This dissertation is an investigation of HR practitioners’ design of selection interviews, a widely used selection measure which can be implemented to varied degrees of effectiveness. Twelve interviews with HR practitioners regarding their design of selection interviews were thematically analyzed as informed by a broad decision-making framework, following a survey of their use of selection methods and interview structure. Themes included the influence of information about the job, hiring managers, knowledge of measurement concepts, the situation, experience, as well as the propensity to overlook interview deficiencies. Status-quo bias mapped heavily onto many of the themes informed by the interviews and thus informed the design of an experiment as a follow-up study. A total of 168 HR practitioners and hiring managers were presented with a definition of anchored rating scales (a key aspect of interview structure that is often not utilized) and placed into one of three conditions (a control, information only, or information and example condition). While no differences were found between conditions, HR practitioners’ reactions were generally more positive than the reactions of hiring managers. Based on these two studies and previous research regarding the research-practice gap and knowledge mobilization, there appears to be much work needed to inform HR practitioners decision-making, in this case regarding structuring interviews.