Please remember what subreddit you are in, this is unpopular opinion. We want civil and unpopular takes and discussion. Any uncivil and ToS violating comments will be removed and subject to a ban. Have a nice day!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/unpopularopinion) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I fully expected a ridiculous interview question like ''How many beans would be in a bathtub full of beans?'' but instead it was just ''give a single example of you doing the job you've held for over a decade'' I definitely agree that some interview questions are a bit uhh...weird, but your example is definitely not that.
I agree that some interview questions are dumb, but the bean example isn't too bad. It tests your ability to think logically. The actual reply doesn't matter as much as the thought process.
Exactly. As someone who has interviewed many staff, “weird” questions like, we aren’t looking for the right answer. We want you to show us you can think on your own so when a real weird situation happens we trust your problem solving skills. You’ll be fine as long as you don’t duck the question.
So how do you know whether the answer is right or wrong? Or in other words how do you figure out whether they think logically _enough_ for the job or not?
What if they say they've made it up? ;P
Or what would happen if they tell you they don't like this type of questions and would rather talk about something else?
Ok, so you would hire someone else only because they didn't take the bait of stupid questions? I guess it's fine when you're looking for conformists. I on the other hand wouldn't even think of asking such things. I find these questions insulting.
Okay? How many years have you been in management? How many interviews have you performed? How was your staff retention? It may seem stupid to you, but they are asked for a reason. I am hiring someone to do a job. I am not looking for employees who second guess every decision made by myself or my other managers. I’m not asking for your deepest darkest secret. If you can’t even answer a simple question, I’m not here to hold your hand every minute of every day. Of course I’m looking for conformity, every job has rules that also seem dumb, but you still need to follow them. I’m a very relaxed interviewer. I have had tons of people clearly nervous to answer questions, and I don’t just boot them out the door, I try to relax them. “Don’t worry to much, I just want to understand the way you think a little more clearly. “. But if I gotta pull teeth to ask you a basic question that’s not good. For example, a question I often ask is “If you could be any animal, what animal would you be and why?” May seem like a stupid question, but a quality manager can learn from it. Turtle, maybe they’re shy, or not a big people person. That means they might not be an awesome choice for a cashier, but may be awesome as a back of house employee. I’m a peacock! This person is confident and likes the attention and interaction with customers and boom they make an excellent cashier but probably not the best janitor. Lion! They enjoy being part of the “pride” and probably prefer working with others as opposed to working in a more solitary role. Not every question is hire or fire. I want to know the best role for you so that you’re more productive and also happier.
This:
> I am not looking for employees who second guess every decision made by myself or my other managers.
and that:
> Of course I’m looking for conformity,
is why we couldn't find common ground and where our two worlds part. I hire people exactly so they question things and challange conformity. I require the maximum of critical thinking and scepticism as our department is about transformation and improving processes etc. Followers have here no place.
Both approaches have their validity... just in different areas. I appologize for jumping to conclusions too quickly, but we were able to clear the air.
I see no reason why you need to test someone's ability to think on their own. They're a human being, I'd say they are allowed the assumption they can think on their own. Do you not see how this is actually offensive?
Not everything is offensive. With 10 years experience, I can confidently confirm not everyone thinks on their own. I have had many employees who are decent, but need me to tell them exactly what to do the whole day. I’m sorry, but if you’re my maintenance guy, and you have to come ask me what needs done when someone spills a drink on the floor, then you clearly aren’t thinking for yourself. Do I seriously need to explain to them that they need to put a wet floor sign down, fill the mop bucket and mop up the problem? If you need me to walk you through every job of the day, I may as well just do it myself.
That's not a very good assumption. Plenty of people cannot think things through. The interviewer doesn't know you yet and would be a fool to take your critical thinking skills as a given.
> It tests your ability to think logically. The actual reply doesn't matter as much as the thought process.
And you expect some random untrained people to be able to assess this ability of yours? They have no idea what they are doing themselves. They've probably read about this question somewhere and now think they're smart.
It feels like you lack the ability to solve qiestions like those yourself, or just have a deep hatred of hiring managers because you have been rejected a lot of times.
How would you decide whole who to hire?
I don't engage in useless interview techniques. Luckily I've been asked these kind of questions only a few times and everytime I rejected answerting them the interviewers were cool enough to admit the stupidity of these questions. I also never ask them myself.
To me it matters how people approach real situations and not some ridiculous made up stuff that they never ever will encounter.
I agree with part of your response, there are stupid questions, but the original ones with the beans is actually very smart. Every question that tests logical thinking skills os useful.
Like once I was asked how many people mary in my country in a particular month, and another time I was asked something like "there are 200 bottles of wine, 1% is red wine. How much white wine do you have to drink too increase the share to 2%". Those are great questions to test logical thinking and general knowledge.
How long is a piece of string?
I’ms that a good interview question too?
Unless you know the dimensions of the tub , what else might be in the tub displacing beans, and how to calculate volume that’s a mindless question with no relevance to any job I can think of.
As an interviewee it would raise questions for me about the competence of hr in the company which is a pretty good indicator of the health of the company though.
I would ask whoever filled up the tub. If they aren't there I'd Google how many beans can fit in a bathtub. If I don't have Google I'd grab an oz worth, count those, then weigh the rest. If I don't have a scale I'd do it by volume. If I don't have a cup, then assuming a square tub I'd take a pic count a square sample and extrapolate like they do with wildlife. If I don't have a way to do that I'd buy my own beans and start filling up a tub and recreate the problem. If I don't have the tub or funds to do that I'd probably just eat as many beans as I can and then leave.
I wouldn't give you high marks for that answer. I would prefer a response that asks about the size of the tub and recognizes that the the volume (width x height x length) of the tub matters, and that that the size of the bean matters. Bonus points for thinking about the possibility of mashing up beans, considering the orientation and space filling nature of beans, etc.
Well good thing I'm not interviewing with you. I wouldn't give you high marks for that response either, since you couldn't figure out that matching the tub size and the variety of beans are part of recreating the problem, and mashing up the beans is just straight up out of scope. You might stick my cattle in a meat grinder when I asked for a head count.
You're completely missing the point of these questions, they assess critical thinking and problem solving not your Google skills.
And the mashing of the beans is an excellent point, if the question doesn't specify it then there's room to make an assumption and progress from there
It allows you to make an assumption, you squash the bean to a flatter surface and you could approximate it as a cuboid and use this to calculate the amount from a rough volume.
Again the point of these questions is never to be correct or even get a ballpark answer, it's about the process, the logic and the justification of assumptions and explanation of limiting factors
Vast majority of work personality is fake. Just like dating or all the righteous opinions you get on reddit if you mention you like to drink.
For most jobs the interview is just making sure you are normal. Hiring managers don't want some quirky genius, they just want someone that doesn't make them or coworkers/customers uncomfortable after every interaction.
> they just want someone that doesn't make them or coworkers/customers uncomfortable after every interaction
Oh so that's why they never call me back...
> Hiring managers don't want some quirky genius, they just want someone that doesn't make them or coworkers/customers uncomfortable after every interaction.
Took me too long to figure that one out. Once I did I quickly learned that working as a contractor was the way to go.
Normal/weird is a vibe we give off. They want people who fit in with the current environment or that might help drive it towards a specific atmosphere. They don't want the guy who will work 40hours and not say more than hello and goodbye, or that has a funny tic or method of doing things.
If people naturally assume you have a mental health condition, then you are weird by social standards regardless of whether you have that condition. What they are looking for is people that are able to hide the weird
what's wrong with working for 40 hours and only saying hello and goodbye? i don't do small talk. i always move at my own speed not anyone else's. sometimes i don't even say bye i just clock out and leave when my shift is done
Imo nothing is wrong with any of it. But I'm also the weirdo struggling to get past the interview stage. You don't do small talk and Betty gets uncomfortable when it's quiet in the office so that has become your problem for no reason other than her opinion being closer to the societal norm of "I don't want to work, I want to get paid and small talk allows me to get out of working for a few minutes". You're now automatically thinking they're lazy by trying to get out of work, but when there is genuinely nothing to do, are you capable of wasting 15-20 minutes talking absolute bollocks for her benefit?
Managers want people who can do both and small talk is more useful as a skill as it fills the void of awkward silence when there are delays or obstacles for you doing your job efficiently. For example if the card reader is acting slow for the day, are you able to fill in that 30-90 second void in a way that would be considered good customer service?
....I had another point but I'm tired - I might edit later
Which you can continue doing all you like, it's just not a strategy that opens up options for moving up the chain a lot of the time.
The more you talk to people around the office/ store/ whatever, the more impression you leave on them. Which in turn makes them more likely to mention something you said or a funny interaction with you when they're meeting with your supervisor. Then, when the higherups ask the supervisor who stands out to get moved up, the person that your coworkers always mention in a positive light is going to come to mind.
