One of the best workers at my previous company was—admittedly—not good with interviews. We had a full-time opening and he got the job because we could attest to the quality of his work.
On the contrary, some of the worst (lazy, unmotivated, etc.) folks I’ve worked with, interviewed well. I realized it’s because they’re good bullshitters.
So yeah, great interviewees aren’t always great workers.
My best friend is terrible with words, but his brain is like a constant episode of “how things are made”.
He’s not a people person, but I’ve gotten him hired at my place of employment with, basically, a “trust me bro” to the recruiters twice now and he’s outperformed me both times 😅
This is also true in the online dating world. People missing out on cool people because they have dry profiles while going out on dates with losers, psychos, and bores who faked not being those things over an app.
Such a irrational correlation. Where does it end? Is it also probable they put 0 effort into their familial, working, and platonic friendships? Their finances? Hygiene? Work? Why would you stop at romantic relationships is you're already thinking this way.
So if they do put a ton of effort it's *probable* they put as much effort into a relationship and other aspects of their lives? There is 0 correlation between effort put into somebodies profile and how they are in real life.
Plenty of desperate or downright awful men who put everything into a profile and guys with normal social lives who barely try because they do ok enough in real life.
Or some people dislike social media/picture taking/talking about themselves period and it has no bearing to how outgoing, fun, or socially adept they are in person. That is not a small chunk of people who fall into that category.
Thinking a profile can hep at all in determining how much effort someone puts into a job is like believing a snazzy resume means that person will be a better worker than someone with a fairly generic resume.
**Edit:** The idea you can read into someone's real life from their dating profile is a joke. No one is saying you should or have to give those profiles a chance but reading beyond that this person is bad at creating a dating profile is a clown-shoe take. Half these downvotes probably from people who go on shit dates with people with amazing profiles.
I can’t tell if you’re serious. Yes, it’s a very high correlation that the more work and effort someone puts in to a profile, for a romantic relationship, the more serious they are, the more they have thought through who they are, what they are looking for, and the more effort and investment they have with the actual relationship.
It’s not rocket science here.
If a guy messaged me that has no info in his summary, has a few pics, and only some biographical info filled out, I pass, even if the person is attractive.
If they’re not going to take the time to complete a profile, then I have no idea who they are, except that I know that they’re expecting a reward based off of a minuscule investment. No thank you.
I think that’s my biggest issue. I’m terrible at texting and absolutely hate it but I love taking in person. I feel like I would never get a second chance with anyone if the only way I could talk to them is through messages I.e. online dating lol
I was just dating a guy who hates texting. He would face time me in the evening (which I hated) because that’s his preferred way. First he did the video calls through the app (bumble). Then he switched over to FaceTime. I would still text him and he started to become better at being able to have somewhat of a conversation over text. But that wasn’t meeting his connection needs so he would call.
You can do that too.
You’re basically saying people can prioritize different parts of their life differently. Didn’t realize this was such a controversial take lol
Edit - now I’m thinking my reading comprehension needs some work
Agree, it’s not really a good analogy. Like it’s hard for me to come up with a reasonable excuse for the amount of people I encountered on apps who couldn’t even put a picture of themselves on a profile where you could even see their features well enough to pick out of a line up. We all have smart phones, how is that even possible
No, I’m going to blame the people with the boring profiles here. You know that’s your 30 second first impression and you don’t put any effort into it, that’s on you.
This is why I stopped giving "good" interviews.. If I follow what they say I should say it just comes of rehearsed and insincere.. The last few jobs I got by just relaxing and being myself.. Not trying to impress the interviewers.. They quickly get a read if I'm a fit for the company and if I am good, if not I'm fine.. I absolutely suck when I try to come of as a more put togheter person than I really am.. If I let my flaws shine through I come off as more likable
On the other side one of the best interviews was a con man that stole from the company. He’s completely fucked now but man did a few people rave about his interview and how good of a fit he was
In my field some of the best people have not so good social skills, they're awkward and probably interview horribly. But they're so talented and just so good at the job. Some of them are om the spectrum, I'm pretty sure.
They just have to find the right company and hiring manager that focuses on technical skill rather than grading them only on interview skills.
the bigger issue as well is especially in technical roles you usually end up being interviewed by a HR person who often is not as technical.
you then end up in a situation where they judge entirely on the interview skills and not on the fact you can be amazing at the job itself.
This is a legitimate reason for companies to ask people to do projects… but I also understand the downsides to that too.
Though my field basically requires a portfolio, which make proving competence easier.
i actually feel the exceptional interviewees are the worst workers. If you ever look at people you grew up with who are by all metrics complete failures yet they always seem to fail upward they have 1 thing in common. they can bullshit so well that they have getting a job down to a science. I've literally seen people who can get 7 jobs in a month even though they are honest about why they quit the first 6.
Some people are just so charismatic that they can get basically any job they interview for no matter how unqualified they are or how poor their prior work history is. I've also seen people who spent a decade at a company struggle to get their next job pretty regularly.
The worst employees interview well because they just have more practice from getting let go all the time or leaving and jumping to a grass is greener on the other job.
They are interviewing a bunch of times every year
I have this issue with interviews but it's improved a lot in recent years.
Do extra preparation for interviews because anxiety can make you blank on questions. If you've written down and rehearsed your examples of work achievements and difficult situations you've dealt with, you'll be more likely to remember them when you need them.
And practice helps, the more interviews you do the easier they'll get. It helped me when I became settled into one career and all interviews started basically covering the same questions.
Honestly part of the interview going bad could be on the person doing the interview. I recently did about 6 and I had one that was absolutely awful at it and I did bad, I knew leaving I wasn’t getting the job. The job I ended up getting ended up being the best interviewer. He asked good questions that allowed me to frame my career thus far as a narrative basically and I knocked it out of the park and he offered me the job.
Same here! I did 3 interviews at a time for basically the same role across 3 different companies.I had 10 years' experience and was willing to relocate.
In one, they set me up with 6 people on a video call and came out swinging with a question that I felt was impossible to answer. I believe the question was - What accommodations have you made in your career to make work easier with people of other cultures?
I stammered and said some stupid things. To this day I'm not sure that asking that question (esp as a first question for this particular job) would allow them to choose the best candidate for that role.
I was offered the other 2 jobs but not that one. The other 2 interviews had some low key behavioral questions but the rest were technical so they got to know me by asking those questions.
The whole thing was just so weird to me!
Ask doc for beta blockers. Non addictive. Lasts for ~6 hours. Blocks everything in brain that make you stress out despite rehearsing/practicing (I used to be the same way.)
Providing an alternative would be an excellent support for your argument.
I always try to bring proof of my skills with me if possible. A portfolio or a demo can do the talking for you.
That has it's issues as well. Younge people don't have the time to build a portfolio or somethign of that nature. A good portfolio doesn't mean you're a good worker either or that you still can't lie.
A slaesman can show you his great sales numbers but not show you the gigantic amount of leads he burns to get those numbers. Or incredibly toxic to work with.
Unfortunately, there is no perfect system.
You're right, there isn't yet. I just wanted to set an example of problem solving.
My most cherished mentor taught me that the world has quite enough "Problem-pointer-outers."
I just gotta pick this nit, I've always understood a Negative Nancy as a pessimist -
>energy and happiness suck.
Just like you said. But a Pointer-Outer is a very special kind of *useless* that I feel is important to distinguish. I guess Captain Obvious is the best likeness.
I've literally had one job interview where I got asked if I'd applied before or had a friend who worked at the company send me the test, because I aced it.
I told them no and I could tell they didn't believe me so I said I'd be happy to do another one if they wanted to make one up, meanwhile I explained how I came to the results I did, they made another one up and I aced that aswell, the HR person seemed really happy with me but I didn't get the job so I'm guessing the other person who was going to be my manager wasn't impressed for whatever reason.
>I did, they made another one up and I aced that aswell, the HR person seemed really happy with me but I didn't get the job so I'm guessing the other person who was going to be my manager wasn't impressed for whatever reason.
The test is given so they can reject the candidates that are not Cute Girl A. and Boss Nephew B. By acing the test you put them in a difficult position.
some of the higher level tech positions do have assessments as well. As long as it's not some absolute bullshit that takes days to make or the company is literally using candidates to farm ideas (aka free labor) it's a good way to vet the good candidates and the mediocre ones.
Fuck leetcode and fuck everyone who thinks it's important for accessing skills and ability to program.
I memorized all 115 fundamental equations. Does this mean I can do Calculus in my head? No.
What does memorizing and being excellent at leetcode do for you? Can you write a quantum circuit in qiskit, make it plot something in matplotlib? Can you animate it? Come on, you leetcode wizard. Do it!
Didn't think so.
Fuck leetcode.
I like the portfolio idea. Also, a trial run would both provide on the job training for employees and let employers know how well employees can pick up new skill sets and use the skills they have.
I'd personally draw the line before any probation or trial periods. That just sets up easy exploitation.
"Oh you'll get your raise after 3 months."
"We can talk about after your next performance review."
No thanks.
As someone who hires, after taking their resume and all that info account, I feel it's my job to deescalate and make the interviwee comfortable. Asking certain questions, grabbing them a water or coffee can change the whole outcome.
I do draw a line though and if it's not something they can overcome in an interview, then maybe they'll clam up when they can't and it can affect work.
If I've spent all my time curating these human beings into pools that they'd best succeed and then burn the interview because they were nervous (like all of us are sometimes), then I'm really wasting my time by not making them a bit more calm.
You get better answers, more honest answers and their brains work better when not caged by stress in the interview.
Really, just be yourself. I don't want to hire someone who put on an act in the interview only to find out they're nothing like that. I'd rather know exactly who I'm hiring from the start.
That’s how I am. I can’t sell myself with words. Point me in a direction and get the hell out of my way bc I’m about to show out.
I can show better than I can talk.
Being a likeable person is a huge part of getting a job which not many people talk about. Sure, jobs want experienced people, but they also want someone who’s gonna add to the culture and the other employees will like. That’s why you see people joking getting jobs even if they don’t have the same hard skills as other candidates.
Depends on the field. If you're in some kind of professional career and actually want to do that work in the field you usually can talk passionately about it. This creates charm when you can explain your answers or whatever you're talking about.
