The Trick Interview Question - or is it?
Discussion
Had a tele interview yesterday and after plesantries the lady went straight in with her first question and it was almost starting from the back and working forward (to me anyway).
She said so can you tell me a bit about yourself not in terms of your career but what you like to do in your spare time, hobbies etc?
Now really I should know better than to dwell on what I was asked and should just forget it unless they contact me again right? But its just bugging me as I feel that you never really know what if any science is behind the question or whether there are any firms left on the planet anymore that are just asking a simple question about what you enjoy outside of the office.
I have heard some recruiters caveat some questions with dont worry its not a trick question as there is really no right or wrong answer but I do begin to wonder sometimes if they go away and analyse the benefits to the company if for example you tell them you are an absolute whizz with a ball of wool and a pair of knitting needles LOL........
We are talking about a high low to mid level role not some entry level job so nothing with fatcat type pay.
Do you wonder if youve answered this question and its somehow affected your application?
Who knows I might get a face to face interview but the brain does work in funny ways and I keep thinking about this one. I reamed off a bit about how I met my partner, what we like doing together, and what I do in my own time too so briefed her on 3 of my hobbies/interests.
To the recruiters here - do you take this question at face value, a simple get to now you type tool or are deeper things at work here? It feels like you are playing a mind game most of the time with interviews.
She said so can you tell me a bit about yourself not in terms of your career but what you like to do in your spare time, hobbies etc?
Now really I should know better than to dwell on what I was asked and should just forget it unless they contact me again right? But its just bugging me as I feel that you never really know what if any science is behind the question or whether there are any firms left on the planet anymore that are just asking a simple question about what you enjoy outside of the office.
I have heard some recruiters caveat some questions with dont worry its not a trick question as there is really no right or wrong answer but I do begin to wonder sometimes if they go away and analyse the benefits to the company if for example you tell them you are an absolute whizz with a ball of wool and a pair of knitting needles LOL........
We are talking about a high low to mid level role not some entry level job so nothing with fatcat type pay.
Do you wonder if youve answered this question and its somehow affected your application?
Who knows I might get a face to face interview but the brain does work in funny ways and I keep thinking about this one. I reamed off a bit about how I met my partner, what we like doing together, and what I do in my own time too so briefed her on 3 of my hobbies/interests.
To the recruiters here - do you take this question at face value, a simple get to now you type tool or are deeper things at work here? It feels like you are playing a mind game most of the time with interviews.
You're over thinking it.
As an employer, I find it increasingly common to have several applicants with similar if not identical levels of education, experience, capabilities, etc. So on the basis that I'm employing a human being, I like to know what sort of person they are beyond their ability to fulfil the role. This may not necessarily impact directly on who to hire but it can sometimes be part of the influencing factors that tip the balance on marginal choice, answer the question; 'do we like them?'
The one area where this line of questioning does have strategic validity is in determining the capacity of a candidate to perform at the highest levels. Someone who has no interests, pastimes or other non-work activities can sometimes suggest that either they are dull or that they have to dedicate too much of their time to operate to the required level of function.
As an employer, I find it increasingly common to have several applicants with similar if not identical levels of education, experience, capabilities, etc. So on the basis that I'm employing a human being, I like to know what sort of person they are beyond their ability to fulfil the role. This may not necessarily impact directly on who to hire but it can sometimes be part of the influencing factors that tip the balance on marginal choice, answer the question; 'do we like them?'
The one area where this line of questioning does have strategic validity is in determining the capacity of a candidate to perform at the highest levels. Someone who has no interests, pastimes or other non-work activities can sometimes suggest that either they are dull or that they have to dedicate too much of their time to operate to the required level of function.
Yup, overthinking it.
Could be as simple as putting you at ease. It could also be that they want to know how you speak when it's a subject you are the 100% global expert on (you). Does your passion about cycling/music/badger baiting come through when you discuss it. They then have a baseline for the job side.