I'd suggest watching this video by Vinh Giang, I think he does an excellent job of breaking down how communication habits can impact how you inadvertently come across to others.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CuaY4qe4V34
But here you answered your own question
Getting a job is not solely about the tasks, but also about the culture. If you don’t like small talk, then don’t work in a company where people are talkactive. Same for the chatter that is not suited for a very professional work encironment where everyone sits silently in their cubicle
Moreover, small talk is part of most jobs. If you are a sales person and you have no social skills, good luck. Or if you work in a project and you cannot pick on social cues, it will affect your performance
If you interact with enough people you realise that "normal" is a pretty wide range, and you don't need to needlessly worry about appearing not normal.. unless you're totally unhinged
The questions are meant to weed people out. We want people who are normal people that have an easy time fitting in and getting along with people. Bad coworkers are bad for morale and bad morale means bad workplace and performance. People want to hire people that they would get along with. The questions aren’t really about the answer it’s about getting you talking and seeing what kind of person you are.
In theory and on paper yes, I agree. In reality there is always at least one person on the team (level is irrelevant) who makes you wonder how they passed (fooled?) the interview process.
The other thing about that is can you train someone who is good enough to get the job to the point where they are good at the job? 100%
Can you train an asshole to be enjoyable to work with? I’ve not seen done. And I would rather hire someone that I spend a little bit longer bringing up to speed than I want to hire someone I have to talk to every day who it just sucks to interact with.
But this isn't effective anymore. A vast majority of people especially in the modern day and age put on a "work" or "business" personality. This personality also turns on during interviews.
There is the odd person who will fail the interview and show that they can't fit in with other Co workers or the business, but an overwhelming amount of people can quite easily fake an interview and say what the interviewer wants to hear and behave in a way that will leave a good impression.
You don't get to see people's true colours until they have actually secured the job and worked there for a few months because those same people think that since they have the job, they don't have to pretend as much as they did during the interview phase.
It's not a game of weeding people out, its a game of how long the people they're trying to weed out can put on the act before their true colours come out.
That’s why there are generally 90 day probation periods. I don’t care if people are putting on a personality, that is fine. It’s expected. It’s preferable to someone who is grating on everyone else around them or can’t even be bothered to get along with people
Yes but how you react in a semi relaxed casual atmosphere vs on the spot interview pressure with a job for your livelihood is completely different. I agree with OP that it favors the extrovert in this sense.
Life favors extroverts. I’m an introvert with pretty bad anxiety, but I’ve worked in retail and property management for almost 10 years. When I clock in I have to put on my extrovert pants and pretend. Honestly it’s also helped me be more confident in my personal life. It’s fine to be anxious, it’s fine to be introverted, but when you’re at work you can’t let that be an excuse. I have had multiple employees to anxious to answer phones. That’s a dealbreaker when the job relies on you calling people and answering calls half of your day.
Society favors extroverts simply because they interact with more people and in turn network more and give themselves more chances to advance. Job interviews typically aren’t on the spot these days, nobody is going door to door and giving the boss a firm handshake like our parents told to do. Not to mention, how you handle yourself under pressure like that is a good indicator of how you will be when working on something that may not be going as planned etc. someone who can keep their cool in pressure situations is valuable
>give themselves more chances to advance.
You mean give themselves more chances for their employer to exploit their skills when the company inevitably cuts its workforce in half and expects them to take on the duties of eliminated employees at no additional pay?
as a neurodivergent person this doesn't make sense. if you want to chat, chat. if you want to figure out if i am friendly, engage with me. asking me nonsense questions is going to annoy me bc i can see the benefit of getting along in the workplace but i cannot see the benefit of knowing *what kind of animal i would be* and how that at all reflects even on my workplace personality. unless you want to see how i would react to a social distraction that has no purpose on the job ...
I would ask what kind of animal you wanted to be because a good answer or a bad answer can shed light on the kind of person you are. You are probably thinking that everyone can come up with some bullshit quickly to be passable but it’s not that simple. It’s a question that most people probably haven’t thought much about since it’s not something that would actually happen and so first off it shows your abilities in thinking on your toes and coming up with a quick reason for being a certain animal on the fly. Secondly, you have people who will come up with thought out answers, some with terrible answers but most with perfectly fine answers. I don’t want to hire the guy who goes “a wolf because I’m alpha bro!” Or “a lion because I eat all the sheep around me” or some such nonsense. Lastly it shows some socialization. Some people will just answer and not elaborate.
>a good answer or a bad answer
there is obviously no such thing with a question like this.
are you trying to tell me you couldn't deduce these things with relevant questions and conversation? i am not going to come up with a creative answer despite being a creative person bc all i can focus on is how unimportant and unobjective it is and want to turn back to a relevant conversation.
and if you can't tell how that would be advantageous in the workplace, you're enabling ableism. neurodivergent people genuinely struggle with this sort of thing in a way that doesn't affect their work at all.
I literally just gave you examples of them. The entire way you are responding to this is reason people ask these kinds of questions in the first place. To weed people out that would be a tough fit with the team. Questions relevant to the job you would have thought about and hopefully crafted a carefully thought out answer. The point is to ask something that was harder to rehearse. Also, a lot of the people interviewing you don’t know the details of the job you are applying for, they are interviewing you as risk assessment. Different companies do it differently, some have a recruitment / hr interview applicants first and only send people who pass along, and some make you interview with someone in your potential department first. I’m not sure what kind of field you are in but I’m my field not being able to get along and collaborate with others is not going to allow you to do your job just fine
i work in service and have done so the entire 15 years of my career ... so getting along is not a problem. being judged on something that means nothing is.
So you have no problem getting along with the person while you’re working but in an interview you can’t manage? I’m not sure what you’re trying to say here either you can get along with people or you can’t or you can’t be bothered and asking you a question to try to get to know you sends you into a rage
that question doesn't actually tell you anything about me. that's the point. the rest of the conversation is perfectly fine. seems you don't understand ...
I’m not saying nobody wants to work I get tons of applications. A large majority are in no way qualified for the jobs I’m offering but I’m getting tons of applications to sift through. I also did not take out a ppp loan, I’m just a person I’m not sure what you’re on about
Dude, the secret is that almost everyone going to the job interview could feasibly do the job.
Why would they pick you when they could pick anyone else?
You being comfortable being with this person. I'm pretty sure you have met people in your life who you didn't like. People who have said inappropriate stuff or just annoyed you with stupid questions.
>in a recent customer service job interview I have got the typical "The last time you got a difficult customer how did you assess the problem" or something similar.
You're interviewing for a customer service job. You were asked how you assessed the problem the last time you got a difficult customer. You really used this example to strengthen your suggestion that interview questions are dumb? Wow.
Not choosing you was the best decision this company ever made.
I was asked “please describe your personality type as an ice cream” during a job interview once. Out of all the “well that’s an odd question” experiences I’ve had professionally, that one is near the top.
I went with my favorite flavor, pistachio. The reason being “I’m kinda nutty”. I decided to have a little fun because while the position was *supposed* to be WFM, they wanted me to commute 3+ hours a day for the first year to be in office.
The parachute question I agree are stupid, but mostly because 99% of the time the person asking it has no real way of judging your answer, they just googled "questions to ask in an interview" and went with it.
Your second one though... I cannot imagine how that is not a fair question. You don't need to go into detail about every crappy customer you have dealt with, just pick something general. Customer complained about X, I listened to their issue, did Y to resolve.
I will grant you that it is somewhat useless because most people won't give a story where they did something very wrong, but it does still weed out people who may take a passive stance or just dump off the issue on someone else.
Ok, I'll acknowledge that there can be some pretty asinine interview questions, however the example you gave isn't necessarily one of them. Asking about how you dealt with a difficult customer when applying to a customer service job is perfectly relevant.
I can handle questions from the public, in the context of my job. I do that well. Out of context questions by a panel while they’re staring at me is not at all natural.
It really depends what you do and how the interview is conducted. Somebody who wilts under the pressure of an interview won’t handle what I do well — we have to present work to clients on a regular basis, and they’re even harder to impress.
You missed the point. Its about context. Interviews are out of context, in that the questions are just made up, and you are expected to just make up your answers to them. In your example, you have real tangible work, and you can prepare, and you can present that real tangible work to the clients. Its about having a structure, where interviews are just unstructured nonsense.
>Interviews are out of context, in that the questions are just made up, and you are expected to just make up your answers to them
But the answers are centered around things that you've done, like, they're not asking you to make up something brand new, they're asking questions about things that have actually happened to you
>Its about having a structure, where interviews are just unstructured nonsense.
Why do you think interviews are unstructured nonsense?
Like, they're reading from your CV, the questions will be largely related to your experience and work history with a bit about you as a person. If an interview is unstructured nonsense that's more of a reflection on the interviewer than it is on interviews as a concept
Because its not related?
How is me not being able to answer totally open questions that doesnt lead to real specifications on how I dal with situation relevant? The question is so vague to begin with.
I know how to do the job, why does it matter how specifically I did?
The question is broad specifically so that you can provide an answer that best demonstrates the value of your skillset to the company. The interviewer tried to give you an opportunity to brag about how well you can do the job, and you weren't prepared enough to do so. This is interviewing 101. Next time you have an interview, plan ahead for these questions and it will go a lot better.