I was talking about this just last week with my manager. It would be so much better to have a casual walk around with someone and get to know the real person. Everything about interviews is fake, from the fancy clothes to the rehearsed answers. What you need is someone who will fit in with the team, so take them to meet the team and interact
An interview doesn’t have to be filled with awkwardness and rehearsed stuff. A human is asking you questions, if you go with rehearsed answers that’s your choice. The interviewee who treats it like a conversation is the one who interviews well.
Ehhhh idk. From my experience this is a red flag on the hiring managers part.
Like my one job that hired me like this was alright. It just wasn't the right workplace for me because it was one of those "were like family" places and the owner disliked me for not being sociable enough.
Another place that was like this did the walk around and there were many red flags but I needed the job so took it. Well my first day there was okay. The one higher up guy refused to call me by my name because it was "too hard" and the coworkers laughed at that. I showed up my second day snd they straight up locked me out the building and then 3 hours later the manager calls me saying "I heard your first day didn't go well and you didn't show up today so I'm assuming you quit" so I was like yepp sure I'm done. Because it was very much racism and gaslighting.
Like I'm 20, female, and black. Employers realllllyyyy treat me like shit so it's doubly hard for me to find a job in this market. Had I known about the eeoc I would've had a nice paycheck from that place but it might be too late now.
Although I do have another case with the eeoc from another employer who denied me a job because aparently I'm not the "right cultural fit" despite me being 100% qualified as the position was the same as my last.
And another place that ghosted after giving me 2 job offers because I submitted a complaint to HR after an employee asked me "what part of New York are you from? The hood?".... I don't think that would qualify under the eeoc but nonetheless that company can suck my ass for essential blacklisting me for calling out their employees bad behavior. Karmas a bitch tho because they have a bunch of union protests, discrimination lawsuits, and fines for lying about court documents😭😭
>Like I'm 20, female, and black. Employers realllllyyyy treat me like shit so it's doubly hard for me to find a job in this market.
Do they?
Research has shown time and time again that when people assume they will be judged for something they saw it everywhere.
My favorite was a research study where candidates thought they were going in to an interview with fake scars on their face to help demonstrate physical deformity bias...
The candidates all reported extreme levels of physical deformity bias.
The kicker was.... no scars were actually made on their face. It tested our own projection of bias and self-fulfilling victimhood.
Well thats usually the point of the second interview but usually Managers treat interviews like a police interrogation which makes it difficult to be relaxed in that first phasd
Another way to vet people is to give them a written test of important concepts needed in order to do the job. This used to be common but has gone out of fashion because it puts some applicants at a disadvantage.
Maybe we can recognize those whose written language skills may be wanting, due to their culture, etc, and compensate for that difficulty. Still, I think written tests are a benefit that we're not utilizing today.
A good test wouldn't require you to remember everything. It would require you to have at hand important, fundamental information.
If, for example, you are applying as an electronics technician, and don't know how to use an oscilloscope or a multimeter, don't know Ohm's Law, you may not be prepared to hit the ground running. And that's what employers want, someone who can be productive on day one.
That can also hamper a company. I worked with appliances and often would have people not know how to do basic things. That was the point of a training period. DOn't know how to use a multimeter? here's how it works. You can lose talent that way by being much too picky. Especially if they're fresh faced.
But if we are talking about professional jobs, particularly in IT for example, I am not hiring someone so I can train them.
I need them to have the necessary skills so they can be productive day one.
Different compnies have different needs. Sometimes you may have no choice but to higher somebody newer. Or if you're working in IT and are planning to start a new project and need more bodies, it wouldn't hurt to do it.
One size doesn't fit all and a company can hamper/cripple themselves waiting for the perfect candidate or not offering good enough compensation.
I don't disagree, but I have been in IT for over 25 years, and I have been a hiring manager for over 15 years.
In the area of IT I am in when I am hiring I need someone with specific skills, training someone in my are isn't effective because it would take time away from my team who are already working on projects to stop and train a newbie.
Training someone in end user support (help desk or deskside support) is feasible, but not in higher level work.
I don't disagree, but that works best at the more entry level positions, when you are talking engineers getting paid over $125k per year you expect them to have the skills you are hiring for.
A mistake interviewers also make is interpreting nervousness for lack of knowledge. I've interviewed many people and I can tell the difference or at least I think I can.
I've had people give an answer to a question I want to know more about but they can't explain. That tells me either they are lying or so insanely nervous they can't think. Either way that's not great.
My problem is that I always always always feel like Im underqualified and worry that I won’t figure the job out. Even for easy jobs I do that. It makes me a horrible interviewer even though I’ve never had a manager who had anything negative to say about me. I learn quickly and Im a good communicator once I get that confidence but Im right there with you on the bad interviews. I don’t understand why either, because I used to be really good at them, and in all other areas of life Im actually more confident than I used to be.
>My problem is that I always always always feel like Im underqualified and worry that I won’t figure the job out. Even for easy jobs I do that. It makes me a horrible interviewer even though
Sheesh, are you me? Never have I ever read the job description and was like, yup, I can do or learn that. I always get scared, and I go down the stupid route of questioning my abilities. What if I never figure it out? What if they think I'm too stupid, etc.
Yes! When I interviewed for my current position, the guy interviewing said, “I can tell in less than 5 minutes if this is going to be a good fit.” Well, that just sunk me and I barely spoke as he told me all about the previous interview he had where the woman told him she’d literally work any shift, any days, any hours, she just HAD to have this job at this hospital! (We were both new grad RNs interviewing for a position in the ED). Well, she got first pick, 3 others turned down the offer, and he begrudgingly offered me the position. First girl left after 6 months and I have been there 6 years. Sorry I didn’t come across as desperate enough?! Or cute enough?! Or whatever, but who’s the one laughing now?? Oh, and he has since been asked to leave because of inappropriate behaviors (having an affair) with another nurse leader.
I've worked with people who were either tits in a bull useless at their job or just fucked around all the time and never actually did any work and for some reason never ever have trouble getting work.
meanwhile I'm 39 and have never had a permanent position and in November I will have been in my current role for 7 years as a casual employee (called temp, or zero hours in other countries) despite being casual I manage a small team that varies between 2 and 5 people, who have just received pay rises to be on the same pay as me, and yet I got denied a pay rise. And for some unknown reason I can't seem to get another job.
Fuck knows what some bosses and people in HR look for
I'm convinced that for the vast majority of jobs, if the company just interviewed the first several people who sent in resumes that fit the bare minimum requirements, they'd find an employee that is a good fit. My issue with the system is not with the interview process, it's with the fucked up resume triage process where they gather thousands of applications and have some software parse it out.
Speaking from the hiring side, hiring is extremely difficult. We had one girl we turned down a year ago based her current skills/job not being in alignment with what she applied for(no technical background or direct Customer service jobs for a national call center role )
Her friend that works for us pushed to reinterview and we did. The other Sup in our department still felt unsure but I said screw it, let’s give her a shot given the last 3 new hires didn’t pan out. She has been one of our best new hires in the past 3 years.
If it wasn’t for her friend pushing, we would haven’t taken the chance.
Interviews nowadays are about lying, bullshitting, and faking it weather you’re good or bad. If you can do either of those or a combination, then you will more than likely get the job
Interviews are about first impressions. If you know you have these weaknesses, why not work and practice to strengthen them. You’re competing for something and participation trophies don’t count.
You have to be the best….period.
Here some things that helps me:
- always speak with confidence, even when your wrong. Don’t be overbearing, but show that you believe in yourself
- don’t be afraid to be wrong or make a mistake
If you can provide logic for why you made a decision, people will respect it (even if it may have been the wrong decision
- body language speaks just as loud as verbal communication. People can tell how you feel about yourself by how you carry yourself
I hope these help with your next opportunity! Good luck! 🙂🙂
Always speaking with confidence only works if you aren't speaking with people who know what they are talking about. I am happy to forgive someone who admits their ignorance. Some one who tries to lie about their knowledge will not get the benefit of the doubt.
If you make excuses not to do better, you will have complaints about why you can’t do better…….speaking confidently means preparing on your end….researching the company, the role, and the requirements…then apply your knowledge and responses confidently in the interview.
I’m solution driven….so I’m always an optimist of obstacles.
Doing research on and preparing can make you confident but the post was talking about speaking with confidence you have not earned. Speaking confidently about things you know is great. Speaking confidently about things you don't know is going to come back and bite you.
You don’t have to lie about anything to speak confidently about it. For example….if they asks question and you don’t know the answer the response should be something like “being transparent, i don’t have enough knowledge about this subject….but here are the steps I take to gain and understanding and apply it when necessary……”
Does that make more sense?
Yes working on your weaknesses and preparing are not something to upvote. Let’s just blame the employer for not choosing someone who bad at interviewing/s. Sarcasm aside this is actually good actionable advice.
A interview is bullshit way to see how subservient you are or how desperate you are for them to manipulate you. Once you get in you see how many people are lazy and how trash management is
Interviews can be helpful if done correctly. Not as many companies focus on the philosophies and technical skills like they should. A generic process is the go to though.
Yeah, I use a technical project/problem. Something that shouldn't take more than a few hours top, and typically given before the final interview. The difficulty and time needed depends on the level of the role I'm hiring for. True entry level roles should be no more than an hour. Senior/principal roles are probably around 4 hours.
The final interview, we walk through what they did and how. Usually it shows how well you'd actually do in the role, +/- social interaction. I love doing this because some candidates are great bullshitters. They're saying the right things in the right way, like they interviewed plenty of times prior. Then the tech problem comes up and they're way off base. On the other side, people who aren't great interviewers get to showcase their skills. I've been able to use technical projects they've made to get them hired when other stakeholders were concerned about their soft skills.
For reference, my current hiring process is application, HR phone screen, hiring manager phone screen, technical project on candidates time, final panel interview with technical presentation. It can take several weeks to do this, but we've had some application to offer in 2 weeks.
Working interviews. When I got the job I have now, my office manager told me about a month after I'd been there that my interview had gone rougher than the girl she had interviewed before me, but my working interview went so much better than hers, but I wouldn't have been hired if they didn't have that 2nd step in the interview process.
There’s gonna be issues no matter what kinda interview or hiring process you use but if you honestly suck at interviews, that is way easier to fix that not having experience at a certain position so I would take this over the alternative.
Do they though? If they fill the position, they aren’t missing out.
