No matter how carefully you determine your business objectives, the success of your plan depends on a well-chosen staff.

Choosing the right candidate for the job is an important and often difficult decision, yet managers often rely on hunches rather than on an organized interview process.

John Hinrichs, president of Management Decision Systems, a consulting firm in Darien, Conn., has researched and identified several common mistakes make by interviewers. One interesting discovery was that the higher the level of the executive doing the interviewing, the more these errors are made.

Here are some common interviewing errors to guard against:

Don't base your judgments on superficial first impressions. Try to hold several interviews with the finalists for a given position. It's also helpful to have potential co-workers or other team members interview the candidates and share their opinions with you. Probe beneath all accomplishments and responsibilities to determine how certain aspects of the job were actually carried out. Check references thoroughly and attempt to get feedback from the candidates' former bosses.

Don't talk too much. An adept interviewer, seeking to learn as much as possible from the applicant, should talk only about 25% of the time. Hinrichs� research reveals that some executives talk more than 50% of the time.

Don't tell the applicant what you're looking for too early in the interview. A skillful applicant will tailor their remarks to tell you what you want to hear. If a candidate asks, "What kind of person do you see in this job?" provide a general answer like "Someone who welcomes a challenge." Then redirect the questioning to find out about the candidate's past job performance.

Don't ask "What if" questions. Hypothetical questions often elicit theoretical answers. You may think you're testing the applicant's judgment and ability to perform, but the interviewee often doesn't know enough details about the situation to answer the question. In addition, a candidate good at the theoretical "what ifs" may actually be poor at carrying through on the job.

Don't compare candidates solely in relation to other candidates. Rather, compare each individual's past performance to the new job requirements. This is the only way to stay focused on the best person for the position.

Don't look for a clone of yourself. Frequently, candidates look good to us if they are similar to us in age, education, interests or background. Just because you both went to Cornell University or both like sailing is no reason to be swayed from your objective of focusing on past performance.

Don't play so safe that you pass by an exceptional performer who may be slightly offbeat for someone who appears to meet the criteria on paper but has performed only adequately in the past.

Don't let one trait influence other areas of performance. Analyze each candidate's overall abilities. The danger here is that the candidate can be stereotyped - "he's a creative type" - on the basis of one trait and then all other traits attributed to that group are likely to be unfairly ascribed.

Don't make the assumption that the candidates must have certain past experience - often much like your own - to succeed. There are often many paths to the same goal. In addition, a different past experience may add a new dimension and insight that will enhance the job and improve the results.

When preparing to interview candidates for a position, first consider the result you're after in the job. Once you have clear idea of these outcomes, analyze the kinds of experience, skills, and education you feel is necessary to achieve those results. Each candidate's past experience and accomplishments can then be compared to your requirements.

With these things predetermined, your interviews will be organized, focused and more likely to result in hiring the best person for the job.