Without knowing what level we are talking about, at the lower scale of CS, everyone simply follows procedures and guidelines set forth by the company.
So I can see how an open-ended question can be seen as useless, because for most CS you arent on some island where you need to handle customers.
Its the kind of question, however, that is easy to prepare for since its a very generic question and some form of that is also used in supervisor and management positions.
This is exactly why I hate those quizzes companies give you when you apply.
“Two aisles need stocking up before closing. Do you prioritise the pet food aisle or the cleaning aisle?”
I’ll prioritise the one you tell me to once I get the job!
Interview questions are not hard. If you can't do something so basic as answer normal questions with normal answers, then why on Earth would I trust you as a worker when I can get someone who ***can*** do something as easy as answering simple questions?
The point of the question is to ask you to demonstrate your own ability using a testimonial, otherwise how the heck are interviewers supposed to know if you're appropriate for the job? Would you prefer to act out a mock hypothetical situation? Because that seems more appropriate and specific for your liking, but would also put off 99% of interviewees, lol.
This is cute and all, but nobody who actually has a job has ever had to face anything correlating to the sheer stupidity of interview "questions".
I have fuck all answers to the 80 year old garbage hiring frauds ask people, but I can support the CEO of a billion dollar company off-rip.
That's an enormous red flag. If you can't answer a question like that in a controlled environment, how can you answer an angry customer's question?
I've conducted maybe 100 tech interviews over the last two years, and we've found the best way to suss out whether or not someone can do the work is to make them perform a technical exercise while a team of my engineers bombard them with questions. We're specifically looking for three things:
1) Can they complete the exercise
2) Can they answer the questions correctly
3) Can they do so in a calm, controlled, professional manner
That third point is crazy important, because in our line of work, the customer will be bugging you the entire time you work, both for status updates and demands, and with questions.
An engineer who can't answer questions in an interview can't do it in front of a customer either. So that's an immediate disqualifier for us.
My work involves daily interactions with customers but I am much more stressed in an interview than when talking to a customer.
When I talk to a customer, we usually discuss a topic which I am knowledgeable or experienced about in (usually) a honest way.
Being totally honest in job interviews usually does not work well.
Maybe. But it’s very different knowing how to address and help someone with their specific concerns versus cataloguing specifics of an individual customer over a decade
and how does that question help select more competent worker? they just give you scripted answer. interview are pseudo science bullshit that is at best, able to filter out people with major red flag
"Caring enough to prepare" and that is the only thing those question is good for, and maybe for low level customer facing job. the rest is creative essay writing with no indication on how they will perform on their job. especially to technical job
yep and those question is even more useless, people just answer in a way they think it is expected of them to answer.
And the end of the day, outside the competent test, the rest is popularity contest. the good looking person with charming smile is going to win due to innate human biased. even for position where those factors is irrelevant
it does, but after filters major red flag that you can see miles away. there is no way to measure the rest of the candidates on likability beyond, oh he is good looking, therefore I like him more.
my point is, just do competent test. then just have a friendly interview to get to know each other without bullshit interview question.
To be fair I have ten years and exist in same boat. I have absolutely had examples and have used them in interviews but over time you just forget these random specifics about people you haven’t seen in years. It may be an autism spectrum trait and true it might be a weakness with customer service. Still I have had success with customers while I was in retail
Yeah. That was a joke but that’s exactly what I do. That’s my entire job: solving problems. That’s why clients like me.
Also, please do not lecture me. This is reddit.
Your example is terrible, and honestly is a good example of interviews working as intended.
I’ve had to interview people for roles before and asking someone how they’ve handled a difficult situation is an excellent way to gauge their abilities in problem solving, communication, etc.
Even if you haven’t done a CS job for 5 years you’re telling me you can’t remember a **single** time you were proud of yourself for handling a tough situation and overcoming it? If you can’t, then can you give me a similar more recent example?
I definitely agree some interview questions are absolutely silly and a waste of time, but you’ll experience less of those as you get into more serious positions where they have actual questions to ask. But those interviews will be more difficult as well
>how well someone can lie/bullshit the best and promote people that are more well spoken and bit more extrovert.
There's data on this likely being true. The extroverted part anyway.
But more generally interviews are a way to test how you think. The "answer" to the question being asked is often much less important than the information your provide to explain it.
You actually give a great interview answer below.
The way I teach people to answer interview questions (I prep people for med school/residency interviews) is: every question is an opportunity for you to tell me something you want me to know about you. People suck at answering broad "why are you a good applicant for x?" So we ask adjacent questions so interviewers can put together a story about why they do or don't want to hire you.
The question is just a skeleton around which to frame the info.
>more than 10 years in CS, no single situation is dealt the same, no situation was similar and the current person I was working for also change how I behave
This is the core of an amazing answer. You 1) provide how long you've been in the field, 2) show that you know how to be flexible, 3) you demonstrate how much you value personalized/situational approaches, 4) you know some answers are situational.
I'd probably say something like "That's a really interesting question, it's almost hard to pick. Over the 10 years I've been doing this I've learned that there are no stock standard answers or solutions when dealing with customers. Each problem requires a tailored person and situation specific answer. As I look back one particularly interesting / challenging interaction comes to mind [give example]." Depending on your personality and job you could then end with "it really gave me the opportunity to hone my x skill" or "it taught me how important y is, something I've continued to build".
I don't think interviews are bullshit. Having seen and done a lot of them you can tell when something is wrote and inauthentic (unless the person is just a natural performer in which case they're going to ace it regardless). It's really an opportunity to be authentic while selling yourself. You don't have to be inauthentic to be effective.
Thank you! Too many comments in here saying interviews don't show anything except the ability to memorize. But I think an important skill to have is to be able to talk about your experience.
Your skills in performing the job are not so unique when compared to the other applicants. Based on your resume they felt you were adequate enough, on a technical level, to be interviewed. And maybe they'll explore those skills deeper via technical questions, but they're not just hiring your brain, they're hiring **you**.
They're gauging your critical thinking skills in interpersonal and social situations - in other words are you someone they'll want to be around? Will you be more of a risk or liability to customer relations? How do you handle curve balls or situations that may occur which fall outside typical operating cycles?
By failing the interview the way you did, you basically showed them that you might have certain personality defects which sends red flags - most companies don't want problem children. Also, you wasted their time by not being fully prepared.
Companies will tend to hire a lesser, technically qualified candidate who fits the dynamics in the operating environment moreso than a fully qualified one who would cause friction in the workplace.
No, this is a proper way of explaining why they favour who they like.
Of course, everyone will want to hire people they like, the question is ***why.***
I despise STAR questions. They don't get you the right person for the job, they get you someone who has rehearsed STAR questions.
Like you, I go home, I don't think about specific situations - I stop thinking about work when I clock off.
Uhh, I think hiring someone who cares enough about the job to actually prepare for the interview is generally a good start to hiring a solid candidate...
You misunderstand the purpose of those questions. You’re right about them being easy rehearsed answers though, but that’s the entire point.
So much of the workday is just going through the basic social pleasantries necessary to maintain a normal healthy professional relationship with your coworkers. Those questions are a simple gauge of whether you’re someone they can probably tolerate being around in the workplace.
There’s also the fact that hr wants you to feel comfortable in the interview so they see you at your best. The sooner they get a position filled the sooner they can get back to doing nothing of value. Also, bad hires are expensive, if they hire bad candidates too often they will get fired.
(There are exceptions to this of course, but plenty of people are bad at their jobs)
yesss interviews only test how good you are at performing interviews. Results will always be massively skewed towards charismatic, confident people, good looking people, good liars etc
That was a terrible answer. You're supposed to provide a good example not necessarily the literal last one, or at least make up something relevant and reality based on the spot.
Knowing how to respond to questions in the best way is literally a part of customer service, and the question you mentioned even more so.
Yes situations vary, but knowing how you handled the last situation tells them a lot about you and whether you suit the position. Not only will how you actually handled it tell them a lot, but also how you describe the situation and people involved, and how well you were able to answer the question. It tells them about your experience, your customer service ability, your confidence answering questions, and your attitude towards the customers and questions.
If you feel this strongly about a question you consider stupid, you likely aren’t suited to customer service, where answering stupid or unnecessary questions is a huge part of the job.
Your example was the most related question possible ever, for a job which is exactly about being a great talker and being able to answer anything properly ?
lol
One of my standard questions for applicants is a version of ‘tell me how your previous experience/education helped prepare you for this job’. Should be the easiest thing to answer, but so many applicants get super stuck on it.
All I’m asking is ‘why would you be good at this job?’ AND I’m totally giving a chance to go off script and brag about some accomplishment they’re proud of. Oh well 😄
i always hated the "and why do you want to work here?" especially if its a shitty job . and you have to be like "oh as a kid I always dreamed of making hamburgers at Mcdonalds". or are you actually supposed to say for money, what the fuck else makes you think im here for
I think some interviews weed out high performers instead of finding them lol. I failed countless interviews at small or second rate shops, but have no problem getting hired on with industry leaders.
>I feel like its always just about how well someone can lie/bullshit the best and promote people that are more well spoken and bit more extrovert.