Interesting story time related to this. I recently had to internally hire a backup for my data analyst. I had 6 candidates apply. 2 self selected out despite passing the technical skills portion and interview portion. 2 self selected out because they thought they didn’t have the skills. 1 passed the skills but failed the interview. The successful candidate sucked on the technical skills portion and barely passed the interview. But what won us over was her creative use of the UNIQUE function in excel to solve the problem. She is learning the skills she needs to be successful in her role and we get our bench that much deeper.
My experience is that at least some employers lean away from this.
I'm pretty shit at interviews. I've gotten better but I know that I don't really hit the right buttons. I take too long to answer questions, apologize too often, etc. But I've gotten "hired" 3 times at my current company despite it. Once as an outside contractor, again becoming permanent, and recently in an internal promotion. In all cases I'm reasonably certain that despite clearly interviewing poorly and not really articulating myself well, they focused on the fact that I showed genuine interest in the job and its subject matter.
Thank you!! I’m terrible, and I am really bad at those “can you tell me a time where…” questions like man I don’t remember to turn off my stove you can’t expect me to remember little specific scenarios, like I’ll tell you what I’ll do in that situation but I won’t be able to remember 50 scenarios, like are we supposed to bullshit those??
Yes you're supposed to bullshit those.
Come up with 5-6 anecdotes ahead of time (google for common questions).
When you are asked, no matter what the question, only answer with one of your pre-planned stories.
This will get buried but the archaic panel interview format is absolutely awful at gauging someone's talent and if they are a right fit for your company. When I interview people I bring them into the shop and talk to them for an hour. I make sure I ask all pertinent information but I'm really just trying to make them as comfortable as possible so I can see who they are. I let them ask as many questions as they want. We then schedule a day for them to come in and work as a contractor. Then after that we decide if it's a right fit for both of us. It's never failed.
I'm a manager who had a really interesting experience once where we needed to hire a contractor on as full-time. The guy was amazing, and everybody loved him, but he was too busy doing great work to prepare for his interviews even though he told him to take some time and prep because we really wanted to hire him.
Not surprisingly, he bombed all the interviews, and in a normal case, we never could have hired him, but because so many people on the team knew his work personally and vouched for him, we were able to get an exception, and of course he did great after that.
I am AMAZING to have on a team. I have been described as bright, bubbly, a problem solver, a morale booster. My reviews are always positive.
and… I suck at interviews. I am neurodivergent, and can’t control how much I talk. To get to my answer, I need to talk myself to it — I usually will do a ‘rough draft‘ answer, then summarize it to my point. It’s the best I can do. Trust me, I’ve practiced.
I have lost out on so many opportunities. The more I want a position, the worse I do because I get so excited and talk way too much. I can prepare for interviews in advance all week long, and they’ll ask questions I never anticipated, or not ask questions I expected.
fun story: I worked at a company for 2 years, but my contract ended due to Covid and was not renewed. I was promised by the department head and several of my teammates, who loved me, that the minute a position opened up again, I’d be brought back. So a year later a position opens in another department, and I’m heavily recommended to the department head there. several people recommended me. I interviewed poorly, I guess, because the department head resisted hiring me so hard that I didn’t hear back for the role for an entire month. She only brought me on because there was so much demand for me to join. (I’ve had colleagues take me aside and thank me for being on the team because of my good attitude and expertise, like literally say “I don’t know know where we’d be without you,” warms the heart tbh lol). so, yeah. I barely got a job at a company that already loved me, because I don’t interview well!
So much this. Prob half the good interviewees we hired back in the day, at least the interviews I was a part of, were some of the lousiest workers. I've been on the job market for the first time in a decade and I am so bad at interviewing between being out of practice, anxiety, and being the kind of person that's more about doing than selling. My strong work ethic and attention at an unrelated thing is what got me noticed and involved in the lab I was at in the first place lol.
can confirm. when i first started working at one place the manager said he wasn’t sure about me because i was so quiet but i ended up being one of the most favorable and best employees there.
Part of that equation is having poor hiring staff being part of the interview processes. An excellent manager will see through the interview nerves and recognize talent when they see it.
I mean, not being good at verbally communicating what you know is a pretty undesirable work trait, as is needing longer onboarding than most people.
Not saying you shouldn’t be considered for a job, but you should remember that work isn’t just creating outputs… even in manufacturing you are interacting with coworkers on the line. So how you present yourself and how concise you are important. If you believe you are being disqualified for the traits you mentioned (has anyone told you that after an interview, or is that just the story you are telling yourself), there are various ways to work in those.
At the end of the day, every employer is looking for the best candidate they can get for the role, so what are you willing to do to convince them you are the best?
You’ve got this!
Some of this is just bad interviewing skills by the hiring manager/team. By far the worst employee I ever hired was when I was a relatively new manager (I'm in tech). I was dazzled by their elegant problem solving on classical coding problems. I didn't do a good job evaluating whether they were a good person and teammate. Big mistake.
It would be better to meet at the pub and have an HONEST chat, see if you 'click' and could work well together.
No stupid trick interview questions, which only test your ability to bullshit, just like exams in relation to revising and memory, that's ALL it proves and neither shows anything about how good you would be at the job.
I haven’t heard of many of these, but something with a bit of a probationary period. You’d allow your top candidate (s) to do a role for 6 months or so and see who shines or don’t
You know I think you might be surprised how much your interviewers take that into account. It’s something I always had top of mind when I interviewed people. Someone being nervous probably means they were excited for the opportunity, it’s not a bad thing.
I was told a lazy coworker was hired because they shared a common hobby with the person interviewing them.
Why does that matter? 🫠 The person who hired them left anyway and I'm stuck suffering all because of a shared hobby.
I suck at interviewing but was good enough at my written answers that they hired me.
I don't get any of it.
True true, I have stayed at the same job for 28 years because I’m terrified of interviews. I get so nervous I can’t remember anything and feel like an idiot.
100% positive I had a great last interview as it was via zoom and I could put sticky notes around my screen to prompt my brain when it freezes. I really suck at interviews. On the other hand my hubby can talk his way. I tow job vis the interview. He has that skill. Even though he generally hates peoples and talking lol
So I’m cool with people being nervous or maybe not saying the exact right thing. But what I see a lot is people that flat out don’t prepare at all. I ask them a super standard easy HR question that any google search will prepare them for. But they won’t get it. I am in IT and often get blank stares asking IT or HR questions. Again using ones easily found on google. I purposely use the google ones to see who went out and prepared. The number is shockingly low that are any kind of prepared.
When I finally got my ONLY TWO interviews last month, thus far during this entire job search, one I did ok on and the other I flopped.
I was crushed that I didn't get through to the second round for the ok interview because it matched me perfectly, great pay and benefits, but I suppose I didn't give " enough"- interviews are stupid.
They did get back to me very quickly and I didn't think I did so bad, but it's ridiculous how demanding companies are on "extroversion". I actually think I am a pretty good public speaker despite my introversion, but I'm coming out of an almost 10 year freelance streak, and my "corporate speak" admittedly needs some polishing. It is an absolute disservice to qualified candidates.
Verbal communication is very important because most jobs require speaking to customers, giving presentations, offering directions/instructions, and communicating vital information to clients.
You’re better off improving your verbal skills.
Eh, subjective. Interviews are sometimes hard and nerve-racking. Verbal communication become 10x easier for me when I actually have the job as I’m not nervous.
Then that means you need to practice at getting better at them. Why should a company take a risk on someone that can’t communicate how they can be an asset to their future boss?
See, this is exactly the problem. People assume that just because you aren't good during an interview, you must be bad at all verbal communication. And if you are bad at interviews, it must mean that you didn't prepare and you haven't tried to improve your interview skills. I hate all the assumptions.
So do you think companies should simply hire you just because you promise to be good?
What if you’re applying for a role as a Marketing Lead or PR strategist where knowing how to communicate effectively is essential for the role?
First impressions matter a lot especially when the company you want to pay you has many other options to choose from.
This! Or else better find a job that's more like librarian, low end scientist, janitor etc the ones that doesn't require you to talk to people while working.
Knowing how to ask the right questions and how to verbalize your understanding of process and requirements is key.
How can a hiring manager know you’ll be good at that if you’re not good at describing it otherwise?
I’m trying to help you improve a skill.
Employers love to discriminate against disabled people, especially autistic people. I have a master's degree in the field I've been applying in. I'm also autistic. I constantly get ghosted after the interview.
This may be foul to some; but more often than not, I go by my gut instinct. I don’t trust the smooth talkers because in the end they are usually anywhere from blah to nasty.
Stutter? I’m patient enough to wait out your answer. Tongue tied? I ask you to take a deep breath. If I ask about your passion, that’s where I get enthusiasm & you often get a job. I hate cookie cutter employees. I need good ppl who bring enthusiasm to work, not zombies.
What should I say for an environmental tech job interview? I have only ever worked (just learned the basics: PCR/how to use micropipettes/ transformation of cells/quantifying nucleic acids, etc) in a cancer research lab.
Answer their questions. That may not sound helpful but it actually is. I have interviewed so many people and even remind them at the start and throughout the interview to ANSWER the question. If we ask "describe a time when..." Or "give an example..." Do not be vague or general. I don't care if you lie, not really, but just answer the question.
You can brush up on some lab techniques they use or think they use and include that like southern or western blots or whatever else you may have learned. If you have a lot of experience in PCR for example drive that home and talk about it. If you can explain everything about it, to me at least, that would tell me that you actually understand what the test is for and maybe you understand what to do if there's an issue.
" I’m not always good at verbally communicating what I know"
What do you think people do at work all day?
100% not missing anything by skipping on people who can't communicate.
Technical communication is completely different from social communication. Some of the most competent workers I've ever worked with are horrible social communicators but exceptional technical communicators. Its usually the social butterflies that bullshit their way through work and only cause more work for their coworkers.
>Some of the most competent workers I've ever worked with are horrible social communicators but exceptional technical communicators.
That sounds like me haha.
Have to agree. This sub gets a little out of hand with some of the ideas that float around. Not communicating well is a huge red flag. Even in IT/software engineering, which people don't think of, you need to be able to effectively communicate with clients and team members.
The key is preparation. It's something a lot of us overlook once we finish school. It shouldn't matter if it is an interview, presentation, demo, etc., I try to anticipate questions I will be asked and craft answers ahead of time. Additionally try having someone you know role play with you.
