume?

The rapid normalization of online interviews has transformed talent assessment. While technology has undeniably expanded access and efficiency, research reminds us that interview medium matters—especially for competency-based behavioral interviews.

A seminal meta-analytic review on technology-mediated employment interviews found that both interviewer ratings and candidate reactions are consistently lower in technology-mediated interviews compared to face-to-face formats A meta-analytic review of techn…. This is not a trivial finding. CBBIs rely heavily on rich behavioral evidence, probing, rapport, and nuanced interpretation of verbal and non-verbal cues. When these elements are constrained by technology, assessment quality can be inadvertently compromised.

From an assessor’s lens, online CBBIs present several structural challenges:

• Restricted behavioral signals: Limited visibility of non-verbal behaviors (e.g., eye contact, presence, energy) can weaken evidence for competencies such as influencing, leadership presence, or emotional intelligence.
• Impaired probing and flow: Lag, screen fatigue, or reduced rapport may shorten follow-up questioning—directly affecting the depth of STAR-based evidence.
• Heightened candidate anxiety and impression management constraints: Candidates may struggle to present their best selves, impacting both performance and perceived fairness.
• Risk of construct contamination: Factors such as digital fluency or connection quality may unintentionally influence ratings, rather than the targeted competencies.

The implication is clear: online CBBIs should not be treated as a simple digital replica of face-to-face interviews. Organizations that rely on them for critical decisions must be intentional—strengthening structure, assessor calibration, interviewer training, and decision governance to protect validity and fairness.

As the use of technology in assessment accelerates, the role of HR and assessment professionals is not to resist digital tools, but to design rigor around them. Evidence-based practice, assessor expertise, and disciplined interview design are what ultimately safeguard the quality of talent decisions—regardless of the medium.

Blacksmith, N., Willford, J. C., & Behrend, T. S. (2016). Technology in the employment interview: A meta-analysis and future research agenda. Personnel Assessment and Decisions, 2(1), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.25035/pad.2016.002