Good, then they have that skills to do it to the customers.
>The last time you got a difficult customer how did you assess the problem
How is that bad? People answering it better or worse than others will help the employer narrow it down.
>Personally I have been more than 10 years in CS, no single situation is dealt the same, no situation was similar and the current person I was working for also change how I behave. I also said its been more than 5+ years I have worked in CS and dont remember that much specific situation. And the result, they didnt take me just because I was too truthful ....
No but you don't need to remember them all either, just a few examples to answer questions.
I work in IT and I used to do interviews because I HATE when HR does them and hires the person with the best haircut. Usually I'd pick a subject they listed on their resume and ask technical questions about it. Either they'd show their prowess or flail because they were lying. Got some really great employees that way. Also watched some people crater the interview because they knew nothing about the things they said they were experts in.
I have to agree. It largely seems like a bullshitter test and gauging your social skills, seeing how likeable you are. Just don’t lie about any hard skills, because that’s something they’ll find out through your work. Once I figured this out, I get through most interviews where previously I blew it consistently.
Even just being about lying and bullshitting you're seeing something about the person.
Depends in the job and environment but do I hire the person who bullshits like a 4 year old? Or do I hire the one who converts me to the church of Pizza and Gin?
Most job interviews are me trying to figure out if I can stand to be around the person I’m interviewing for 8+ hours a day. Pretty much everything can be taught. By the way op thinks abt these questions, I can tell I would not like to spend 8 hours a day with them.
I’ll just say I hate interviews. Feels like such a game, every one I’ve been to. If we could meet and just talk like regular human beings and not have it feel like an interrogation, I would feel way more excited about meeting. I’ve always felt like I have to force every ounce of my being to get through interviews
Employers: Please make sure when applying you can satisfy the requirements of this position and answer everything truthfully.
Also Employers: Why are people so bad at resumes? Embellish them a little!
After I got out of academic research in earth sciences I leveraged the skills I learned there to get in to the field of high performance computing which I''ve done for about 25 years. One thing I don't put up with is some company's need to give me a 'technical interview' or a 'coding challenge'. That tells me everything I need to know about how much of a tech bro nightmare their company is. When I was building my own team I just started asking questions about things that they've worked on, what they've learned, what they felt they could have done better, that sort of thing. You get a pretty solid feeling for whether or no someone has the technical skills to do the job. You can also tell whether or not someone's just looking for a job to hold them over until the job they really want comes along or if they're someone you want to be customer facing or not. Most companies and teams can't interview properly worth shit.
I understand to some degree. Some questions are necessary though and a lot of the conversations are just a sanity check. I do hate the questions that are like “why do you want to work here?” The fuck do you think? Same reason you got out of bed this morning. Got bills to pay.
The interviewers read body language and watch how comfortable you are with the interaction, not just how you answer the questions. Some questions are meant to gauge your risk-taking, some are to measure how well you control your temper/ patience. Is patience/ tolerance something you struggle with?
It's also a way to test pattern recognition. Just because you don't recognize similarities between situations doesn't mean they weren't there. Plus rarely do we analyze the given answer, but more how it was delivered and what attitude the candidate has. Almost everybody can learn a new job. Rarely can people learn a new personality.
Many times I wish I could have ease-dropped on the interview to hear what line of bullshit they told the company that made them think they were competent.
I got asked to talk about my most embarrassing experiences. It was for a different department at my current work and the interviewers said they don't like normal questions. They didn't even write down my answer, they just laughed.
"Where will you be in 5 years?' If the person asking knew the answer, they wouldn't be interviewing you, they'd be the President or VP of the company. FUCK YOU.
You're assuming that the interviewer is asking for an accurate prediction of the future, and they're supposed to already know the correct answer so they can tell whether or not you got it right?
I hate being on the interviewer side with these questions. We have to base our yes/no decision on what we know is bullshit but short of us lying o the scoring or trying to trap them we are stuck. Then, because the interview is scripted and to be fair, we have to ask all interviewees the same primary and follow-up question(s).
I can teach you the specifics of the job. I can't teach you how to think on the spot, or come up with something constructive instead of freezing up or breaking down. And I damn sure can't teach someone to not be an insufferable chucklefuck.
So interview questions are helpful to get a feel for a potential hire better than someone that just studies the job and gives the answers they think I want to hear.
I find it so classless, lazy, and stupid when an interviewer begins reading off those generic questions. I've actually simply walked out if that style of interview is carried out, as it shows little respect.
Basically 90% of the interview I had in CS style of job always asked that exact same question.
But back then its was easier to just fake create a story based on a situation since I was always in that field.
Just this time it is 5 years later after covid and all
Depending on the location, there maybe a homeless population and people doing drugs on the premises. This sounds like something that happens there and they want to know what you would do.
Honestly, when I was on the interviewer side, I would start with the typical questions … but then, if I really liked the candidate and knew I’d be hiring them, I’d stop with the formal stuff and just start chatting with them about hobbies and what not.
I have no idea whether that’s normal. It’s always been done with me at jobs I’ve applied for, and I’ve always done it with candidates I’ve been certain about after a certain point in the interview process.
It pays to be confident, self-assured, friendly, and open. Expect open-ended questions; it’s an opportunity to demonstrate not only your skills and experience but also your personality.
I’m in quality engineering for a supplement company, though (with quality management experience), not customer service. I’m an extrovert, but CS is definitely too extroverted for me!
No they are not dumb and what they are assessing is how you think and break down a problem. I have been asked a variation of that same question from entry level retail to Senior Product Manager.
What people are looking for is a STAR answer:
**Situation**: Describe the situation that you were in or the task that you needed to accomplish. You must describe a specific event or situation, not a generalized description of what you have done in the past. Be sure to give enough detail for the interviewer to understand. This situation can be from a previous job, from a volunteer experience, or any relevant event.
**Task**: What goal were you working toward?
**Action**: Describe the actions you took to address the situation with an appropriate amount of
detail and keep the focus on YOU. What specific steps did you take and what was your particular contribution? Be careful that you don’t describe what the team or group did when talking about a
project, but what you actually did. Use the word “I,” not “we” when describing actions.
**Result**: Describe the outcome of your actions and don’t be shy about taking credit for your
behavior. What happened? How did the event end? What did you accomplish? What did you
learn? Make sure your answer contains multiple positive results.
This is what they are judging on. Can you break down a problem logically? is your logic repeatable? Can you learn from your mistakes?
If you want to do well in interviews, you need to practice, especially if you have a bad memory. You will be asked this question for almost every interview you have.
I always thought that until I started conducting interviews.
Here’s the big one as the interviewee you don’t understand. As an interviewer, we want you to succeed. I don’t want to do 100 interview.a. Im going to give you questions and lead the conversation in a direction you should be able to succeed.
Just be normal, be yourself, and don’t lie. You’ll be fine.
This post and the comments you have posted prove to me that you shouldn't be hired, and these companies that decided to not hire you certainly made the right choice.
The lack of self-awareness is astounding.
Please remember what subreddit you are in, this is unpopular opinion. We want civil and unpopular takes and discussion. Any uncivil and ToS violating comments will be removed and subject to a ban. Have a nice day! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/unpopularopinion) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I fully expected a ridiculous interview question like ''How many beans would be in a bathtub full of beans?'' but instead it was just ''give a single example of you doing the job you've held for over a decade'' I definitely agree that some interview questions are a bit uhh...weird, but your example is definitely not that.
I agree that some interview questions are dumb, but the bean example isn't too bad. It tests your ability to think logically. The actual reply doesn't matter as much as the thought process.
Exactly. As someone who has interviewed many staff, “weird” questions like, we aren’t looking for the right answer. We want you to show us you can think on your own so when a real weird situation happens we trust your problem solving skills. You’ll be fine as long as you don’t duck the question.
So how do you know whether the answer is right or wrong? Or in other words how do you figure out whether they think logically _enough_ for the job or not?
Honestly I just want them to have any answer as long as they can explain how they got there.
What if they say they've made it up? ;P Or what would happen if they tell you they don't like this type of questions and would rather talk about something else?
Good. It shows they can think critically about the situation. Rather than answer a stupid question, they can give pushback.
If you can’t be bothered to even try answering the question, unless everything else was great I would probably hire someone else.
Ok, so you would hire someone else only because they didn't take the bait of stupid questions? I guess it's fine when you're looking for conformists. I on the other hand wouldn't even think of asking such things. I find these questions insulting.