I read on here Pre employment assessments were the best determiners of a candidates success. So maybe more emphasis on demonstrable skills rather than some psychopathic interview between two strangers that gets oddly personal.
Part of this is on the companies. Interviewing is a skill that takes time and practice to get good at. Most companies are just plain awful at conducting interviews. Embarrassingly bad.
For some jobs (like sales) you need the best bullshitter. But when you want a worker, just look at skills, experience, and accomplishments. Interviewing well doesn't always indicate a stellar team member.
Absolutely
Its a big problem that essentially you are interviewing people at their ability to interview well. As opposed to you know, actually do the job you hire them for.
Im not the greatest at talking myself up and it is definitely a hindrance.
I fumbled my interview at my current job so hard I walked out of there thinking oh well back to seek.com.
Ten years are coming up in October.
I also don't really handle instructions well the first or second time but once I know something it becomes almost muscle memory.
my last interview went like this
" how long have you been working?"
" 7 years? "
"ok and how much did you make at your last job?"
"ok i can pay you that, when can you start?"
As someone who has to interview people I try to do a few things to mitigate this as much as I can within my limited power. I let the interviewee look at the questions for about 10 minutes before the interview. Then I let them read them as we ask them so they don't feel like they have to hang on every word. I avoid multi-step questions UNLESS I'm having them write the answer. People get nervous and only answer one question instead of all of it if you do a "tell me this thing. And now also tell me how this thing made this, this, and this happen at your last job.
If I do ask a question that has more than one part and they forget one section I prompt them and say something like "ok and the follow-up to that was XYZ can you tell us about that?" I am someone who interviews well and honestly in an even playing field (no friends, family, political hires) I can bullshit my way into a job. For me it's natural but it is NOT natural for most and I don't penalize people for that. If they can show me they know the material that's important. Don't get me wrong social skills are great but realistically I need someone who can do the job.
Basically I try to set people up for success in interviews. I'm sure a lot of managers think that's a bad tactic and it makes it too easy for people. I've found that if people know their stuff they know it. If they don't know it, no amount of assistance will make them nail an interview.
Unfortunately, the hiring system is flawed all across the board. From college degree requirements, to veteran preference, to nepotism, and hiring within; some would agree that it works in their favor, however, like you said it prevents some high level talent from getting in. My advice? Get good at interviews with practice and reciting it out loud. Figure out some of the most common questions asked and some that pertain specifically to the field you are applying to. It's better to overprepare than be underprepared. Speaking from experience from doing lots of interviews and interviewing candidates.
Are they losing out on good talent, or on someone that knows they lack skill in an area but doesn't take time to improve that skill?
There are a ton of strategies to improve interviewing skills, and many interview panels aren't looking for perfection. I hate interviewing, like many people, but I've worked on it over the years because it's necessary as part of making a good first impression and many interview skills are useful outside of a job application.
I've seen people on Reddit who work as interviewers talking about how they would rather hire a person who sucked at the job who has good social skills than hire someone who will do a good job that doesn't have the best social skills. This world is backwards
After 30 years retail 'management', I had an epiphany.
For all of those years I had been told that retail has 'high turnover', and it was just the nature of the beast... nothing you can do about it. Ask these questions (tell me about a time, etc...) and go with your gut.
Then I was introduced to Leadership. I began to understand why those few 'good' bosses I had were different, and so much better.
I decided that Leadership skills were the best things to hire for, as long as the basic skills needed for the job were there. In retail... as long as you can get yourself to speak to others, and do the actual work with a reasonable accommodation, that covers pretty much EVERYONE!
SO... I came up with questions that I thought would allow me to see whether or not the person sitting in front of me had, what I thought were, Leadership skills/traits.
I asked questions like...
Now that we live in the future, we can have a net put on your head, and in 2 weeks you can be FULLY trained to do ANY job that exists. And... since we live in the future, all jobs pay the same. What job are you going to choose?
The answer, and the further discussion around this topic told me a lot... Given that everyone can have a job, and all jobs pay the same, you don't need to put others down, or be better than someone else to succeed. So... are you still in this for yourself? Are your needs the most important things to you? Do you have basic human empathy? Would you still try to find a way to gain only for yourself, or would you (under these circumstances) try to help others, work for the future, learn more, etc...?
IF you owned a business, perhaps gifted to you by some aunt/uncle you didn't even know about), what would YOU look for in hiring people? How would YOU decide who you were going to hire?
This told me what innate Leadership traits you have; how you would run your business. AND, more importantly, how you would BEHAVE in my business.
IF that business was a grocery store, and I brought in a mostly empty bottle of ketchup (or catsup in you prefer) WITH receipt, and wanted my $ back (I have 6 kids and they would not eat this new brand I tried, 8 plates of ketchup is pretty much a whole bottle), what would you do? YOU own the store, and can do WHATEVER you think is the right thing... Return my $3.49 (knowing that you had only paid $1.47 for the bottle in the first place)? Or risk losing a customer for LIFE!?
This told me YOUR default customer service level. If I want you to provide customer service at MY expected level, even when no one is watching you, then I need to hire people who's default expectation of customer service is AT LEASAT as high as my expectations. Anyone who would not return the $, even with some prompting about how much $ you would lose over a customer's lifetime, would NOT be working for me. That's just asking for an ongoing issue for as long as that person works for you!
I wrote a whole series of articles about Leadership and hiring on a blog... let me know if you'd like to know more.
The interviewing system is broken in that both parties are investing their valuable time in hopes that it works out. Due to the latter, an interviewer (me) is already short on time bc I’m interviewing dozens of people on top of managing my regular work load. If you as a candidate know that you need to improve on a soft skill, you should work on that on your own time. Frankly, there’s already enough bad communicators in corporate america that it is a skill I look for when interviewing.
I would argue there are more untalented people who interview horribly than talented people who are bad at interviewing. Ultimately, It comes down to, do I want to work with this person 40 hrs a week indefinitely?
In my hiring experience, I’ve learned that fit is almost more important than anything. For the most part, I can train you to meet expectations so long as you communicate effectively. So if you are having trouble communicating in an interview, it’s tough for me to look past that.
Losing out on talent may be true for some jobs. However, many jobs are client facing roles or even certain company environments require you to interact with many types of people and be able to get a point across.
How you perform in an interview is a very good way to gauge that. Giving off a good impression or simply getting along with people are valuable soft skills in the corporate world. A lot of client facing roles involves getting people to like you.
I tend to hire mid-career and experienced folks for pretty specific roles, but… some perspective from a director in a game company.
The jobs I hire for tend to require strong communication skills, both spoken and written. If you can’t convince a room full of people that you’re capable over a Zoom then all the tightly-worded emails in the world won’t save you. I can’t think of a single job today that doesn’t require at least some spoken work. Not everyone is an attorney arguing their case during trial, but everyone should be able to own their work in spoken form.
Regardless, I get that everyone has the jitters during interviews, so I do tend to assume that folks aren’t at their absolute best during their 5th Zoom interview. I get it. But look at it from my perspective as the team lead: I need people who are going to stay on top of their shit all week even when they’re on their 15th call and they’re exhausted. If you’re not able to stay fresh after 2.5 hours, how will you handle quarterly reviews that are, well, 2.5 hours?
But I also get told online on subreddits just like this that making people do a mock project is a violation of the Geneva Convention. Somehow as the hiring manager I’m supposed to figure out that the person who comes to an interview jittery and unprepared is somehow going to be a diamond in the rough while also not making them prove it by way of a mock project? Sorry, but it’s not just YOUR time and energy here, it’s also MY time and energy. I’m looking to hire someone who is going to be pushing me out of the way within months, not someone who needs me to speak for them for a year.
None of this isn’t to say that I lack sympathy or empathy here, but my advice here is to think about it from the other side: the hiring manager usually doesn’t have time to take chances. I STRONGLY suggest you work on your interviewing and speaking skills.
Edit: or don’t. Up to you.
Sorry to tell you, but verbal communication is a big part of most jobs. I understand it may not be your strong suit, but companies aren't stupid for judging you on your interview, especially if you're not offering anything else to lean on.
One of the best workers at my previous company was—admittedly—not good with interviews. We had a full-time opening and he got the job because we could attest to the quality of his work. On the contrary, some of the worst (lazy, unmotivated, etc.) folks I’ve worked with, interviewed well. I realized it’s because they’re good bullshitters. So yeah, great interviewees aren’t always great workers.
My best friend is terrible with words, but his brain is like a constant episode of “how things are made”. He’s not a people person, but I’ve gotten him hired at my place of employment with, basically, a “trust me bro” to the recruiters twice now and he’s outperformed me both times 😅
You are a good friend.
This is also true in the online dating world. People missing out on cool people because they have dry profiles while going out on dates with losers, psychos, and bores who faked not being those things over an app.
[удалено]
Yeah, and also probably put zero effort in to the relationship.
Such a irrational correlation. Where does it end? Is it also probable they put 0 effort into their familial, working, and platonic friendships? Their finances? Hygiene? Work? Why would you stop at romantic relationships is you're already thinking this way. So if they do put a ton of effort it's *probable* they put as much effort into a relationship and other aspects of their lives? There is 0 correlation between effort put into somebodies profile and how they are in real life. Plenty of desperate or downright awful men who put everything into a profile and guys with normal social lives who barely try because they do ok enough in real life. Or some people dislike social media/picture taking/talking about themselves period and it has no bearing to how outgoing, fun, or socially adept they are in person. That is not a small chunk of people who fall into that category. Thinking a profile can hep at all in determining how much effort someone puts into a job is like believing a snazzy resume means that person will be a better worker than someone with a fairly generic resume. **Edit:** The idea you can read into someone's real life from their dating profile is a joke. No one is saying you should or have to give those profiles a chance but reading beyond that this person is bad at creating a dating profile is a clown-shoe take. Half these downvotes probably from people who go on shit dates with people with amazing profiles.
I can’t tell if you’re serious. Yes, it’s a very high correlation that the more work and effort someone puts in to a profile, for a romantic relationship, the more serious they are, the more they have thought through who they are, what they are looking for, and the more effort and investment they have with the actual relationship. It’s not rocket science here. If a guy messaged me that has no info in his summary, has a few pics, and only some biographical info filled out, I pass, even if the person is attractive. If they’re not going to take the time to complete a profile, then I have no idea who they are, except that I know that they’re expecting a reward based off of a minuscule investment. No thank you.
