Standards and Guidelines
Etiquette for CAA Interviewers
Adopted by the CAA Board of Directors in October 2000; revised in October 2006.
We have all heard horror stories about inappropriate behavior during CAA interviews. The following guidelines set out some ways to make the interview experience more positive. The guidelines are intended not to supplant but to supplement legal guidelines for job interviews and should be considered in conjunction with CAA’s Standards for Professional Placement, available in the Career and Workspace section of CAA’s Standards and Guidelines.
Introduction
We need to remember as visual-arts professionals that interviewing candidates through the CAA Annual Conference serves a larger purpose than matching particular candidates with jobs. Interviewing goes far beyond the needs of our particular institutions: it is an important part of our mentoring of beginning professionals. Interviewing through CAA may be one of the candidate’s earliest introductions to the profession. From well-conducted interviews, candidates can learn much about types of institutions and how their training corresponds to institutional and pedagogical needs. They can acquire a sense of the direction they want to take within the profession. Maintaining mutual respect among visual-arts professionals at different career stages is important to all the work we do, and the interviewing process is a primary occasion for cultivating this mutual respect.
We also need to keep in mind that interviewing can be a learning experience not only for the candidates but also for the interviewers. As interviewers, we learn about the intellectual interests and employment concerns of candidates, the emphases of their graduate programs, and how our own institutions and curricula relate to these interests and concerns. We benefit greatly from our contact with candidates, and our behavior should reflect that.
Prior to the Interviews
As per CAA’s professional-placement guidelines, remember that a clear and accurate advertisement of the job can go a long way toward making the interview process informative and cordial.
Prior arrangements for interviews may take some time and trouble to make, but they are infinitely preferable to ad hoc interviewing at the conference arranged through message boards or by phone. Prior arrangement puts everything on a more professional level.
Establish an application deadline that is early enough to be able to acknowledge the receipt of candidate’s materials and to make the necessary prior arrangements.
In your acknowledgment, thank candidates for their interest and let them know how and when you will inform them if they are to be interviewed at the conference.
When you or an administrative assistant tells a candidate that they are to be interviewed, let them know, if possible, who will be conducting the interview and where they will be staying. This lessens anxiety and enables candidates to get in touch with interviewers more easily in case something unexpected happens, such as a canceled flight.
Schedule enough time per interview so that candidates can learn something substantive about your institution, and you can learn something substantive about them. Half an hour to forty-five minutes is a good length.
Review candidates’ files well enough so that you can ask them specific questions about their art, their research, or their teaching interests. Interviews totally composed of generic questions (e.g., how would you teach the survey course in art history or the foundations course in studio?) can be very discouraging for candidates and boring for interviewers.
Schedule short pockets of time between interviews so that you and your colleague(s) can refresh your memory about the next candidate. Few things are more disconcerting to candidates than interviewers not remembering who they are. Transition times may also help to avoid awkward moments when candidates meet in the hall or doorway to your room.
During Interviews
It is inappropriate to conduct an interview with more than one candidate in the room or at an interviewer table.
Coffee or other refreshments are not hard to arrange and may help to put candidates and interviewers at ease and alleviate everyone’s fatigue. Should candidates and interviewers dine together at the conference (or campus interview), interviewers should be sensitive to the candidate’s eating preferences. A candidate may maintain a certain eating regimen due to health, religious beliefs, etc.
Many conference interviews are conducted at special interviewer tables. Candidates may feel especially awkward and “exposed” in this impersonal context, and so it is doubly important to put them at ease by being cordial and expressing genuine interest in their candidacy. Try to maintain a sense of intimacy in conversing with candidates despite the distractions surrounding you. Maintaining eye contact is crucial, as is an appropriate voice level. Don’t talk so softly that you can’t be heard or so loudly that you become a distraction to nearby tables. Cushions of time between interviews will help avoid fatigue and provide opportunities to organize materials on the table. Keep in mind that other candidates’ files may be easily visible, so keep them out of sight insofar as possible to protect privacy.
Consider carefully which and how many members of your department interview candidates. Too many interviewers seems like an inquisition; too few or only one can also be awkward. If at all possible, have both a man and a woman interviewing candidates: this may lessen the intimidation a woman might feel being interviewed by only a man, and vice versa. Interviewers should make every effort to leave department/personal politics out of the interview.