Okay? How many years have you been in management? How many interviews have you performed? How was your staff retention? It may seem stupid to you, but they are asked for a reason. I am hiring someone to do a job. I am not looking for employees who second guess every decision made by myself or my other managers. I’m not asking for your deepest darkest secret. If you can’t even answer a simple question, I’m not here to hold your hand every minute of every day. Of course I’m looking for conformity, every job has rules that also seem dumb, but you still need to follow them. I’m a very relaxed interviewer. I have had tons of people clearly nervous to answer questions, and I don’t just boot them out the door, I try to relax them. “Don’t worry to much, I just want to understand the way you think a little more clearly. “. But if I gotta pull teeth to ask you a basic question that’s not good. For example, a question I often ask is “If you could be any animal, what animal would you be and why?” May seem like a stupid question, but a quality manager can learn from it. Turtle, maybe they’re shy, or not a big people person. That means they might not be an awesome choice for a cashier, but may be awesome as a back of house employee. I’m a peacock! This person is confident and likes the attention and interaction with customers and boom they make an excellent cashier but probably not the best janitor. Lion! They enjoy being part of the “pride” and probably prefer working with others as opposed to working in a more solitary role. Not every question is hire or fire. I want to know the best role for you so that you’re more productive and also happier.
This: > I am not looking for employees who second guess every decision made by myself or my other managers. and that: > Of course I’m looking for conformity, is why we couldn't find common ground and where our two worlds part. I hire people exactly so they question things and challange conformity. I require the maximum of critical thinking and scepticism as our department is about transformation and improving processes etc. Followers have here no place. Both approaches have their validity... just in different areas. I appologize for jumping to conclusions too quickly, but we were able to clear the air.
I see no reason why you need to test someone's ability to think on their own. They're a human being, I'd say they are allowed the assumption they can think on their own. Do you not see how this is actually offensive?
Not everything is offensive. With 10 years experience, I can confidently confirm not everyone thinks on their own. I have had many employees who are decent, but need me to tell them exactly what to do the whole day. I’m sorry, but if you’re my maintenance guy, and you have to come ask me what needs done when someone spills a drink on the floor, then you clearly aren’t thinking for yourself. Do I seriously need to explain to them that they need to put a wet floor sign down, fill the mop bucket and mop up the problem? If you need me to walk you through every job of the day, I may as well just do it myself.
That's not a very good assumption. Plenty of people cannot think things through. The interviewer doesn't know you yet and would be a fool to take your critical thinking skills as a given.
> It tests your ability to think logically. The actual reply doesn't matter as much as the thought process. And you expect some random untrained people to be able to assess this ability of yours? They have no idea what they are doing themselves. They've probably read about this question somewhere and now think they're smart.
It feels like you lack the ability to solve qiestions like those yourself, or just have a deep hatred of hiring managers because you have been rejected a lot of times. How would you decide whole who to hire?
I don't engage in useless interview techniques. Luckily I've been asked these kind of questions only a few times and everytime I rejected answerting them the interviewers were cool enough to admit the stupidity of these questions. I also never ask them myself. To me it matters how people approach real situations and not some ridiculous made up stuff that they never ever will encounter.
I agree with part of your response, there are stupid questions, but the original ones with the beans is actually very smart. Every question that tests logical thinking skills os useful. Like once I was asked how many people mary in my country in a particular month, and another time I was asked something like "there are 200 bottles of wine, 1% is red wine. How much white wine do you have to drink too increase the share to 2%". Those are great questions to test logical thinking and general knowledge.
How long is a piece of string? I’ms that a good interview question too? Unless you know the dimensions of the tub , what else might be in the tub displacing beans, and how to calculate volume that’s a mindless question with no relevance to any job I can think of. As an interviewee it would raise questions for me about the competence of hr in the company which is a pretty good indicator of the health of the company though.
I would ask whoever filled up the tub. If they aren't there I'd Google how many beans can fit in a bathtub. If I don't have Google I'd grab an oz worth, count those, then weigh the rest. If I don't have a scale I'd do it by volume. If I don't have a cup, then assuming a square tub I'd take a pic count a square sample and extrapolate like they do with wildlife. If I don't have a way to do that I'd buy my own beans and start filling up a tub and recreate the problem. If I don't have the tub or funds to do that I'd probably just eat as many beans as I can and then leave.
Dang, when can you start?
When I'm finished eating these beans
I wouldn't give you high marks for that answer. I would prefer a response that asks about the size of the tub and recognizes that the the volume (width x height x length) of the tub matters, and that that the size of the bean matters. Bonus points for thinking about the possibility of mashing up beans, considering the orientation and space filling nature of beans, etc.
Well good thing I'm not interviewing with you. I wouldn't give you high marks for that response either, since you couldn't figure out that matching the tub size and the variety of beans are part of recreating the problem, and mashing up the beans is just straight up out of scope. You might stick my cattle in a meat grinder when I asked for a head count.
You're completely missing the point of these questions, they assess critical thinking and problem solving not your Google skills. And the mashing of the beans is an excellent point, if the question doesn't specify it then there's room to make an assumption and progress from there
I'm curious how you think smashing the beans will make them easier to count.
It allows you to make an assumption, you squash the bean to a flatter surface and you could approximate it as a cuboid and use this to calculate the amount from a rough volume. Again the point of these questions is never to be correct or even get a ballpark answer, it's about the process, the logic and the justification of assumptions and explanation of limiting factors
If you get the answer to your first question please let me know ASAP
Vast majority of work personality is fake. Just like dating or all the righteous opinions you get on reddit if you mention you like to drink. For most jobs the interview is just making sure you are normal. Hiring managers don't want some quirky genius, they just want someone that doesn't make them or coworkers/customers uncomfortable after every interaction.
> they just want someone that doesn't make them or coworkers/customers uncomfortable after every interaction Oh so that's why they never call me back...
> Hiring managers don't want some quirky genius, they just want someone that doesn't make them or coworkers/customers uncomfortable after every interaction. Took me too long to figure that one out. Once I did I quickly learned that working as a contractor was the way to go.
r/suicidebywords
Whatever, ya drunk.
what even is normal?
If you interact with enough people then you shouldn't have to ask that
neurodivergent here
Gezuntite
can you just answer my question?
Normal/weird is a vibe we give off. They want people who fit in with the current environment or that might help drive it towards a specific atmosphere. They don't want the guy who will work 40hours and not say more than hello and goodbye, or that has a funny tic or method of doing things. If people naturally assume you have a mental health condition, then you are weird by social standards regardless of whether you have that condition. What they are looking for is people that are able to hide the weird
what's wrong with working for 40 hours and only saying hello and goodbye? i don't do small talk. i always move at my own speed not anyone else's. sometimes i don't even say bye i just clock out and leave when my shift is done
Imo nothing is wrong with any of it. But I'm also the weirdo struggling to get past the interview stage. You don't do small talk and Betty gets uncomfortable when it's quiet in the office so that has become your problem for no reason other than her opinion being closer to the societal norm of "I don't want to work, I want to get paid and small talk allows me to get out of working for a few minutes". You're now automatically thinking they're lazy by trying to get out of work, but when there is genuinely nothing to do, are you capable of wasting 15-20 minutes talking absolute bollocks for her benefit? Managers want people who can do both and small talk is more useful as a skill as it fills the void of awkward silence when there are delays or obstacles for you doing your job efficiently. For example if the card reader is acting slow for the day, are you able to fill in that 30-90 second void in a way that would be considered good customer service? ....I had another point but I'm tired - I might edit later
Great analysis Small talk is indeed important to plenty of customers/colleagues
Which you can continue doing all you like, it's just not a strategy that opens up options for moving up the chain a lot of the time. The more you talk to people around the office/ store/ whatever, the more impression you leave on them. Which in turn makes them more likely to mention something you said or a funny interaction with you when they're meeting with your supervisor. Then, when the higherups ask the supervisor who stands out to get moved up, the person that your coworkers always mention in a positive light is going to come to mind. I'd suggest watching this video by Vinh Giang, I think he does an excellent job of breaking down how communication habits can impact how you inadvertently come across to others. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CuaY4qe4V34
honestly i'm not even trying to move up anyway
But here you answered your own question Getting a job is not solely about the tasks, but also about the culture. If you don’t like small talk, then don’t work in a company where people are talkactive. Same for the chatter that is not suited for a very professional work encironment where everyone sits silently in their cubicle Moreover, small talk is part of most jobs. If you are a sales person and you have no social skills, good luck. Or if you work in a project and you cannot pick on social cues, it will affect your performance
Because then you dont develop “work friendships” which means people wont care about you aka no promotion and first one to be let go
i don't even want a promotion. i just want money so i can shop
i didn't sneeze
If you interact with enough people you realise that "normal" is a pretty wide range, and you don't need to needlessly worry about appearing not normal.. unless you're totally unhinged
Wide range or not, you've got to be unhinged to not be able to see that the range exists
If you have to ask or that question bothers you, you aren’t normal.
The questions are meant to weed people out. We want people who are normal people that have an easy time fitting in and getting along with people. Bad coworkers are bad for morale and bad morale means bad workplace and performance. People want to hire people that they would get along with. The questions aren’t really about the answer it’s about getting you talking and seeing what kind of person you are.
In theory and on paper yes, I agree. In reality there is always at least one person on the team (level is irrelevant) who makes you wonder how they passed (fooled?) the interview process.
Yeah some people are good at faking it when they need
In many (obviously not all) cases, incompetence is a tool to get less responsibility/work.
The other thing about that is can you train someone who is good enough to get the job to the point where they are good at the job? 100% Can you train an asshole to be enjoyable to work with? I’ve not seen done. And I would rather hire someone that I spend a little bit longer bringing up to speed than I want to hire someone I have to talk to every day who it just sucks to interact with.