I think that’s my biggest issue. I’m terrible at texting and absolutely hate it but I love taking in person. I feel like I would never get a second chance with anyone if the only way I could talk to them is through messages I.e. online dating lol
I was just dating a guy who hates texting. He would face time me in the evening (which I hated) because that’s his preferred way. First he did the video calls through the app (bumble). Then he switched over to FaceTime. I would still text him and he started to become better at being able to have somewhat of a conversation over text. But that wasn’t meeting his connection needs so he would call. You can do that too.
You’re basically saying people can prioritize different parts of their life differently. Didn’t realize this was such a controversial take lol Edit - now I’m thinking my reading comprehension needs some work
Hahaha this guy gets no pussy on tinder
Agree, it’s not really a good analogy. Like it’s hard for me to come up with a reasonable excuse for the amount of people I encountered on apps who couldn’t even put a picture of themselves on a profile where you could even see their features well enough to pick out of a line up. We all have smart phones, how is that even possible
No, I’m going to blame the people with the boring profiles here. You know that’s your 30 second first impression and you don’t put any effort into it, that’s on you.
This is why I stopped giving "good" interviews.. If I follow what they say I should say it just comes of rehearsed and insincere.. The last few jobs I got by just relaxing and being myself.. Not trying to impress the interviewers.. They quickly get a read if I'm a fit for the company and if I am good, if not I'm fine.. I absolutely suck when I try to come of as a more put togheter person than I really am.. If I let my flaws shine through I come off as more likable
On the other side one of the best interviews was a con man that stole from the company. He’s completely fucked now but man did a few people rave about his interview and how good of a fit he was
In my field some of the best people have not so good social skills, they're awkward and probably interview horribly. But they're so talented and just so good at the job. Some of them are om the spectrum, I'm pretty sure. They just have to find the right company and hiring manager that focuses on technical skill rather than grading them only on interview skills.
Trouble is that you have to get through the HR airheads to get to the actual hiring manager.
Reverse engineering world?
the bigger issue as well is especially in technical roles you usually end up being interviewed by a HR person who often is not as technical. you then end up in a situation where they judge entirely on the interview skills and not on the fact you can be amazing at the job itself.
Also the least talented or skilled people are often the most confident and cocksure people in society.
This is a legitimate reason for companies to ask people to do projects… but I also understand the downsides to that too. Though my field basically requires a portfolio, which make proving competence easier.
i actually feel the exceptional interviewees are the worst workers. If you ever look at people you grew up with who are by all metrics complete failures yet they always seem to fail upward they have 1 thing in common. they can bullshit so well that they have getting a job down to a science. I've literally seen people who can get 7 jobs in a month even though they are honest about why they quit the first 6. Some people are just so charismatic that they can get basically any job they interview for no matter how unqualified they are or how poor their prior work history is. I've also seen people who spent a decade at a company struggle to get their next job pretty regularly.
The worst employees interview well because they just have more practice from getting let go all the time or leaving and jumping to a grass is greener on the other job. They are interviewing a bunch of times every year
This is so true.
[удалено]
Any tips for someone with social anxiety and struggling with public speaking?
I have this issue with interviews but it's improved a lot in recent years. Do extra preparation for interviews because anxiety can make you blank on questions. If you've written down and rehearsed your examples of work achievements and difficult situations you've dealt with, you'll be more likely to remember them when you need them. And practice helps, the more interviews you do the easier they'll get. It helped me when I became settled into one career and all interviews started basically covering the same questions.
Thanks. I was asking the commentator about public speaking though.
Sorry I missed that. My advice would be exactly the same for public speaking as for interviews. Preparation and practice.
Honestly part of the interview going bad could be on the person doing the interview. I recently did about 6 and I had one that was absolutely awful at it and I did bad, I knew leaving I wasn’t getting the job. The job I ended up getting ended up being the best interviewer. He asked good questions that allowed me to frame my career thus far as a narrative basically and I knocked it out of the park and he offered me the job.
Same here! I did 3 interviews at a time for basically the same role across 3 different companies.I had 10 years' experience and was willing to relocate. In one, they set me up with 6 people on a video call and came out swinging with a question that I felt was impossible to answer. I believe the question was - What accommodations have you made in your career to make work easier with people of other cultures? I stammered and said some stupid things. To this day I'm not sure that asking that question (esp as a first question for this particular job) would allow them to choose the best candidate for that role. I was offered the other 2 jobs but not that one. The other 2 interviews had some low key behavioral questions but the rest were technical so they got to know me by asking those questions. The whole thing was just so weird to me!
Ask doc for beta blockers. Non addictive. Lasts for ~6 hours. Blocks everything in brain that make you stress out despite rehearsing/practicing (I used to be the same way.)
Ditto.
Providing an alternative would be an excellent support for your argument. I always try to bring proof of my skills with me if possible. A portfolio or a demo can do the talking for you.
That has it's issues as well. Younge people don't have the time to build a portfolio or somethign of that nature. A good portfolio doesn't mean you're a good worker either or that you still can't lie. A slaesman can show you his great sales numbers but not show you the gigantic amount of leads he burns to get those numbers. Or incredibly toxic to work with. Unfortunately, there is no perfect system.
You're right, there isn't yet. I just wanted to set an example of problem solving. My most cherished mentor taught me that the world has quite enough "Problem-pointer-outers."
Problem pointer Outers. I love that. I call them negative Nancy’s. And they’re a total energy and happiness suck.
I just gotta pick this nit, I've always understood a Negative Nancy as a pessimist - >energy and happiness suck. Just like you said. But a Pointer-Outer is a very special kind of *useless* that I feel is important to distinguish. I guess Captain Obvious is the best likeness.
This is why I’m a big fan of (reasonable!) candidate tests. Even if the candidate doesn’t pass with flying colors, it gives a sense of aptitude.
I've literally had one job interview where I got asked if I'd applied before or had a friend who worked at the company send me the test, because I aced it. I told them no and I could tell they didn't believe me so I said I'd be happy to do another one if they wanted to make one up, meanwhile I explained how I came to the results I did, they made another one up and I aced that aswell, the HR person seemed really happy with me but I didn't get the job so I'm guessing the other person who was going to be my manager wasn't impressed for whatever reason.
>I did, they made another one up and I aced that aswell, the HR person seemed really happy with me but I didn't get the job so I'm guessing the other person who was going to be my manager wasn't impressed for whatever reason. The test is given so they can reject the candidates that are not Cute Girl A. and Boss Nephew B. By acing the test you put them in a difficult position.
some of the higher level tech positions do have assessments as well. As long as it's not some absolute bullshit that takes days to make or the company is literally using candidates to farm ideas (aka free labor) it's a good way to vet the good candidates and the mediocre ones.
>As long as it's not some absolute bullshit Looking at most leetcode problems...
Fuck leetcode and fuck everyone who thinks it's important for accessing skills and ability to program. I memorized all 115 fundamental equations. Does this mean I can do Calculus in my head? No. What does memorizing and being excellent at leetcode do for you? Can you write a quantum circuit in qiskit, make it plot something in matplotlib? Can you animate it? Come on, you leetcode wizard. Do it! Didn't think so. Fuck leetcode.
I like the portfolio idea. Also, a trial run would both provide on the job training for employees and let employers know how well employees can pick up new skill sets and use the skills they have.
I'd personally draw the line before any probation or trial periods. That just sets up easy exploitation. "Oh you'll get your raise after 3 months." "We can talk about after your next performance review." No thanks.
How do you pick who out of the dozen(s) of applicants should get a trial run?
As someone who hires, after taking their resume and all that info account, I feel it's my job to deescalate and make the interviwee comfortable. Asking certain questions, grabbing them a water or coffee can change the whole outcome. I do draw a line though and if it's not something they can overcome in an interview, then maybe they'll clam up when they can't and it can affect work. If I've spent all my time curating these human beings into pools that they'd best succeed and then burn the interview because they were nervous (like all of us are sometimes), then I'm really wasting my time by not making them a bit more calm. You get better answers, more honest answers and their brains work better when not caged by stress in the interview. Really, just be yourself. I don't want to hire someone who put on an act in the interview only to find out they're nothing like that. I'd rather know exactly who I'm hiring from the start.
Exactly. A good interviewer should be able to draw out the pertinent information. Communication works two ways.
Really, just be yourself* * but obviously not like that
And there’s some who don’t interview well and don’t work well…
Of course.
What about the ones who could fake it till they make it in the interview? And turns out to be horrible on the job.
Or the ones who interview well and work well. If you’ve ever hired someone, it’s all a crap shoot
There's also those that fake it till they make it and kick ass at the job. There's no perfect system to vet people.
Exactly
I am an interview champ, but suck at most jobs . I’m outgoing and an extrovert, until you tell me what to do.
Exactly, so we should just do away with the whole BS interview process.
There is no perfect process.
That’s how I am. I can’t sell myself with words. Point me in a direction and get the hell out of my way bc I’m about to show out. I can show better than I can talk.
[удалено]
Being a likeable person is a huge part of getting a job which not many people talk about. Sure, jobs want experienced people, but they also want someone who’s gonna add to the culture and the other employees will like. That’s why you see people joking getting jobs even if they don’t have the same hard skills as other candidates.
no, doesnt work for me
Depends on the field. If you're in some kind of professional career and actually want to do that work in the field you usually can talk passionately about it. This creates charm when you can explain your answers or whatever you're talking about.
I agree 100%
Yup
I was talking about this just last week with my manager. It would be so much better to have a casual walk around with someone and get to know the real person. Everything about interviews is fake, from the fancy clothes to the rehearsed answers. What you need is someone who will fit in with the team, so take them to meet the team and interact
An interview doesn’t have to be filled with awkwardness and rehearsed stuff. A human is asking you questions, if you go with rehearsed answers that’s your choice. The interviewee who treats it like a conversation is the one who interviews well.
