I loathe and avoid these interview questions. Because they carry a lot of hidden assumptions. The interviewee has to parse the "shadow question" lurking within them. Not everyone can.
So, below are things co-panelists have told me they want from these Qs over the years:
This is intended to get you to talk freely about something you are passionate about. It is not there to establish a particular work skill, but to see how you approach things you enjoy.
In some workplaces, it's also to determine cultural 'fit'. If the office is full of people who like doing outdoors things, or the boss is big on them and the company does lots of outdoorsy away days, then they're hoping for someone to say "oh i go hiking/surfing/whatever"
When it comes to cultural fit type stuff... Well, you have no way of knowing what that office culture is like unless you're going for a promotion or know someone working there. So the best approach is to just be honest.
Describe something you enjoy doing as a hobby honestly and openly. Answer any extra questions about it. I normally pick something they'd end up finding out about me quickly in the office anyway. That way if they react badly to it I know I probably didn't want the job anyway.
I also often give them two things, showing that i like indoor AND outdoor things (because I do).
So I'll say: "Well I love my computer games, always have. Big gamer. And I love hiking, although I don't get to do as much of that as I'd like these days."
"What would your friends say about you?"
This is to try and get you to describe a quality you think you have, relevant to the job, without feeling like you are boasting. Ideally a quality related to dealing with people or how you act in a group (hence the 'friends' bit).
The shadow question is really:
"How are you going to act in the office?"
Will you be loud and outgoing? More of a follower than a leader? Do you see yourself as the joker in a group?
Again, there's a 'cultural fit' thing lurking there.
"what is your biggest weakness?"
They want you to show you can assess your performance and take feedback. NEVER say "i care too much" or something fake to try and make it a positive. Better to admit to a genuine (but minor) flaw but then say how you correct for it at work.
Example: "I can get hyper-focused on tasks sometimes, if it's a thing I find really exciting or interesting...."
<then straight away>
"...so I often set myself calendar reminders in Outlook to make sure I step back and reassess my priorities regularly."
Something to remember with interviews (and these particular questions) is that they are actually a bit of a mirror.
if you answer them honestly, you can tell a LOT about the likely work and management environment from how the interviewers react to your answers.
If your answers make them uncomfortable, or if someone is dismissive of a thing you said in a nasty way then you know you'd get a bit of that attitude in the office too. And you can thus make a judgement (As they'll be doing) as to what working there would be like.
Overall, my general advice with all 'soft' questions like this is to just answer them honestly. But to remember that there is normally a shadow question lurking behind them, which is normally intended to get a picture of the type of person you will be in the office environment.
Indeed I'm at the stage of my career where, generally, I'm ASKED to apply for roles.
I feel very privileged and lucky about that. Means I get to have fun with that last q if I/they've decided I'm not right for the job.
I just say:
"My weakness is I take 1D6 extra fire damage."
Something else as a tip:
The best thing you can do, if you are interviewing for a job in a big company/organisation (or one that sees itself in a very formal way) is not just read books/articles on how to be interviewed, but to read ones on HOW TO BE AN INTERVIEWER.
This is particularly true if shadow questions are difficult for you. Because in the interviewer articles/books, they will be specifically TELLING interviewers good questions to ask, to find out certain things (Rightly or wrongly).
Treat them as gaming walkthroughs!
Don't miss this reply either, as I couldn't agree more with it and it explains better than I could why questions like this 100% need to die. As do the workplace attitudes that they often, consciously or subconsciously, reflect and ingrain:
"I struggle with picking up indirect meaning. I often ask a lot of questions about things that can seem obvious to some"
Then:
"I've found though that this helps keep everyone on the same page and avoid scope creep! Which is very useful!"
My brain's inability to understand why some people insist on doing OBVIOUSLY stupid things, leading me to politely (normally!) ask them to explain their assumptions, is fucking superpower.
Damn right I'm going to highlight that in an interview as a weakness-turned-strength.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
There are few things more surprising than a cold, wet kitty nose to the back of the knee. Particularly when you are unaware there is a kitty in the house.
"I am here. You have been informed."
"Snooze now. Wake me up when you feed the sparrows."
1) Own a car 2) Be ABLE to drive a car 3) Learn how to do it 4) Pass a test
I'm always FASCINATED how, culturally, keeping this as affordable as possible has become seen as of greater (not equal) importance than keeping public transport affordable.
Like, not raising fuel tax is seen as a massive victory for "the person on the street".
Yet any discussion about freezing public transport fares is INSTANTLY shot down as being to the benefit of a subset of people only, and somehow laughable economics.
It's not either/or. If you need to freeze transport costs to alleviate pressure on people's pockets, or to stimulate economic growth. If THAT'S your excuse. Then you freeze both road AND rail costs to the end user.
Collaborating on content does not require every single collaborator being able to edit the sodding webpage.
It's a website, not a buffet. Collaborate first then pick one person to copy paste the text in.
Here endeth today's lesson on HE departmental web bullshit requests.
Having permissions to edit a university webpage is not a valid way of improving your sense of self worth, or a way of rewarding your staff.
The university website is not a substitute for therapy or promotion.
Here endeth today's second lesson HE departmental web bullshit.
The likelihood of a department blaming a governance failure on another department CUBES when you add a new department as owner to a website section. Not doubles.
2 owners? 8x the risk. 3 owners? 27x the risk.
Here endeth today's third lesson on HE departmental web bullshit.
Lyn Macdonald was an absolute TITAN of WW1 history.
Indeed I can honestly say that I owe my passion for that period in part to her. Discovering her books as an undergrad opened my eyes to the complex narrative of WW1, beyond the myths. It was life-changing.
Hey, old web people, remember when we sometimes used to build websites powered by Microsoft Access databases?
That was a wild time.
Right up there with the browser makers fighting over whether margin was inside the box or outside it.
And none of us. NONE OF US actually understood how float worked. It just kind did. Mostly. Except when it didn't. Oh well. Just slap a 400px padding at the bottom.
Q: You're quite a writer. You've a gift for language, you're a deft hand at plotting and your books seem to have an enormous amount of attention to detail put into them. You're so good you could write anything. Why write fantasty? /1
Pratchett: I had a decent lunch and I'm feeling quite amiable. That's why you're still alive. I think you'd have to explain to me why you've asked that question.
Q: It's a rather ghettoized genre. /2
Pratchett: This is true. I cannot speak for the US, where I merely sort of sell okay. But in the UK I think every book - I think i've done twenty in the series - since the fourth book, every one has been one of the top ten national bestsellers... /3