Article
How Digital Preparedness and Communication Friction Shape Candidate Engagement and Future Acceptance of Technology-Mediated Job Interviews
Technology-mediated job interviews offer organisations speed, geographical reach and scheduling convenience, but their functional advantages do not necessarily ensure a positive candidate experience. This study develops and tests an Opportunity–Capability–Friction (OCF) framework explaining candidate engagement in technology-mediated interviews. Digital Interview Preparedness (DIP) represents capability; Accessibility (ACC) and Flexibility (FLX) represent opportunity; and Digital Communication Barriers (DCB) represent friction. Interview Engagement (ENG) is positioned as the central experiential outcome and as an antecedent of Future Online/Hybrid Mode Preference (FMP). Primary data from 250 respondents with experience of technology-mediated job interviews were analysed using reliability analysis, descriptive statistics, Pearson correlations and multiple regression. All six multi-item measures demonstrated good internal consistency (Cronbach’s α = .868–.885). The four OCF antecedents jointly explained 32.7% of the variance in interview engagement, F(4,245) = 29.73, p < .001. Preparedness (β = .191, p = .001), accessibility (β = .217, p < .001) and flexibility (β = .221, p < .001) were positive predictors of engagement, whereas communication barriers were a substantial negative predictor (β = −.374, p < .001). Engagement was strongly associated with future online/hybrid mode preference (r = .608, p < .001) and, when entered alone, explained 36.9% of its variance. A robustness model including engagement, accessibility and flexibility explained 40.4% of future mode preference. The findings show that candidate acceptance of digital interviewing is not driven by convenience alone: the quality of communication and the candidate’s ability to participate effectively are central to engagement. The study extends efficiency-centred research by integrating opportunity, capability and friction within a candidate-centred explanatory model.