How do interviewers know if an applicant is a good teamplayer or not?

[donaldtang]

---

Members don't see this ad.

I have been to a number of programs for interview, and all of them told me that they are seeking people that work well in a team. But how can they tell if a person is a good team player or not based on interview and application materials?
It is the same for applicants too, as I find it difficult to know whether the people in a program are supportive or not based on interview. Because I don't get the opportunity to work with them during interview day.

 

[Law2Doc]

I have been to a number of programs for interview, and all of them told me that they are seeking people that work well in a team. But how can they tell if a person is a good team player or not based on interview and application materials?
It is the same for applicants too, as I find it difficult to know whether the people in a program are supportive or not based on interview. Because I don't get the opportunity to work with them during interview day.

This teamwork info usually comes from your evaluations from your core rotations, your LORs and their exposure to you on away rotations.

As for whether a program is supportive, you have to get your info outside of the interview day. talk to med school alumni who trained there, befriend the residents and ask them questions, etc. The interview day is a show, so you only see the program the way they want to present it. Enjoy the how, but do your homework in other ways.

 

[mlw03]

I have been to a number of programs for interview, and all of them told me that they are seeking people that work well in a team. But how can they tell if a person is a good team player or not based on interview and application materials?
It is the same for applicants too, as I find it difficult to know whether the people in a program are supportive or not based on interview. Because I don't get the opportunity to work with them during interview day.

I think this is a good question, so let's try to get this back moving. I personally think it's darn near impossible. That's why there are plenty of residents who are not good team players. Because you just can't get that info beforehand. Everyone's LoRs are going to be solid for the most part, so that won't help. Probably the only true way to do it was, as was suggested, an away rotation. I didn't do this for residency, but for fellowship I very much wanted to end up in a particular place, so I did the away. That becomes a two way street, and on both sides you take the devil you know over the devil you don't if you have a good experience on the away rotation (from both sides).

 

[Socrates25]

This is a great question. As a chief resident I am actively involved in our residency's interviewing process. I can tell you straight up there's no question you can ask in an interview that will prove that somebody is a team player or a hard worker.

Furthermore, most letters of rec dont address these issues. I hate to say it, but 90% of letters are the same canned responses about being "interested, engaged, good patient advocate, etc." Almost none of them comment on work ethic, team player abilities, etc because attendings dont usually see those qualities, the residents do.

The bottom line is that the residents on the team often know more about a med student's work ethic and team player abilities than the attendings do; yet we have this stupid default "rule" established that a letter of rec from a resident is worthless.

The best way to know if an applicant is a hard worker/team player is to get a look at the evals submitted about them by RESIDENTS, not faculty. But we dont have access to those records, so we have to settle for half-ass letters of rec which arent very helpful anyways.

 

[Socrates25]

This teamwork info usually comes from your evaluations from your core rotations, your LORs and their exposure to you on away rotations.

The residency program only has access to a very small percentage of evals from core rotations that are packaged into a dean's letter format. What we really need is ALL the evaluations from all the core rotations -- but we dont get that info so we have no real way to evaluate those aspects of the applicant.

 

[mlw03]

So wouldn't a decedent solution be to have residents and/or fellows the student really works with write the LoR, then have the attending co-sign it? Kinda like saying, "i trust this resident's judgment and back his/her word with my own". Residents may not love the idea of the added work of doing these LoRs, but for the system as a whole it's a great thing and would in theory be worth it if it let to higher quality residents in their own program.

This is a great question. As a chief resident I am actively involved in our residency's interviewing process. I can tell you straight up there's no question you can ask in an interview that will prove that somebody is a team player or a hard worker.

Furthermore, most letters of rec dont address these issues. I hate to say it, but 90% of letters are the same canned responses about being "interested, engaged, good patient advocate, etc." Almost none of them comment on work ethic, team player abilities, etc because attendings dont usually see those qualities, the residents do.

The bottom line is that the residents on the team often know more about a med student's work ethic and team player abilities than the attendings do; yet we have this stupid default "rule" established that a letter of rec from a resident is worthless.

The best way to know if an applicant is a hard worker/team player is to get a look at the evals submitted about them by RESIDENTS, not faculty. But we dont have access to those records, so we have to settle for half-ass letters of rec which arent very helpful anyways.

 

[Sol Rosenberg]

So wouldn't a decedent solution be to have residents and/or fellows the student really works with write the LoR, then have the attending co-sign it? Kinda like saying, "i trust this resident's judgment and back his/her word with my own". Residents may not love the idea of the added work of doing these LoRs, but for the system as a whole it's a great thing and would in theory be worth it if it let to higher quality residents in their own program.

This is essentially what happens for the Chariman's letter from the department at my school. Everyone wants and asks for a letter from the Chariman, but because of the nature of his job he spends very little time with students (though he makes sure that he does spend some, and his own experiences do go into the letter.) The remainder of the letter is a summary of the student's performance/comments from residents and attendings. All-in-all, it was a very nice letter (he showed it to me,) and I doubt it was like most other letters. It was almost 2 pages long, for one thing, and packed with specifics for another.....

So that sort of thing does happen.

 

[mlw03]

That's good to know. So in that case, my question is why it doesn't happen more often?

This is essentially what happens for the Chariman's letter from the department at my school. Everyone wants and asks for a letter from the Chariman, but because of the nature of his job he spends very little time with students (though he makes sure that he does spend some, and his own experiences do go into the letter.) The remainder of the letter is a summary of the student's performance/comments from residents and attendings. All-in-all, it was a very nice letter (he showed it to me,) and I doubt it was like most other letters. It was almost 2 pages long, for one thing, and packed with specifics for another.....

So that sort of thing does happen.

 

[gutonc]

That's good to know. So in that case, my question is why it doesn't happen more often?

Because not every program requires a Chair's letter, not every dept chair writes a Chair's letter, and even when they do, they may not be as extensive as this just due to time constraints.

It's one thing when you're the chair of a dept. like Path or Rad Onc where you may have 5-10 applicants in your school's class each year. Getting such a letter for each applicant would be relatively easy. It's also more likely that you as the chair will have had personal experience with each applicant.

For larger specialties (IM, Peds, Gen Surg), it's a much different scenario. My med school class had ~75 IM applicants (out of 225 grads). If the chair wrote extensive personalized letters for every applicant in that setting, s/he would basically spend the entirety of July and August doing nothing but that, which is clearly not going to happen. My school's chair did write such letters but they were pretty short and relied on your CV and other LORs that they asked your writers to send to him for review. We had a brief, 10 minute chat too. But no 2 page epics for sure.

 

[jcu]

Only the sorting hat is capable of making that distinction. Was that not part of your interview?

 

[Deferoxamine]

Is "Candidate X" a Team Player?

You know those trays of donuts they hand out to all you applicants at the start of Morning Report? Well, most programs will videotape the rooms as this happens.

If you pass the tray to the person next to you and don't take a donut, you're a selfless team player and they'll rank you highly.

If you take a donut off the tray, you're a selfish SOB and they won't rank you.

It's that simple.