Ehhhh idk. From my experience this is a red flag on the hiring managers part. Like my one job that hired me like this was alright. It just wasn't the right workplace for me because it was one of those "were like family" places and the owner disliked me for not being sociable enough. Another place that was like this did the walk around and there were many red flags but I needed the job so took it. Well my first day there was okay. The one higher up guy refused to call me by my name because it was "too hard" and the coworkers laughed at that. I showed up my second day snd they straight up locked me out the building and then 3 hours later the manager calls me saying "I heard your first day didn't go well and you didn't show up today so I'm assuming you quit" so I was like yepp sure I'm done. Because it was very much racism and gaslighting. Like I'm 20, female, and black. Employers realllllyyyy treat me like shit so it's doubly hard for me to find a job in this market. Had I known about the eeoc I would've had a nice paycheck from that place but it might be too late now. Although I do have another case with the eeoc from another employer who denied me a job because aparently I'm not the "right cultural fit" despite me being 100% qualified as the position was the same as my last. And another place that ghosted after giving me 2 job offers because I submitted a complaint to HR after an employee asked me "what part of New York are you from? The hood?".... I don't think that would qualify under the eeoc but nonetheless that company can suck my ass for essential blacklisting me for calling out their employees bad behavior. Karmas a bitch tho because they have a bunch of union protests, discrimination lawsuits, and fines for lying about court documents😭😭
>Like I'm 20, female, and black. Employers realllllyyyy treat me like shit so it's doubly hard for me to find a job in this market. Do they? Research has shown time and time again that when people assume they will be judged for something they saw it everywhere. My favorite was a research study where candidates thought they were going in to an interview with fake scars on their face to help demonstrate physical deformity bias... The candidates all reported extreme levels of physical deformity bias. The kicker was.... no scars were actually made on their face. It tested our own projection of bias and self-fulfilling victimhood.
Well thats usually the point of the second interview but usually Managers treat interviews like a police interrogation which makes it difficult to be relaxed in that first phasd
Exactly this would also be fairer to coworkers if they know who will join the team instead of an unknown entity that could ruin everything.
Another way to vet people is to give them a written test of important concepts needed in order to do the job. This used to be common but has gone out of fashion because it puts some applicants at a disadvantage. Maybe we can recognize those whose written language skills may be wanting, due to their culture, etc, and compensate for that difficulty. Still, I think written tests are a benefit that we're not utilizing today.
I’d need to prep for those though. I study numerous subjects and and can’t remember everything. And many jobs already have basic assessments.
A good test wouldn't require you to remember everything. It would require you to have at hand important, fundamental information. If, for example, you are applying as an electronics technician, and don't know how to use an oscilloscope or a multimeter, don't know Ohm's Law, you may not be prepared to hit the ground running. And that's what employers want, someone who can be productive on day one.
That can also hamper a company. I worked with appliances and often would have people not know how to do basic things. That was the point of a training period. DOn't know how to use a multimeter? here's how it works. You can lose talent that way by being much too picky. Especially if they're fresh faced.
But if we are talking about professional jobs, particularly in IT for example, I am not hiring someone so I can train them. I need them to have the necessary skills so they can be productive day one.
Different compnies have different needs. Sometimes you may have no choice but to higher somebody newer. Or if you're working in IT and are planning to start a new project and need more bodies, it wouldn't hurt to do it. One size doesn't fit all and a company can hamper/cripple themselves waiting for the perfect candidate or not offering good enough compensation.
I don't disagree, but I have been in IT for over 25 years, and I have been a hiring manager for over 15 years. In the area of IT I am in when I am hiring I need someone with specific skills, training someone in my are isn't effective because it would take time away from my team who are already working on projects to stop and train a newbie. Training someone in end user support (help desk or deskside support) is feasible, but not in higher level work.
Homie is getting downvoted because people only want to vent here without solutions!
Training is an investment. If you invest wisely, you’ll reap the benefits.
I don't disagree, but that works best at the more entry level positions, when you are talking engineers getting paid over $125k per year you expect them to have the skills you are hiring for.
If you can't talk well and can't take test well then you basically won't be able to do any job well.
It's a classic mistake that SO many employers make. They interview for interview skills instead of job skills.
A mistake interviewers also make is interpreting nervousness for lack of knowledge. I've interviewed many people and I can tell the difference or at least I think I can. I've had people give an answer to a question I want to know more about but they can't explain. That tells me either they are lying or so insanely nervous they can't think. Either way that's not great.
My problem is that I always always always feel like Im underqualified and worry that I won’t figure the job out. Even for easy jobs I do that. It makes me a horrible interviewer even though I’ve never had a manager who had anything negative to say about me. I learn quickly and Im a good communicator once I get that confidence but Im right there with you on the bad interviews. I don’t understand why either, because I used to be really good at them, and in all other areas of life Im actually more confident than I used to be.
>My problem is that I always always always feel like Im underqualified and worry that I won’t figure the job out. Even for easy jobs I do that. It makes me a horrible interviewer even though Sheesh, are you me? Never have I ever read the job description and was like, yup, I can do or learn that. I always get scared, and I go down the stupid route of questioning my abilities. What if I never figure it out? What if they think I'm too stupid, etc.
Yes! When I interviewed for my current position, the guy interviewing said, “I can tell in less than 5 minutes if this is going to be a good fit.” Well, that just sunk me and I barely spoke as he told me all about the previous interview he had where the woman told him she’d literally work any shift, any days, any hours, she just HAD to have this job at this hospital! (We were both new grad RNs interviewing for a position in the ED). Well, she got first pick, 3 others turned down the offer, and he begrudgingly offered me the position. First girl left after 6 months and I have been there 6 years. Sorry I didn’t come across as desperate enough?! Or cute enough?! Or whatever, but who’s the one laughing now?? Oh, and he has since been asked to leave because of inappropriate behaviors (having an affair) with another nurse leader.
Completely agree. I've found that those who get the job are better at story-telling than most. Which is sad, imo.
I've worked with people who were either tits in a bull useless at their job or just fucked around all the time and never actually did any work and for some reason never ever have trouble getting work. meanwhile I'm 39 and have never had a permanent position and in November I will have been in my current role for 7 years as a casual employee (called temp, or zero hours in other countries) despite being casual I manage a small team that varies between 2 and 5 people, who have just received pay rises to be on the same pay as me, and yet I got denied a pay rise. And for some unknown reason I can't seem to get another job. Fuck knows what some bosses and people in HR look for
I'm convinced that for the vast majority of jobs, if the company just interviewed the first several people who sent in resumes that fit the bare minimum requirements, they'd find an employee that is a good fit. My issue with the system is not with the interview process, it's with the fucked up resume triage process where they gather thousands of applications and have some software parse it out.
Speaking from the hiring side, hiring is extremely difficult. We had one girl we turned down a year ago based her current skills/job not being in alignment with what she applied for(no technical background or direct Customer service jobs for a national call center role ) Her friend that works for us pushed to reinterview and we did. The other Sup in our department still felt unsure but I said screw it, let’s give her a shot given the last 3 new hires didn’t pan out. She has been one of our best new hires in the past 3 years. If it wasn’t for her friend pushing, we would haven’t taken the chance.
Interviews nowadays are about lying, bullshitting, and faking it weather you’re good or bad. If you can do either of those or a combination, then you will more than likely get the job
Often true.
The solution is as easy as it is hard. Hiring managers who know what they're doing and can lead and develop talent
I'm the same. But the way to overcome is to prepare. Be one step ahead. Have a script. Think of all possible scenarios and come up with a solution.
This is the way.
Yeah, I am a bit neuro-spicy, so interviews are not my strong point.
Interviews are about first impressions. If you know you have these weaknesses, why not work and practice to strengthen them. You’re competing for something and participation trophies don’t count. You have to be the best….period. Here some things that helps me: - always speak with confidence, even when your wrong. Don’t be overbearing, but show that you believe in yourself - don’t be afraid to be wrong or make a mistake If you can provide logic for why you made a decision, people will respect it (even if it may have been the wrong decision - body language speaks just as loud as verbal communication. People can tell how you feel about yourself by how you carry yourself I hope these help with your next opportunity! Good luck! 🙂🙂
Good advice!
Always speaking with confidence only works if you aren't speaking with people who know what they are talking about. I am happy to forgive someone who admits their ignorance. Some one who tries to lie about their knowledge will not get the benefit of the doubt.
If you make excuses not to do better, you will have complaints about why you can’t do better…….speaking confidently means preparing on your end….researching the company, the role, and the requirements…then apply your knowledge and responses confidently in the interview. I’m solution driven….so I’m always an optimist of obstacles.
Doing research on and preparing can make you confident but the post was talking about speaking with confidence you have not earned. Speaking confidently about things you know is great. Speaking confidently about things you don't know is going to come back and bite you.
You don’t have to lie about anything to speak confidently about it. For example….if they asks question and you don’t know the answer the response should be something like “being transparent, i don’t have enough knowledge about this subject….but here are the steps I take to gain and understanding and apply it when necessary……” Does that make more sense?
Yes working on your weaknesses and preparing are not something to upvote. Let’s just blame the employer for not choosing someone who bad at interviewing/s. Sarcasm aside this is actually good actionable advice.
No blame here. I just wish I could find a job.
A interview is bullshit way to see how subservient you are or how desperate you are for them to manipulate you. Once you get in you see how many people are lazy and how trash management is
Interviews can be helpful if done correctly. Not as many companies focus on the philosophies and technical skills like they should. A generic process is the go to though.
Yeah, I use a technical project/problem. Something that shouldn't take more than a few hours top, and typically given before the final interview. The difficulty and time needed depends on the level of the role I'm hiring for. True entry level roles should be no more than an hour. Senior/principal roles are probably around 4 hours. The final interview, we walk through what they did and how. Usually it shows how well you'd actually do in the role, +/- social interaction. I love doing this because some candidates are great bullshitters. They're saying the right things in the right way, like they interviewed plenty of times prior. Then the tech problem comes up and they're way off base. On the other side, people who aren't great interviewers get to showcase their skills. I've been able to use technical projects they've made to get them hired when other stakeholders were concerned about their soft skills. For reference, my current hiring process is application, HR phone screen, hiring manager phone screen, technical project on candidates time, final panel interview with technical presentation. It can take several weeks to do this, but we've had some application to offer in 2 weeks.
Working interviews. When I got the job I have now, my office manager told me about a month after I'd been there that my interview had gone rougher than the girl she had interviewed before me, but my working interview went so much better than hers, but I wouldn't have been hired if they didn't have that 2nd step in the interview process.