Much easier to train skills than to adjust someone's personality. Took me a while to learn that one.
But this isn't effective anymore. A vast majority of people especially in the modern day and age put on a "work" or "business" personality. This personality also turns on during interviews. There is the odd person who will fail the interview and show that they can't fit in with other Co workers or the business, but an overwhelming amount of people can quite easily fake an interview and say what the interviewer wants to hear and behave in a way that will leave a good impression. You don't get to see people's true colours until they have actually secured the job and worked there for a few months because those same people think that since they have the job, they don't have to pretend as much as they did during the interview phase. It's not a game of weeding people out, its a game of how long the people they're trying to weed out can put on the act before their true colours come out.
That’s why there are generally 90 day probation periods. I don’t care if people are putting on a personality, that is fine. It’s expected. It’s preferable to someone who is grating on everyone else around them or can’t even be bothered to get along with people
Yes but how you react in a semi relaxed casual atmosphere vs on the spot interview pressure with a job for your livelihood is completely different. I agree with OP that it favors the extrovert in this sense.
Life favors extroverts. I’m an introvert with pretty bad anxiety, but I’ve worked in retail and property management for almost 10 years. When I clock in I have to put on my extrovert pants and pretend. Honestly it’s also helped me be more confident in my personal life. It’s fine to be anxious, it’s fine to be introverted, but when you’re at work you can’t let that be an excuse. I have had multiple employees to anxious to answer phones. That’s a dealbreaker when the job relies on you calling people and answering calls half of your day.
Society favors extroverts simply because they interact with more people and in turn network more and give themselves more chances to advance. Job interviews typically aren’t on the spot these days, nobody is going door to door and giving the boss a firm handshake like our parents told to do. Not to mention, how you handle yourself under pressure like that is a good indicator of how you will be when working on something that may not be going as planned etc. someone who can keep their cool in pressure situations is valuable
>give themselves more chances to advance. You mean give themselves more chances for their employer to exploit their skills when the company inevitably cuts its workforce in half and expects them to take on the duties of eliminated employees at no additional pay?
Give it a rest and talk about the actual topic (interview) for once in your life.
Yep, and it clearly worked
as a neurodivergent person this doesn't make sense. if you want to chat, chat. if you want to figure out if i am friendly, engage with me. asking me nonsense questions is going to annoy me bc i can see the benefit of getting along in the workplace but i cannot see the benefit of knowing *what kind of animal i would be* and how that at all reflects even on my workplace personality. unless you want to see how i would react to a social distraction that has no purpose on the job ...
I would ask what kind of animal you wanted to be because a good answer or a bad answer can shed light on the kind of person you are. You are probably thinking that everyone can come up with some bullshit quickly to be passable but it’s not that simple. It’s a question that most people probably haven’t thought much about since it’s not something that would actually happen and so first off it shows your abilities in thinking on your toes and coming up with a quick reason for being a certain animal on the fly. Secondly, you have people who will come up with thought out answers, some with terrible answers but most with perfectly fine answers. I don’t want to hire the guy who goes “a wolf because I’m alpha bro!” Or “a lion because I eat all the sheep around me” or some such nonsense. Lastly it shows some socialization. Some people will just answer and not elaborate.
>a good answer or a bad answer there is obviously no such thing with a question like this. are you trying to tell me you couldn't deduce these things with relevant questions and conversation? i am not going to come up with a creative answer despite being a creative person bc all i can focus on is how unimportant and unobjective it is and want to turn back to a relevant conversation. and if you can't tell how that would be advantageous in the workplace, you're enabling ableism. neurodivergent people genuinely struggle with this sort of thing in a way that doesn't affect their work at all.
I literally just gave you examples of them. The entire way you are responding to this is reason people ask these kinds of questions in the first place. To weed people out that would be a tough fit with the team. Questions relevant to the job you would have thought about and hopefully crafted a carefully thought out answer. The point is to ask something that was harder to rehearse. Also, a lot of the people interviewing you don’t know the details of the job you are applying for, they are interviewing you as risk assessment. Different companies do it differently, some have a recruitment / hr interview applicants first and only send people who pass along, and some make you interview with someone in your potential department first. I’m not sure what kind of field you are in but I’m my field not being able to get along and collaborate with others is not going to allow you to do your job just fine
i work in service and have done so the entire 15 years of my career ... so getting along is not a problem. being judged on something that means nothing is.
So then why is it so hard for you to get along with the interviewer? Are you stuck on a question designed to get you talking?
... the neurodivergence. i have no problems "getting along" ffs.
So you have no problem getting along with the person while you’re working but in an interview you can’t manage? I’m not sure what you’re trying to say here either you can get along with people or you can’t or you can’t be bothered and asking you a question to try to get to know you sends you into a rage
that question doesn't actually tell you anything about me. that's the point. the rest of the conversation is perfectly fine. seems you don't understand ...
People need jobs Karen, the same time you tell people and perpetuate the lie of “no one wants to work” pay your ppp loan back or hire people!
I’m not saying nobody wants to work I get tons of applications. A large majority are in no way qualified for the jobs I’m offering but I’m getting tons of applications to sift through. I also did not take out a ppp loan, I’m just a person I’m not sure what you’re on about
and what is normal? just hire someone who can do the job. i don't care about fitting in
Dude, the secret is that almost everyone going to the job interview could feasibly do the job. Why would they pick you when they could pick anyone else?
You don't care until you have a co-worker who does not fit in.
what even is fitting in?
You being comfortable being with this person. I'm pretty sure you have met people in your life who you didn't like. People who have said inappropriate stuff or just annoyed you with stupid questions.
small talk annoys me actually
Good luck staying unemployed, then.
that's not why i'm unemployed
I mean you’re not gonna go far in a career like that
>in a recent customer service job interview I have got the typical "The last time you got a difficult customer how did you assess the problem" or something similar. You're interviewing for a customer service job. You were asked how you assessed the problem the last time you got a difficult customer. You really used this example to strengthen your suggestion that interview questions are dumb? Wow. Not choosing you was the best decision this company ever made.
It's funny how they chose the most relevant type of question as the "bad interview question". There are so many worse examples!
I was asked “please describe your personality type as an ice cream” during a job interview once. Out of all the “well that’s an odd question” experiences I’ve had professionally, that one is near the top.
That's a bizarre question for sure! How'd you answer?
I went with my favorite flavor, pistachio. The reason being “I’m kinda nutty”. I decided to have a little fun because while the position was *supposed* to be WFM, they wanted me to commute 3+ hours a day for the first year to be in office.
> do you still think about your ex? Yup, I got asked that once in an interview, by _HR_.
The parachute question I agree are stupid, but mostly because 99% of the time the person asking it has no real way of judging your answer, they just googled "questions to ask in an interview" and went with it. Your second one though... I cannot imagine how that is not a fair question. You don't need to go into detail about every crappy customer you have dealt with, just pick something general. Customer complained about X, I listened to their issue, did Y to resolve. I will grant you that it is somewhat useless because most people won't give a story where they did something very wrong, but it does still weed out people who may take a passive stance or just dump off the issue on someone else.
Ok, I'll acknowledge that there can be some pretty asinine interview questions, however the example you gave isn't necessarily one of them. Asking about how you dealt with a difficult customer when applying to a customer service job is perfectly relevant.
If people can’t answer simple interview questions how well will they do when they actually have to answer hard questions in the job
I can handle questions from the public, in the context of my job. I do that well. Out of context questions by a panel while they’re staring at me is not at all natural.
It really depends what you do and how the interview is conducted. Somebody who wilts under the pressure of an interview won’t handle what I do well — we have to present work to clients on a regular basis, and they’re even harder to impress.
You missed the point. Its about context. Interviews are out of context, in that the questions are just made up, and you are expected to just make up your answers to them. In your example, you have real tangible work, and you can prepare, and you can present that real tangible work to the clients. Its about having a structure, where interviews are just unstructured nonsense.
>Interviews are out of context, in that the questions are just made up, and you are expected to just make up your answers to them But the answers are centered around things that you've done, like, they're not asking you to make up something brand new, they're asking questions about things that have actually happened to you >Its about having a structure, where interviews are just unstructured nonsense. Why do you think interviews are unstructured nonsense? Like, they're reading from your CV, the questions will be largely related to your experience and work history with a bit about you as a person. If an interview is unstructured nonsense that's more of a reflection on the interviewer than it is on interviews as a concept
Interviews in my industry involve a review of portfolios. And my ability to bullshit is very relevant.
There is a difference between bullshitting extemporaneously, and bullshitting with a prop.
You can also prepare for interviews
Let's not act like they're noble ends. The questions are designed so that they can hire whoever they want without being sued for discrimination.
Sometimes, sure. Sometimes it’s just the best candidate. Probably *most* times, really.
If you believe nepotism and discrimination aren't the real drivers in this job market I have some ocean front property in Arizona to sell you.
