I think you misunderstand what I'm getting at
I understand what you are getting at, I just disagree with your opinion (and so do the airlines).
How it takes a formulaic process that anyone can really prepare for by applying their own examples.
That's what they want you to do! It makes it even for everyone, so that you can compare each based on how good/ relevant their experiences up to now have been. It is not meant to be a test of how quickly an individual can 'think of something'. I could put the counter argument that just because you can think of something quickly doesn't mean you have better attributes than the chap who has really thought about what they have achieved in life before an interview and then presents this well. Without preparation he may be at a disadvantage to the 'quick thinker', but on closer scrutiny he may have better, more relevant experience that he would not have presented well without preparation.
It's not like there is a sheet of 'right answers' out there that 'Mr Memory' just learns and can then become the best candidate for pilot recruitment. I don't see why you think that 'formulaic' is bad and 'lateral thinking' is good (you haven't answered why you think that makes a better interview candidate).
Just how should they do it? Like I said, spend a week with a candidate and see them warts and all would be much more enlightening, even more so if they were secretly filmed, but unfortunately for the recruiters that is not an option and would cost too mcuh anyhow. So how do you think they should do it?
The whole reason HR use psychologists and their associated tests is to try to get around the 'good liar' who could look like the ideal candidate with all the required attributes when having the cosy chat with the chief pilot.
It could be argued that the guy with the best attributes who doesn't sell himself effectively and therefore loses out to another candidate is not the best person for the job. Remember, it's not just the
best person they are after for a job, it is an
adequate candidate who meets the minimum required grade, or possibly several of them. Every organisation has undesirables that manage to get a job, but on the whole the recruiters do a pretty good job and thus are reasonably happy with their system (in aviation at least).
PP
By the way I was refering to
you generically rather than
you personally.