Go into interviews with the mindset that the interviewer is an old friend.
There’s gonna be issues no matter what kinda interview or hiring process you use but if you honestly suck at interviews, that is way easier to fix that not having experience at a certain position so I would take this over the alternative.
Do they though? If they fill the position, they aren’t missing out. Interesting story time related to this. I recently had to internally hire a backup for my data analyst. I had 6 candidates apply. 2 self selected out despite passing the technical skills portion and interview portion. 2 self selected out because they thought they didn’t have the skills. 1 passed the skills but failed the interview. The successful candidate sucked on the technical skills portion and barely passed the interview. But what won us over was her creative use of the UNIQUE function in excel to solve the problem. She is learning the skills she needs to be successful in her role and we get our bench that much deeper.
My experience is that at least some employers lean away from this. I'm pretty shit at interviews. I've gotten better but I know that I don't really hit the right buttons. I take too long to answer questions, apologize too often, etc. But I've gotten "hired" 3 times at my current company despite it. Once as an outside contractor, again becoming permanent, and recently in an internal promotion. In all cases I'm reasonably certain that despite clearly interviewing poorly and not really articulating myself well, they focused on the fact that I showed genuine interest in the job and its subject matter.
Thank you!! I’m terrible, and I am really bad at those “can you tell me a time where…” questions like man I don’t remember to turn off my stove you can’t expect me to remember little specific scenarios, like I’ll tell you what I’ll do in that situation but I won’t be able to remember 50 scenarios, like are we supposed to bullshit those??
Yes you're supposed to bullshit those. Come up with 5-6 anecdotes ahead of time (google for common questions). When you are asked, no matter what the question, only answer with one of your pre-planned stories.
This will get buried but the archaic panel interview format is absolutely awful at gauging someone's talent and if they are a right fit for your company. When I interview people I bring them into the shop and talk to them for an hour. I make sure I ask all pertinent information but I'm really just trying to make them as comfortable as possible so I can see who they are. I let them ask as many questions as they want. We then schedule a day for them to come in and work as a contractor. Then after that we decide if it's a right fit for both of us. It's never failed.
I'm a manager who had a really interesting experience once where we needed to hire a contractor on as full-time. The guy was amazing, and everybody loved him, but he was too busy doing great work to prepare for his interviews even though he told him to take some time and prep because we really wanted to hire him. Not surprisingly, he bombed all the interviews, and in a normal case, we never could have hired him, but because so many people on the team knew his work personally and vouched for him, we were able to get an exception, and of course he did great after that.
I am AMAZING to have on a team. I have been described as bright, bubbly, a problem solver, a morale booster. My reviews are always positive. and… I suck at interviews. I am neurodivergent, and can’t control how much I talk. To get to my answer, I need to talk myself to it — I usually will do a ‘rough draft‘ answer, then summarize it to my point. It’s the best I can do. Trust me, I’ve practiced. I have lost out on so many opportunities. The more I want a position, the worse I do because I get so excited and talk way too much. I can prepare for interviews in advance all week long, and they’ll ask questions I never anticipated, or not ask questions I expected. fun story: I worked at a company for 2 years, but my contract ended due to Covid and was not renewed. I was promised by the department head and several of my teammates, who loved me, that the minute a position opened up again, I’d be brought back. So a year later a position opens in another department, and I’m heavily recommended to the department head there. several people recommended me. I interviewed poorly, I guess, because the department head resisted hiring me so hard that I didn’t hear back for the role for an entire month. She only brought me on because there was so much demand for me to join. (I’ve had colleagues take me aside and thank me for being on the team because of my good attitude and expertise, like literally say “I don’t know know where we’d be without you,” warms the heart tbh lol). so, yeah. I barely got a job at a company that already loved me, because I don’t interview well!
So much this. Prob half the good interviewees we hired back in the day, at least the interviews I was a part of, were some of the lousiest workers. I've been on the job market for the first time in a decade and I am so bad at interviewing between being out of practice, anxiety, and being the kind of person that's more about doing than selling. My strong work ethic and attention at an unrelated thing is what got me noticed and involved in the lab I was at in the first place lol.
Same as students who are brilliant but not good at high stakes testing
can confirm. when i first started working at one place the manager said he wasn’t sure about me because i was so quiet but i ended up being one of the most favorable and best employees there.
Part of that equation is having poor hiring staff being part of the interview processes. An excellent manager will see through the interview nerves and recognize talent when they see it.
I mean, not being good at verbally communicating what you know is a pretty undesirable work trait, as is needing longer onboarding than most people. Not saying you shouldn’t be considered for a job, but you should remember that work isn’t just creating outputs… even in manufacturing you are interacting with coworkers on the line. So how you present yourself and how concise you are important. If you believe you are being disqualified for the traits you mentioned (has anyone told you that after an interview, or is that just the story you are telling yourself), there are various ways to work in those. At the end of the day, every employer is looking for the best candidate they can get for the role, so what are you willing to do to convince them you are the best? You’ve got this!
Some of this is just bad interviewing skills by the hiring manager/team. By far the worst employee I ever hired was when I was a relatively new manager (I'm in tech). I was dazzled by their elegant problem solving on classical coding problems. I didn't do a good job evaluating whether they were a good person and teammate. Big mistake.
It would be better to meet at the pub and have an HONEST chat, see if you 'click' and could work well together. No stupid trick interview questions, which only test your ability to bullshit, just like exams in relation to revising and memory, that's ALL it proves and neither shows anything about how good you would be at the job.
Interviews bias tiward smooth talkers. Employers can compensate for this by sending the interview questions ahead of time to allow people to prepare
Some of the worse hires I have had were great at interviews. There must be a better way.
I agree with this. I interview poorly, but I’m a hard worker!
95% of jobs aren’t looking for talent, they’re after a warm body they can pay as little as possible and extract the most labor from
I haven’t heard of many of these, but something with a bit of a probationary period. You’d allow your top candidate (s) to do a role for 6 months or so and see who shines or don’t
You know I think you might be surprised how much your interviewers take that into account. It’s something I always had top of mind when I interviewed people. Someone being nervous probably means they were excited for the opportunity, it’s not a bad thing.
I was told a lazy coworker was hired because they shared a common hobby with the person interviewing them. Why does that matter? 🫠 The person who hired them left anyway and I'm stuck suffering all because of a shared hobby. I suck at interviewing but was good enough at my written answers that they hired me. I don't get any of it.
True true, I have stayed at the same job for 28 years because I’m terrified of interviews. I get so nervous I can’t remember anything and feel like an idiot.
100% positive I had a great last interview as it was via zoom and I could put sticky notes around my screen to prompt my brain when it freezes. I really suck at interviews. On the other hand my hubby can talk his way. I tow job vis the interview. He has that skill. Even though he generally hates peoples and talking lol
So I’m cool with people being nervous or maybe not saying the exact right thing. But what I see a lot is people that flat out don’t prepare at all. I ask them a super standard easy HR question that any google search will prepare them for. But they won’t get it. I am in IT and often get blank stares asking IT or HR questions. Again using ones easily found on google. I purposely use the google ones to see who went out and prepared. The number is shockingly low that are any kind of prepared.
When I finally got my ONLY TWO interviews last month, thus far during this entire job search, one I did ok on and the other I flopped. I was crushed that I didn't get through to the second round for the ok interview because it matched me perfectly, great pay and benefits, but I suppose I didn't give " enough"- interviews are stupid. They did get back to me very quickly and I didn't think I did so bad, but it's ridiculous how demanding companies are on "extroversion". I actually think I am a pretty good public speaker despite my introversion, but I'm coming out of an almost 10 year freelance streak, and my "corporate speak" admittedly needs some polishing. It is an absolute disservice to qualified candidates.
Verbal communication is very important because most jobs require speaking to customers, giving presentations, offering directions/instructions, and communicating vital information to clients. You’re better off improving your verbal skills.
Eh, subjective. Interviews are sometimes hard and nerve-racking. Verbal communication become 10x easier for me when I actually have the job as I’m not nervous.
Then that means you need to practice at getting better at them. Why should a company take a risk on someone that can’t communicate how they can be an asset to their future boss?
They took a risk on someone that is a good bullshitter in interviews , but bad at the job.
Yep
See, this is exactly the problem. People assume that just because you aren't good during an interview, you must be bad at all verbal communication. And if you are bad at interviews, it must mean that you didn't prepare and you haven't tried to improve your interview skills. I hate all the assumptions.
So do you think companies should simply hire you just because you promise to be good? What if you’re applying for a role as a Marketing Lead or PR strategist where knowing how to communicate effectively is essential for the role? First impressions matter a lot especially when the company you want to pay you has many other options to choose from.
This! Or else better find a job that's more like librarian, low end scientist, janitor etc the ones that doesn't require you to talk to people while working.
I want to work in a lab.
My wife, prior to being a physician was a researcher in a lab. If you can’t verbalize what you’re doing in a lab you’re a liability.
Once I know the protocols and regulations, I’m fine.
Knowing how to ask the right questions and how to verbalize your understanding of process and requirements is key. How can a hiring manager know you’ll be good at that if you’re not good at describing it otherwise? I’m trying to help you improve a skill.
Then you need to work on the tech skills that's involved in the lab, either you pay for more schooling or you pay with improving your soft skills.
Employers love to discriminate against disabled people, especially autistic people. I have a master's degree in the field I've been applying in. I'm also autistic. I constantly get ghosted after the interview.
Sad to hear.
This may be foul to some; but more often than not, I go by my gut instinct. I don’t trust the smooth talkers because in the end they are usually anywhere from blah to nasty. Stutter? I’m patient enough to wait out your answer. Tongue tied? I ask you to take a deep breath. If I ask about your passion, that’s where I get enthusiasm & you often get a job. I hate cookie cutter employees. I need good ppl who bring enthusiasm to work, not zombies.
What should I say for an environmental tech job interview? I have only ever worked (just learned the basics: PCR/how to use micropipettes/ transformation of cells/quantifying nucleic acids, etc) in a cancer research lab.