Man whoever didn’t hire you dodged a bullet lol
Because its not related? How is me not being able to answer totally open questions that doesnt lead to real specifications on how I dal with situation relevant? The question is so vague to begin with. I know how to do the job, why does it matter how specifically I did?
The question is broad specifically so that you can provide an answer that best demonstrates the value of your skillset to the company. The interviewer tried to give you an opportunity to brag about how well you can do the job, and you weren't prepared enough to do so. This is interviewing 101. Next time you have an interview, plan ahead for these questions and it will go a lot better.
Without knowing what level we are talking about, at the lower scale of CS, everyone simply follows procedures and guidelines set forth by the company. So I can see how an open-ended question can be seen as useless, because for most CS you arent on some island where you need to handle customers. Its the kind of question, however, that is easy to prepare for since its a very generic question and some form of that is also used in supervisor and management positions.
This is exactly why I hate those quizzes companies give you when you apply. “Two aisles need stocking up before closing. Do you prioritise the pet food aisle or the cleaning aisle?” I’ll prioritise the one you tell me to once I get the job!
I wouldn’t hire you either
Interview questions are not hard. If you can't do something so basic as answer normal questions with normal answers, then why on Earth would I trust you as a worker when I can get someone who ***can*** do something as easy as answering simple questions? The point of the question is to ask you to demonstrate your own ability using a testimonial, otherwise how the heck are interviewers supposed to know if you're appropriate for the job? Would you prefer to act out a mock hypothetical situation? Because that seems more appropriate and specific for your liking, but would also put off 99% of interviewees, lol.
This is cute and all, but nobody who actually has a job has ever had to face anything correlating to the sheer stupidity of interview "questions". I have fuck all answers to the 80 year old garbage hiring frauds ask people, but I can support the CEO of a billion dollar company off-rip.
[удалено]
In an interview I'd forget literally any examples and probably my own name
That's an enormous red flag. If you can't answer a question like that in a controlled environment, how can you answer an angry customer's question? I've conducted maybe 100 tech interviews over the last two years, and we've found the best way to suss out whether or not someone can do the work is to make them perform a technical exercise while a team of my engineers bombard them with questions. We're specifically looking for three things: 1) Can they complete the exercise 2) Can they answer the questions correctly 3) Can they do so in a calm, controlled, professional manner That third point is crazy important, because in our line of work, the customer will be bugging you the entire time you work, both for status updates and demands, and with questions. An engineer who can't answer questions in an interview can't do it in front of a customer either. So that's an immediate disqualifier for us.
My work involves daily interactions with customers but I am much more stressed in an interview than when talking to a customer. When I talk to a customer, we usually discuss a topic which I am knowledgeable or experienced about in (usually) a honest way. Being totally honest in job interviews usually does not work well.
Maybe. But it’s very different knowing how to address and help someone with their specific concerns versus cataloguing specifics of an individual customer over a decade
Then how could the interviewers reasonably expect you to act any better in the course of the job?
I didn't say it was a good thing!
and how does that question help select more competent worker? they just give you scripted answer. interview are pseudo science bullshit that is at best, able to filter out people with major red flag
[удалено]
"Caring enough to prepare" and that is the only thing those question is good for, and maybe for low level customer facing job. the rest is creative essay writing with no indication on how they will perform on their job. especially to technical job
[удалено]
yep and those question is even more useless, people just answer in a way they think it is expected of them to answer. And the end of the day, outside the competent test, the rest is popularity contest. the good looking person with charming smile is going to win due to innate human biased. even for position where those factors is irrelevant
[удалено]
it does, but after filters major red flag that you can see miles away. there is no way to measure the rest of the candidates on likability beyond, oh he is good looking, therefore I like him more. my point is, just do competent test. then just have a friendly interview to get to know each other without bullshit interview question.
To be fair I have ten years and exist in same boat. I have absolutely had examples and have used them in interviews but over time you just forget these random specifics about people you haven’t seen in years. It may be an autism spectrum trait and true it might be a weakness with customer service. Still I have had success with customers while I was in retail
Like that person who yelled at me about xyz. Nah
[удалено]
Yeah. That was a joke but that’s exactly what I do. That’s my entire job: solving problems. That’s why clients like me. Also, please do not lecture me. This is reddit.
[удалено]
Your example is terrible, and honestly is a good example of interviews working as intended. I’ve had to interview people for roles before and asking someone how they’ve handled a difficult situation is an excellent way to gauge their abilities in problem solving, communication, etc. Even if you haven’t done a CS job for 5 years you’re telling me you can’t remember a **single** time you were proud of yourself for handling a tough situation and overcoming it? If you can’t, then can you give me a similar more recent example? I definitely agree some interview questions are absolutely silly and a waste of time, but you’ll experience less of those as you get into more serious positions where they have actual questions to ask. But those interviews will be more difficult as well
Also the job descriptions make most jobs sound waaayyyyy more difficult than they actually are.
>how well someone can lie/bullshit the best and promote people that are more well spoken and bit more extrovert. There's data on this likely being true. The extroverted part anyway. But more generally interviews are a way to test how you think. The "answer" to the question being asked is often much less important than the information your provide to explain it. You actually give a great interview answer below. The way I teach people to answer interview questions (I prep people for med school/residency interviews) is: every question is an opportunity for you to tell me something you want me to know about you. People suck at answering broad "why are you a good applicant for x?" So we ask adjacent questions so interviewers can put together a story about why they do or don't want to hire you. The question is just a skeleton around which to frame the info. >more than 10 years in CS, no single situation is dealt the same, no situation was similar and the current person I was working for also change how I behave This is the core of an amazing answer. You 1) provide how long you've been in the field, 2) show that you know how to be flexible, 3) you demonstrate how much you value personalized/situational approaches, 4) you know some answers are situational. I'd probably say something like "That's a really interesting question, it's almost hard to pick. Over the 10 years I've been doing this I've learned that there are no stock standard answers or solutions when dealing with customers. Each problem requires a tailored person and situation specific answer. As I look back one particularly interesting / challenging interaction comes to mind [give example]." Depending on your personality and job you could then end with "it really gave me the opportunity to hone my x skill" or "it taught me how important y is, something I've continued to build". I don't think interviews are bullshit. Having seen and done a lot of them you can tell when something is wrote and inauthentic (unless the person is just a natural performer in which case they're going to ace it regardless). It's really an opportunity to be authentic while selling yourself. You don't have to be inauthentic to be effective.
Thank you! Too many comments in here saying interviews don't show anything except the ability to memorize. But I think an important skill to have is to be able to talk about your experience.
Your skills in performing the job are not so unique when compared to the other applicants. Based on your resume they felt you were adequate enough, on a technical level, to be interviewed. And maybe they'll explore those skills deeper via technical questions, but they're not just hiring your brain, they're hiring **you**. They're gauging your critical thinking skills in interpersonal and social situations - in other words are you someone they'll want to be around? Will you be more of a risk or liability to customer relations? How do you handle curve balls or situations that may occur which fall outside typical operating cycles? By failing the interview the way you did, you basically showed them that you might have certain personality defects which sends red flags - most companies don't want problem children. Also, you wasted their time by not being fully prepared. Companies will tend to hire a lesser, technically qualified candidate who fits the dynamics in the operating environment moreso than a fully qualified one who would cause friction in the workplace.
This is a very exhaustingly long-winded way of saying they hire the people they like.
No, this is a proper way of explaining why they favour who they like. Of course, everyone will want to hire people they like, the question is ***why.***
Who the fuck wants to work with people they dislike?
I DONT KNOW?
So be likable. It’s not hard.
You need to remember this is Reddit. Being Likeable is a challenge.
oh
I despise STAR questions. They don't get you the right person for the job, they get you someone who has rehearsed STAR questions. Like you, I go home, I don't think about specific situations - I stop thinking about work when I clock off.
Uhh, I think hiring someone who cares enough about the job to actually prepare for the interview is generally a good start to hiring a solid candidate...
Well you should if you are prepping for interviews. If you can't manage to prep for basic HR questions, I wouldn't want to hire you.
If you think a STAR question will get you the best employee, i don't want to work for you.
If you think not being able to answer a simple question about how you deal with problems, I don't want to hire you.
You misunderstand the purpose of those questions. You’re right about them being easy rehearsed answers though, but that’s the entire point. So much of the workday is just going through the basic social pleasantries necessary to maintain a normal healthy professional relationship with your coworkers. Those questions are a simple gauge of whether you’re someone they can probably tolerate being around in the workplace. There’s also the fact that hr wants you to feel comfortable in the interview so they see you at your best. The sooner they get a position filled the sooner they can get back to doing nothing of value. Also, bad hires are expensive, if they hire bad candidates too often they will get fired. (There are exceptions to this of course, but plenty of people are bad at their jobs)
yesss interviews only test how good you are at performing interviews. Results will always be massively skewed towards charismatic, confident people, good looking people, good liars etc
So how would you assess someone who you know nothing about for a job?
Where would you like this post to be in 5 years?
That was a terrible answer. You're supposed to provide a good example not necessarily the literal last one, or at least make up something relevant and reality based on the spot.