Establish basic territories the interview must cover, but vary the order of the questions so that the interview does not sound “canned.”
Stick to the allotted time! Although it may be flattering for a candidate to be kept over, as interviewers we must realize that we might be creating problems for a candidate by unintentionally altering his or her schedule, similarly keeping a candidate waiting in the hall jeopardizes that candidate’s time with you and his or her subsequent interviews with other institutions. If you do run late and candidates meet in your doorway, you can do much to alleviate their discomfort by being cordial and casual. Realize that it may seem much more awkward to candidates than it does to you.
Without using the interview as a means of airing your personal or departmental complaints, be honest about your program, your curriculum, your students, your institution and the city or town in which it is located. Candidates appreciate a realistic assessment, and it avoids problems down the road when the information presented at the interview needs to conform to the reality the candidate experiences when hired. And, as noted above, interviews are a primary way that entering professionals learn both the rewards and problems of working in the visual arts, and acquire a sense of what sort of institution they might want to become a part of. If your institution is a large research university that is very concerned with publications, say that. If you are from a small liberal-arts college, be realistic in your assessment of teaching load and its impact on research.
After the Conference Interview
Work as quickly as you can within your department and your administration to inform candidates about their postinterview status. “Rejection” letters should be as cordial as possible, thanking candidates for their interest and for the interview and wishing them well on their job search. When we delay informing candidates of the status of their application, we need to realize that we have a substantial impact on someone’s life by doing so. When we delay returning valuable materials, such as slides and offprints, we may also be putting an economic burden on candidates.
On-Campus Interviews
For on-campus candidates, make the schedule as clear as possible and invite candidates to contact you if they have questions about the people they will talk to and what will be expected of them on the interview.
It is important that the host institutions clearly outline matters related to travel reimbursement. Information related to plane fares, hotel arrangements, food, parking at the candidate’s home airport, cost of taxis, etc., should be made as clear as possible. Candidates going through their first search may not be aware that they should be saving receipts.
State the conditions of the lecture/class that is to be given and provide an accurate description of the audience that will be attending. Having information such as the anticipated size of the audience and the types of technologies available will provide a better experience for both the candidate and those attending.
Make every effort to give the candidates some “open” or “private time” during which they might explore the institution or simply take a breather during what is often a physically exhausting and emotionally stressful day. Having fifteen to thirty minutes of “private time” for every three hours of interviewing would be useful for the candidates.
Food is always part of the campus interview. Search committees should select places where a variety of foods are available. Avoid putting the candidate in the uncomfortable position of having to disclose his or her diet relative to their medical, religious, or personal needs.
Should people outside the university community (e.g., faculty spouses, alumnae) take part in the scheduled events, they should be alerted to the fact that there are questions that are off limits (marital status, sexual orientation, age, disabilities, etc.—see federal guidelines)
Throughout the visit, especially near the time of departure, interviewers should be sensitive to the candidate’s needs relative to luggage, slides, etc. Prepare a schedule that allows candidates adequate time to get their materials together at the end of the visit.
The candidate’s schedule should identify the individual(s) who will be driving/escorting the candidate to the airport, train terminal, etc.
After On-Campus Interview Notification
All candidates participating in the on-campus interviews should be notified of your institution’s final hiring decision within a reasonable amount of time. If a final decision has not been made or the process extended for any reason, the candidates should be kept apprised of the situation.
Videotaping
The videotaping of candidates during the interviews at the CAA conference or on-campus should be strongly discouraged. This practice would create an intimidating environment and add unnecessary discomfort and stress for the candidates who, even if they are asked for permission, are not in a position to refuse to be taped. There are also complex legal and professional implications involving the usage, storage, and copyrights of these tapes.
Authors and Contributors
Submitted by CAA’s Professional Practices Committee: Michael Aurbach, Vanderbilt University (chair until August 2000); Irina Costache Mount St. Mary’s College/California State University, Northridge (chair after August 2000); Frederick Asher, University of Minnesota; Ellen T. Baird, University of Illinois, Chicago (ex-officio); Bruce Bobick, State University of West Georgia; Marilyn Brown, Tulane University; Debra Drexler, University of Hawai‘i, Manoa; Linda C. Hults, College of Wooster; Gary Keown, Southeastern Louisiana University; Ellen Konowitz, Vanderbilt University; Dewey Mosby, Colgate University.
