Seeking to find an interview process that can guarantee you are selecting your next superstar both now and in your company's future will always be a never ending process. When dealing with people I really don't think a finite recruitment process can offer any guarantees as everyday situations throw out specific behaviours that may only ever be seen once or twice. Personal circulastances also impact and cannot be measured up front.
I do like the ideas that this articles presents although we do the opposite to their recommendations! We really focus and lead with unstructured interviews in order to get under the skins of candidates, disarming them at first glance which allows us to align their behaviours to the known cultures of our clients. We use Psychometric Assessments to back up our findings and then use some structured interviews to ensure the candidates can do the job they are being paid to do as well as looking at future stretch.
Discounting the unstructured approach and adopting a robot like process, in my opinion, would make the world of recruitment and people assessment very dull! It may provide more guarantees that individuals will excel in their roles but will it ensure they align to your company culture?
If you’re a hiring manager, you’re probably happiest getting a sense of a candidate through unstructured interviews, which allow you to randomly explore details you think are interesting and relevant. (What does the applicant think of her past employer? Does she like Chicago? What does she do in her downtime?) After all, isn’t your job to get to know the candidate? But while unstructured interviews consistently receive the highest ratings for perceived effectiveness from hiring managers, dozens of studies have found them to be among the worst predictors of actual on-the-job performance — far less reliable than general mental ability tests, aptitude tests, or personality tests.