They may just want to know what makes you tick, are you interesting, they have to work with you so personality has to fit. They want a balanced person.
I once had an interview and we pretty much spoke about Cars/Porsches for the first 45mins of the session as I had a 912 and he had a 911 I mentioned this in my life section of the CV. I got the job. Turning up to a job interview in a 60's Porsche makes you interesting and memorable!
Could be as simple as putting you at ease. It could also be that they want to know how you speak when it's a subject you are the 100% global expert on (you). Does your passion about cycling/music/badger baiting come through when you discuss it. They then have a baseline for the job side.
They may just want to know what makes you tick, are you interesting, they have to work with you so personality has to fit. They want a balanced person.
I once had an interview and we pretty much spoke about Cars/Porsches for the first 45mins of the session as I had a 912 and he had a 911 I mentioned this in my life section of the CV. I got the job. Turning up to a job interview in a 60's Porsche makes you interesting and memorable!
I don't do a lot of interviewing but would happily give you an example of how I might consider the situation:
Consider two identical applicants, same experience, same education, everything.
- Applicant one hasn't really got much of an answer for their spare time or hobbies. Going to the cinema or pub with friends is about all you can get out of them.
- Applicant two is able to expain how he is taking a night class on screenplay writing, mainly to be able to get a better understanding of what the director of a film is trying to tell them, but perhaps he might like to write their own screenplay in the future. They're also a member of the judging committee for the local CAMRA chapter.
Ostensibly they have the same interests. Films and beer. But the second also has some kind of passion, and is looking to develop themselves. They're also willing to share their time and knowledge with other people. The second gets the job all day long.
I don't care if their passion is making their own chain-mail out of split washers and dressing up and re-enacting battle with a bunch of other people. They have something that they work hard on, and care about.
Consider two identical applicants, same experience, same education, everything.
- Applicant one hasn't really got much of an answer for their spare time or hobbies. Going to the cinema or pub with friends is about all you can get out of them.
- Applicant two is able to expain how he is taking a night class on screenplay writing, mainly to be able to get a better understanding of what the director of a film is trying to tell them, but perhaps he might like to write their own screenplay in the future. They're also a member of the judging committee for the local CAMRA chapter.
Ostensibly they have the same interests. Films and beer. But the second also has some kind of passion, and is looking to develop themselves. They're also willing to share their time and knowledge with other people. The second gets the job all day long.
I don't care if their passion is making their own chain-mail out of split washers and dressing up and re-enacting battle with a bunch of other people. They have something that they work hard on, and care about.
A year or so ago i had some strange questions ive never been asked before:
What book are you currently reading?
If you could be any animal what one would you be?
If you could be anyone dead or alive who would you be?
What is your favorite film?
And honestly, it took me by surprise and completely stumped me for some reason. I didn't get the job and honestly i believe my answers to those were why i didn't get it!
What book are you currently reading?
If you could be any animal what one would you be?
If you could be anyone dead or alive who would you be?
What is your favorite film?
And honestly, it took me by surprise and completely stumped me for some reason. I didn't get the job and honestly i believe my answers to those were why i didn't get it!
What they said.
Plus, when you ask, "So tell me about yourself", people often reply, "Which bit would you like to know first." so she's probably cutting that bit out by specifying hobbies, interests.
Also, your hobbies can give them an idea of what you are like as a person.
Play Sunday League football? Team player.
Prefer darts? Can go it alone, doesn't need to rely on people.
Likes to read non-fiction? Inquisitive, continual learner.
Gym junkie? Knows what it's like to experience discomfort.
Marathon runner? Achiever who doesn't give up and works towards a bigger goal.
Etc.
These aren't defined, though, but form part of the bigger picture.
Plus, when you ask, "So tell me about yourself", people often reply, "Which bit would you like to know first." so she's probably cutting that bit out by specifying hobbies, interests.
Also, your hobbies can give them an idea of what you are like as a person.
Play Sunday League football? Team player.
