PGP38257-Shriya M HRM - Assignment Section-E

The interview was aimed at finding suitable candidate(s) for the Business Development
Associate post at Brahmaastra, a pharmaceutical firm. The interview was conducted post a
round of resume screenings. Resumes were evaluated and 3/7 candidates were selected for
the interview round based on expected skills and key responsibilities to be shouldered. The
following summarized the criteria from resume shortlisting.
 Education: A degree in business administration, marketing, or a related field is
preferred
 Relevant Experience: Prior experience in business development or S&M with
successful CRM
 MR Analysis: Ability to conduct market research & assess business opportunities
 Communication Skills: Ability to articulate complex ideas clearly & concisely
 Team Player: Demonstrated ability to work effectively with cross-functional teams
 Problem-Solving: Ability to identify & evaluate potential risks and develop creative
solutions
 Networking & Coordination: Ability to coordinate & execute marketing events
effectively
 Flexibility: Willingness & ability to travel, plus the ability to adapt to virtual modes as
needed
The three shortlisted candidates were seen in the order of preference by the interviewers.
Candidates were assessed based on the following criteria:
 Communication Skills (20%)
 Business Acumen (20%)
 Analytical and Problem-Solving Skills (20%)
 Market Research and Risk Assessment Ability (20%)
 Networking and Client Relations (20%).
The questions by the interviewers were coherent and accurately reflected the assessment
criteria. Questions were further sub-categorized to understand the candidate better, and test
their business acumen, interest, and job-person fit. Puzzles to evaluate the candidate’s
analytical and problem-solving skills were presented throughout the interviews.
The flow of the interview was smooth, with each member of the panel giving the candidate
an adequate chance to answer the asked question and to explain their point of view. The
interviewers decided to discard the criteria for Diversity and Inclusion since none of the
candidates fit the required profiles.
Although all three interviewees were confident in their answering, some inadequacies
observed during the process include a lack of due diligence on the role, company, and
industry, slight implications of bias and judgments, and a slight delta observed in the
information presented on the resume vs actuality. In all, candidates conducted themselves
with great composure, even during stress points and unexpected questions. In all cases, the
candidates did have questions about the job role and culture fit, which were handled
gracefully by the panel, redirecting the candidate to the appropriate resources.
Post-interviews, the panel announced the results, with a proper evaluation scheme, increasing
the transparency in the process. The panel also had a backup offer, in-case the selected
candidate is unable to join.