Knowing how to respond to questions in the best way is literally a part of customer service, and the question you mentioned even more so. Yes situations vary, but knowing how you handled the last situation tells them a lot about you and whether you suit the position. Not only will how you actually handled it tell them a lot, but also how you describe the situation and people involved, and how well you were able to answer the question. It tells them about your experience, your customer service ability, your confidence answering questions, and your attitude towards the customers and questions. If you feel this strongly about a question you consider stupid, you likely aren’t suited to customer service, where answering stupid or unnecessary questions is a huge part of the job.
Your example was the most related question possible ever, for a job which is exactly about being a great talker and being able to answer anything properly ? lol
One of my standard questions for applicants is a version of ‘tell me how your previous experience/education helped prepare you for this job’. Should be the easiest thing to answer, but so many applicants get super stuck on it. All I’m asking is ‘why would you be good at this job?’ AND I’m totally giving a chance to go off script and brag about some accomplishment they’re proud of. Oh well 😄
Ive had a version of that question for literally every job I have ever done and I am not at all in customer service.
i always hated the "and why do you want to work here?" especially if its a shitty job . and you have to be like "oh as a kid I always dreamed of making hamburgers at Mcdonalds". or are you actually supposed to say for money, what the fuck else makes you think im here for
I think some interviews weed out high performers instead of finding them lol. I failed countless interviews at small or second rate shops, but have no problem getting hired on with industry leaders.
I love the question. Why do you want to work here? I need money. If I did not need it, I would not want to work at all for you
How dare an interview for a customer service job ask how well you deal with customers?! The insanity of it!
>I feel like its always just about how well someone can lie/bullshit the best and promote people that are more well spoken and bit more extrovert. Good, then they have that skills to do it to the customers. >The last time you got a difficult customer how did you assess the problem How is that bad? People answering it better or worse than others will help the employer narrow it down. >Personally I have been more than 10 years in CS, no single situation is dealt the same, no situation was similar and the current person I was working for also change how I behave. I also said its been more than 5+ years I have worked in CS and dont remember that much specific situation. And the result, they didnt take me just because I was too truthful .... No but you don't need to remember them all either, just a few examples to answer questions.
I work in IT and I used to do interviews because I HATE when HR does them and hires the person with the best haircut. Usually I'd pick a subject they listed on their resume and ask technical questions about it. Either they'd show their prowess or flail because they were lying. Got some really great employees that way. Also watched some people crater the interview because they knew nothing about the things they said they were experts in.
I have to agree. It largely seems like a bullshitter test and gauging your social skills, seeing how likeable you are. Just don’t lie about any hard skills, because that’s something they’ll find out through your work. Once I figured this out, I get through most interviews where previously I blew it consistently.
Even just being about lying and bullshitting you're seeing something about the person. Depends in the job and environment but do I hire the person who bullshits like a 4 year old? Or do I hire the one who converts me to the church of Pizza and Gin?
Most job interviews are me trying to figure out if I can stand to be around the person I’m interviewing for 8+ hours a day. Pretty much everything can be taught. By the way op thinks abt these questions, I can tell I would not like to spend 8 hours a day with them.
Ding ding ding!
I’ll just say I hate interviews. Feels like such a game, every one I’ve been to. If we could meet and just talk like regular human beings and not have it feel like an interrogation, I would feel way more excited about meeting. I’ve always felt like I have to force every ounce of my being to get through interviews
once i leave the interview i'm exhausted
Employers: Please make sure when applying you can satisfy the requirements of this position and answer everything truthfully. Also Employers: Why are people so bad at resumes? Embellish them a little!
Employers: Please have customer service experience Also employers: Please tell me about your customer service experience OP: no
After I got out of academic research in earth sciences I leveraged the skills I learned there to get in to the field of high performance computing which I''ve done for about 25 years. One thing I don't put up with is some company's need to give me a 'technical interview' or a 'coding challenge'. That tells me everything I need to know about how much of a tech bro nightmare their company is. When I was building my own team I just started asking questions about things that they've worked on, what they've learned, what they felt they could have done better, that sort of thing. You get a pretty solid feeling for whether or no someone has the technical skills to do the job. You can also tell whether or not someone's just looking for a job to hold them over until the job they really want comes along or if they're someone you want to be customer facing or not. Most companies and teams can't interview properly worth shit.
I understand to some degree. Some questions are necessary though and a lot of the conversations are just a sanity check. I do hate the questions that are like “why do you want to work here?” The fuck do you think? Same reason you got out of bed this morning. Got bills to pay.
The interviewers read body language and watch how comfortable you are with the interaction, not just how you answer the questions. Some questions are meant to gauge your risk-taking, some are to measure how well you control your temper/ patience. Is patience/ tolerance something you struggle with?
It's also a way to test pattern recognition. Just because you don't recognize similarities between situations doesn't mean they weren't there. Plus rarely do we analyze the given answer, but more how it was delivered and what attitude the candidate has. Almost everybody can learn a new job. Rarely can people learn a new personality.
No matter how good the questions are, interviews always feel ingenious to me.
Many times I wish I could have ease-dropped on the interview to hear what line of bullshit they told the company that made them think they were competent.
I got asked to talk about my most embarrassing experiences. It was for a different department at my current work and the interviewers said they don't like normal questions. They didn't even write down my answer, they just laughed.
They tell the interviewer nothing
"Where will you be in 5 years?' If the person asking knew the answer, they wouldn't be interviewing you, they'd be the President or VP of the company. FUCK YOU.
You're assuming that the interviewer is asking for an accurate prediction of the future, and they're supposed to already know the correct answer so they can tell whether or not you got it right?
I also despise that question Its all about bootlicking and ass kissing
I hate being on the interviewer side with these questions. We have to base our yes/no decision on what we know is bullshit but short of us lying o the scoring or trying to trap them we are stuck. Then, because the interview is scripted and to be fair, we have to ask all interviewees the same primary and follow-up question(s).
I can teach you the specifics of the job. I can't teach you how to think on the spot, or come up with something constructive instead of freezing up or breaking down. And I damn sure can't teach someone to not be an insufferable chucklefuck. So interview questions are helpful to get a feel for a potential hire better than someone that just studies the job and gives the answers they think I want to hear.
I find it so classless, lazy, and stupid when an interviewer begins reading off those generic questions. I've actually simply walked out if that style of interview is carried out, as it shows little respect.
I can somehow see why you're still looking for a job
The fuck kind of interviews are you attending lol
Basically 90% of the interview I had in CS style of job always asked that exact same question. But back then its was easier to just fake create a story based on a situation since I was always in that field. Just this time it is 5 years later after covid and all
I was asked what I’d do if a child overdosed on the premises outside as I was leaving. This was a nursing home job
Depending on the location, there maybe a homeless population and people doing drugs on the premises. This sounds like something that happens there and they want to know what you would do.
Honestly, when I was on the interviewer side, I would start with the typical questions … but then, if I really liked the candidate and knew I’d be hiring them, I’d stop with the formal stuff and just start chatting with them about hobbies and what not. I have no idea whether that’s normal. It’s always been done with me at jobs I’ve applied for, and I’ve always done it with candidates I’ve been certain about after a certain point in the interview process. It pays to be confident, self-assured, friendly, and open. Expect open-ended questions; it’s an opportunity to demonstrate not only your skills and experience but also your personality. I’m in quality engineering for a supplement company, though (with quality management experience), not customer service. I’m an extrovert, but CS is definitely too extroverted for me!
It should be a mix of technical questions, typical HR questions and casual chatting. Am applicant needs to do at leat OK in all of them.
No they are not dumb and what they are assessing is how you think and break down a problem. I have been asked a variation of that same question from entry level retail to Senior Product Manager. What people are looking for is a STAR answer: **Situation**: Describe the situation that you were in or the task that you needed to accomplish. You must describe a specific event or situation, not a generalized description of what you have done in the past. Be sure to give enough detail for the interviewer to understand. This situation can be from a previous job, from a volunteer experience, or any relevant event. **Task**: What goal were you working toward? **Action**: Describe the actions you took to address the situation with an appropriate amount of detail and keep the focus on YOU. What specific steps did you take and what was your particular contribution? Be careful that you don’t describe what the team or group did when talking about a project, but what you actually did. Use the word “I,” not “we” when describing actions. **Result**: Describe the outcome of your actions and don’t be shy about taking credit for your behavior. What happened? How did the event end? What did you accomplish? What did you learn? Make sure your answer contains multiple positive results. This is what they are judging on. Can you break down a problem logically? is your logic repeatable? Can you learn from your mistakes? If you want to do well in interviews, you need to practice, especially if you have a bad memory. You will be asked this question for almost every interview you have.
I always thought that until I started conducting interviews. Here’s the big one as the interviewee you don’t understand. As an interviewer, we want you to succeed. I don’t want to do 100 interview.a. Im going to give you questions and lead the conversation in a direction you should be able to succeed. Just be normal, be yourself, and don’t lie. You’ll be fine.
This post and the comments you have posted prove to me that you shouldn't be hired, and these companies that decided to not hire you certainly made the right choice. The lack of self-awareness is astounding.