Prefer darts? Can go it alone, doesn't need to rely on people.
Likes to read non-fiction? Inquisitive, continual learner.
Gym junkie? Knows what it's like to experience discomfort.
Marathon runner? Achiever who doesn't give up and works towards a bigger goal.
Etc.
These aren't defined, though, but form part of the bigger picture.
Antony Moxey said:
ToothbrushMan said:
We are talking about a high low to mid level role
We're talking about a what?As others have said, you are overthinking it. There isn't a magical/trick system to win at interviews. And some people have different approaches. Good luck with the search.
Someone once told me that interviewers are really only looking for three things:
- Can you do the job?
- Will you do the job?
- Will you fit in with the existing team?
(Or skill-set, work ethic and how much of a t
t to are.)
The balance of these things changes, so if your skill-set is hard to come by, they'll accept someone who is more of a tt, but they really are the main things.
- Can you do the job?
- Will you do the job?
- Will you fit in with the existing team?
(Or skill-set, work ethic and how much of a t
t to are.)The balance of these things changes, so if your skill-set is hard to come by, they'll accept someone who is more of a t
t, but they really are the main things.It's a load of bks, isn't it?
I read this article recently "the utter uselessness of job interviews"
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/08/opinion/sunday/...
Studies have shown how ineffective they are, but people still feeling better using them
ks, isn't it?I read this article recently "the utter uselessness of job interviews"
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/08/opinion/sunday/...
Studies have shown how ineffective they are, but people still feeling better using them
In my experience, they probably just want to have a chat.
All the quantifiable stuff can be gleaned from a CV, testing etc, you've passed that, which is why you get asked for an interview.
In every interview I've been in (I'e done a few) , its just a chance for the team to meet you - see whether they like you, do you get on, your manner etc?
Don't overthink it, just relax and talk to them like any other person you meet in life.
All the quantifiable stuff can be gleaned from a CV, testing etc, you've passed that, which is why you get asked for an interview.
In every interview I've been in (I'e done a few) , its just a chance for the team to meet you - see whether they like you, do you get on, your manner etc?
Don't overthink it, just relax and talk to them like any other person you meet in life.
AbzGuyGTI said:
What book are you currently reading?
Facebook
If you could be any animal what one would you be?
A party animal
If you could be anyone dead or alive who would you be?
You, dead.
What is your favorite film?
You know when you leave a cup of tea brewing without milk and a gross film settles on top?
Not that.
When do I start?If you could be any animal what one would you be?
A party animal
If you could be anyone dead or alive who would you be?
You, dead.
What is your favorite film?
You know when you leave a cup of tea brewing without milk and a gross film settles on top?
Not that.
StevieBee said:
You're over thinking it.
As an employer, I find it increasingly common to have several applicants with similar if not identical levels of education, experience, capabilities, etc. So on the basis that I'm employing a human being, I like to know what sort of person they are beyond their ability to fulfil the role. This may not necessarily impact directly on who to hire but it can sometimes be part of the influencing factors that tip the balance on marginal choice, answer the question; 'do we like them?'
The one area where this line of questioning does have strategic validity is in determining the capacity of a candidate to perform at the highest levels. Someone who has no interests, pastimes or other non-work activities can sometimes suggest that either they are dull or that they have to dedicate too much of their time to operate to the required level of function.
This for me, it generally comes down to As an employer, I find it increasingly common to have several applicants with similar if not identical levels of education, experience, capabilities, etc. So on the basis that I'm employing a human being, I like to know what sort of person they are beyond their ability to fulfil the role. This may not necessarily impact directly on who to hire but it can sometimes be part of the influencing factors that tip the balance on marginal choice, answer the question; 'do we like them?'
The one area where this line of questioning does have strategic validity is in determining the capacity of a candidate to perform at the highest levels. Someone who has no interests, pastimes or other non-work activities can sometimes suggest that either they are dull or that they have to dedicate too much of their time to operate to the required level of function.