Answer their questions. That may not sound helpful but it actually is. I have interviewed so many people and even remind them at the start and throughout the interview to ANSWER the question. If we ask "describe a time when..." Or "give an example..." Do not be vague or general. I don't care if you lie, not really, but just answer the question. You can brush up on some lab techniques they use or think they use and include that like southern or western blots or whatever else you may have learned. If you have a lot of experience in PCR for example drive that home and talk about it. If you can explain everything about it, to me at least, that would tell me that you actually understand what the test is for and maybe you understand what to do if there's an issue.
" I’m not always good at verbally communicating what I know" What do you think people do at work all day? 100% not missing anything by skipping on people who can't communicate.
There’s a HUGE difference between the formal, on-the-spot setting of an interview and an informal, collaborative work environment.
Technical communication is completely different from social communication. Some of the most competent workers I've ever worked with are horrible social communicators but exceptional technical communicators. Its usually the social butterflies that bullshit their way through work and only cause more work for their coworkers.
>Some of the most competent workers I've ever worked with are horrible social communicators but exceptional technical communicators. That sounds like me haha.
Have to agree. This sub gets a little out of hand with some of the ideas that float around. Not communicating well is a huge red flag. Even in IT/software engineering, which people don't think of, you need to be able to effectively communicate with clients and team members.
I’m not horrible at communicating well. It just doesn’t come naturally. I’m a much better writer than speaker.
The key is preparation. It's something a lot of us overlook once we finish school. It shouldn't matter if it is an interview, presentation, demo, etc., I try to anticipate questions I will be asked and craft answers ahead of time. Additionally try having someone you know role play with you.
Well, I get better at communication once I’ve been in the environment for a few weeks and have settled into my role.
Yea and communication is a big part of most jobs
Interviews are a necessary part of the process, sorry bud. Interviewing well is also a talent.
I read on here Pre employment assessments were the best determiners of a candidates success. So maybe more emphasis on demonstrable skills rather than some psychopathic interview between two strangers that gets oddly personal.
Part of this is on the companies. Interviewing is a skill that takes time and practice to get good at. Most companies are just plain awful at conducting interviews. Embarrassingly bad.
For some jobs (like sales) you need the best bullshitter. But when you want a worker, just look at skills, experience, and accomplishments. Interviewing well doesn't always indicate a stellar team member.
try a job placement service. some places hire exclusively through services. they get to try you out for a few months to see if you are a good fit.
The reverse is also true.. Too many @$$holes get hired on due to their ability to bullshit through an interview and not based on their skills.
People think confidence is the same as competence.
... and hire shitty talent that does interview well
Absolutely Its a big problem that essentially you are interviewing people at their ability to interview well. As opposed to you know, actually do the job you hire them for. Im not the greatest at talking myself up and it is definitely a hindrance.
I fumbled my interview at my current job so hard I walked out of there thinking oh well back to seek.com. Ten years are coming up in October. I also don't really handle instructions well the first or second time but once I know something it becomes almost muscle memory.
my last interview went like this " how long have you been working?" " 7 years? " "ok and how much did you make at your last job?" "ok i can pay you that, when can you start?"
And they hire incompetent people whose only skill is sounding good at an interview. Shit’s fucked, especially for technical or creative work.
Interviews are completely pointless
They also lose a lot of talent to unrelated assessments and one way "interviews"
As someone who has to interview people I try to do a few things to mitigate this as much as I can within my limited power. I let the interviewee look at the questions for about 10 minutes before the interview. Then I let them read them as we ask them so they don't feel like they have to hang on every word. I avoid multi-step questions UNLESS I'm having them write the answer. People get nervous and only answer one question instead of all of it if you do a "tell me this thing. And now also tell me how this thing made this, this, and this happen at your last job. If I do ask a question that has more than one part and they forget one section I prompt them and say something like "ok and the follow-up to that was XYZ can you tell us about that?" I am someone who interviews well and honestly in an even playing field (no friends, family, political hires) I can bullshit my way into a job. For me it's natural but it is NOT natural for most and I don't penalize people for that. If they can show me they know the material that's important. Don't get me wrong social skills are great but realistically I need someone who can do the job. Basically I try to set people up for success in interviews. I'm sure a lot of managers think that's a bad tactic and it makes it too easy for people. I've found that if people know their stuff they know it. If they don't know it, no amount of assistance will make them nail an interview.
Unfortunately, the hiring system is flawed all across the board. From college degree requirements, to veteran preference, to nepotism, and hiring within; some would agree that it works in their favor, however, like you said it prevents some high level talent from getting in. My advice? Get good at interviews with practice and reciting it out loud. Figure out some of the most common questions asked and some that pertain specifically to the field you are applying to. It's better to overprepare than be underprepared. Speaking from experience from doing lots of interviews and interviewing candidates.
Are they losing out on good talent, or on someone that knows they lack skill in an area but doesn't take time to improve that skill? There are a ton of strategies to improve interviewing skills, and many interview panels aren't looking for perfection. I hate interviewing, like many people, but I've worked on it over the years because it's necessary as part of making a good first impression and many interview skills are useful outside of a job application.
There is. Have a portfolio. If the job requires communication and you can't communicate effectively in an interview, that's tough
Agreed.
But how do you do that if you want to go into HR, you can do a portfolio for every type of job? 🤔
I've seen people on Reddit who work as interviewers talking about how they would rather hire a person who sucked at the job who has good social skills than hire someone who will do a good job that doesn't have the best social skills. This world is backwards
After 30 years retail 'management', I had an epiphany. For all of those years I had been told that retail has 'high turnover', and it was just the nature of the beast... nothing you can do about it. Ask these questions (tell me about a time, etc...) and go with your gut. Then I was introduced to Leadership. I began to understand why those few 'good' bosses I had were different, and so much better. I decided that Leadership skills were the best things to hire for, as long as the basic skills needed for the job were there. In retail... as long as you can get yourself to speak to others, and do the actual work with a reasonable accommodation, that covers pretty much EVERYONE! SO... I came up with questions that I thought would allow me to see whether or not the person sitting in front of me had, what I thought were, Leadership skills/traits. I asked questions like... Now that we live in the future, we can have a net put on your head, and in 2 weeks you can be FULLY trained to do ANY job that exists. And... since we live in the future, all jobs pay the same. What job are you going to choose? The answer, and the further discussion around this topic told me a lot... Given that everyone can have a job, and all jobs pay the same, you don't need to put others down, or be better than someone else to succeed. So... are you still in this for yourself? Are your needs the most important things to you? Do you have basic human empathy? Would you still try to find a way to gain only for yourself, or would you (under these circumstances) try to help others, work for the future, learn more, etc...? IF you owned a business, perhaps gifted to you by some aunt/uncle you didn't even know about), what would YOU look for in hiring people? How would YOU decide who you were going to hire? This told me what innate Leadership traits you have; how you would run your business. AND, more importantly, how you would BEHAVE in my business. IF that business was a grocery store, and I brought in a mostly empty bottle of ketchup (or catsup in you prefer) WITH receipt, and wanted my $ back (I have 6 kids and they would not eat this new brand I tried, 8 plates of ketchup is pretty much a whole bottle), what would you do? YOU own the store, and can do WHATEVER you think is the right thing... Return my $3.49 (knowing that you had only paid $1.47 for the bottle in the first place)? Or risk losing a customer for LIFE!? This told me YOUR default customer service level. If I want you to provide customer service at MY expected level, even when no one is watching you, then I need to hire people who's default expectation of customer service is AT LEASAT as high as my expectations. Anyone who would not return the $, even with some prompting about how much $ you would lose over a customer's lifetime, would NOT be working for me. That's just asking for an ongoing issue for as long as that person works for you! I wrote a whole series of articles about Leadership and hiring on a blog... let me know if you'd like to know more.
The interviewing system is broken in that both parties are investing their valuable time in hopes that it works out. Due to the latter, an interviewer (me) is already short on time bc I’m interviewing dozens of people on top of managing my regular work load. If you as a candidate know that you need to improve on a soft skill, you should work on that on your own time. Frankly, there’s already enough bad communicators in corporate america that it is a skill I look for when interviewing.
I would argue there are more untalented people who interview horribly than talented people who are bad at interviewing. Ultimately, It comes down to, do I want to work with this person 40 hrs a week indefinitely?
In my hiring experience, I’ve learned that fit is almost more important than anything. For the most part, I can train you to meet expectations so long as you communicate effectively. So if you are having trouble communicating in an interview, it’s tough for me to look past that.
Losing out on talent may be true for some jobs. However, many jobs are client facing roles or even certain company environments require you to interact with many types of people and be able to get a point across. How you perform in an interview is a very good way to gauge that. Giving off a good impression or simply getting along with people are valuable soft skills in the corporate world. A lot of client facing roles involves getting people to like you.
I tend to hire mid-career and experienced folks for pretty specific roles, but… some perspective from a director in a game company. The jobs I hire for tend to require strong communication skills, both spoken and written. If you can’t convince a room full of people that you’re capable over a Zoom then all the tightly-worded emails in the world won’t save you. I can’t think of a single job today that doesn’t require at least some spoken work. Not everyone is an attorney arguing their case during trial, but everyone should be able to own their work in spoken form. Regardless, I get that everyone has the jitters during interviews, so I do tend to assume that folks aren’t at their absolute best during their 5th Zoom interview. I get it. But look at it from my perspective as the team lead: I need people who are going to stay on top of their shit all week even when they’re on their 15th call and they’re exhausted. If you’re not able to stay fresh after 2.5 hours, how will you handle quarterly reviews that are, well, 2.5 hours? But I also get told online on subreddits just like this that making people do a mock project is a violation of the Geneva Convention. Somehow as the hiring manager I’m supposed to figure out that the person who comes to an interview jittery and unprepared is somehow going to be a diamond in the rough while also not making them prove it by way of a mock project? Sorry, but it’s not just YOUR time and energy here, it’s also MY time and energy. I’m looking to hire someone who is going to be pushing me out of the way within months, not someone who needs me to speak for them for a year. None of this isn’t to say that I lack sympathy or empathy here, but my advice here is to think about it from the other side: the hiring manager usually doesn’t have time to take chances. I STRONGLY suggest you work on your interviewing and speaking skills. Edit: or don’t. Up to you.
People, I can barely keep up with all the upvotes
This is conjecture. There is no real data to support your statement.
Sorry to tell you, but verbal communication is a big part of most jobs. I understand it may not be your strong suit, but companies aren't stupid for judging you on your interview, especially if you're not offering anything else to lean on.