Do I want to spend 8 hours a day with this person
Do I think I'll end up killing them
I've been told I have a very relaxed interview technique and people like it.
Its 2 fold for me:
Interviews with the same formulaic questions bored me to tears as an applicant so i try not to do that
I want people to be relaxed so I see the real person (sometimes this goes wrong) rather than just getting the "audible" version of their CV along with "a time they were challenged"
I do like asking people to rate themselves out of 10 though, always throws them
Hugo a Gogo said:
It's a load of bks, isn't it?
I read this article recently "the utter uselessness of job interviews"
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/08/opinion/sunday/...
Studies have shown how ineffective they are, but people still feeling better using them
Interesting read.ks, isn't it?I read this article recently "the utter uselessness of job interviews"
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/08/opinion/sunday/...
Studies have shown how ineffective they are, but people still feeling better using them
In behavioural psychology, you always gravitate toward people that are similar to you. Problem is, does them being similar mean they are better at the job? What if everyone in your team is similar and a reflection of your personality - you lose diversity, innovation, creativity and different ways of thinking. Ultimately, your team/org becomes mediocre and stale.
And this is why a lot of organisations are mediocre. Senior Managers and Execs are always hiring "yes men" around them.
One tactic could be to hire in groups not one person at a time. If you hire a group of three, then you are more likely to take a chance with someone left field - but if you only have one choice to make you're likely to rule them out. And it's the left field people that are potentially high risk, but will potentially move the needle astronomically too.
As the article suggests, you could also give interviewees real problems to solve - concentrating more on their approach and process than if they get the right answer.
Edited by silent ninja on Thursday 6th December 23:04
Back in the days when i was a permie, i used to get my team leads to do the first-round interviews - they would cover off all the bases about technical ability / capability to do the actual job.
Shortlist would then come to me to do the 2nd/final interviews - these were always "social" - the aim was to determine whether they fit the team/company.
Having been on both ends of the recruitment process, my thoughts were that you just got a gut feel about someone within the first 10 minutes or so of an interview. I've had jobs where i didnt know the technical stuff, but had the right personality and ability to learn fast.
As an earlier reply stated - when you get a selection of CVs and candidates that are more-or-less the same academically or work experience, you really want to be looking for the person you and your team can happily get-on-with/work-with on a daily basis.
Shortlist would then come to me to do the 2nd/final interviews - these were always "social" - the aim was to determine whether they fit the team/company.
Having been on both ends of the recruitment process, my thoughts were that you just got a gut feel about someone within the first 10 minutes or so of an interview. I've had jobs where i didnt know the technical stuff, but had the right personality and ability to learn fast.
As an earlier reply stated - when you get a selection of CVs and candidates that are more-or-less the same academically or work experience, you really want to be looking for the person you and your team can happily get-on-with/work-with on a daily basis.
AbzGuyGTI said:
A year or so ago i had some strange questions ive never been asked before:
What book are you currently reading?
If you could be any animal what one would you be?
If you could be anyone dead or alive who would you be?
What is your favorite film?
And honestly, it took me by surprise and completely stumped me for some reason. I didn't get the job and honestly i believe my answers to those were why i didn't get it!
Reminds me of a question that popped up on the British Airways cadet pilot psychometric/personality test back in the day, one of those rate 1 -5 in strength of preference: What book are you currently reading?
If you could be any animal what one would you be?
If you could be anyone dead or alive who would you be?
What is your favorite film?
And honestly, it took me by surprise and completely stumped me for some reason. I didn't get the job and honestly i believe my answers to those were why i didn't get it!
Would you be interested in a program about otters*?
(it may have been badgers, my memory is fuzzy - I did it 22 years ago!)
Answer: Damn right I would! 5 all day long. I don't want to sit for 10 hours in the cockpit of an aircraft with someone who isn't interested in otters or badgers.
Gassing Station | Jobs & Employment Matters | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff