How do you control the pace of an interview?

[mohad]

---

Members do not see this ad.

I had an interview a few weeks ago, and it was kind of awkward. Mainly, it consisted of my interviewer reading questions out of a booklet and me answering them. I tried to take him off topic, but he just smiled and nodded when I was talking and then went back to the book of questions. I was wondering if there were any tips to control the direction of the interview because I just felt a bit overwhelmed when he looked at a book, asked a question, listened, and then repeated the process. I was a bit pleased to hear him say "I hope you get accepted here" at the end of the interview, but I know it was just his job to say something to that effect.

I have a decent amount more coming up, and I'm hoping to make it much more casual/conversational instead of just a question and answer session.

 

[Frazier]

If your interviewer has a set of predetermined questions that he hopes to have answered (even if read out of some booklet), you "taking control of the pace of the interview" and "trying to take him off-topic" would be a mistake on your part...

If they give you the reins, then obviously you can go your own route/pace. However, your description above doesn't seem to indicate that being the case.

 

[IncognitoGuy]

If your interviewer has a set of predetermined questions that he hopes to have answered (even if read out of some booklet), you "taking control of the pace of the interview" and "trying to take him off-topic" would be a mistake on your part...

If they give you the reins, then obviously you can go your own route/pace. However, your description above doesn't seem to indicate that being the case.

Well-said. Not all interviews are made equal - some schools might want to "standardize" it a bit more by forcibly guiding the interviewer through a set of questions and work with that, while others are more laid-back and conversational. The interview feedback portion of SDN should help you get some idea of how the school operates - that is, if it typically does the more controlled setting or conversational, as well as the types of questions you'll encounter.

 

[UrshumMurshum]

I was wondering if a fast pace is a good thing for interviews. In one of my interviews I got into the conversation so much that I started replicating the wallstreet/Jim Cramer type talking.

On the one hand it shows you're motivated, have energy, and are interested, but on the other it can be difficult to follow and listen to everything you're saying.

 

[ShenanigansMD]

I wish interviews were just conversational. I have no idea how asking, "If you had a time machine, what three historical figures would you go back in time to meet?" determines your candidacy for medical school.

 

[Nandrolone]

I was wondering if a fast pace is a good thing for interviews. In one of my interviews I got into the conversation so much that I started replicating the wallstreet/Jim Cramer type talking.

On the one hand it shows you're motivated, have energy, and are interested, but on the other it can be difficult to follow and listen to everything you're saying.

imo, just answering the question directly, to the point and without small talk is much better because there is less room for error or saying something the interviewer doesn't like.

 

[IncognitoGuy]

I was wondering if a fast pace is a good thing for interviews. In one of my interviews I got into the conversation so much that I started replicating the wallstreet/Jim Cramer type talking.

On the one hand it shows you're motivated, have energy, and are interested, but on the other it can be difficult to follow and listen to everything you're saying.

If you're taking it somewhere specific, have some end-point or goal to reach, then you can really show your enthusiasm through this. But to do this, you'll need to practice quickly organizing your thoughts and have outlines of yourself in your mind that you can draw on to help you compartmentalize anecdotes, descriptions and the like. From my practice interviews, mapping out beforehand much of what I've done has been important in seeing how much my experiences can add and how I can emphasize certain points. And as you mentioned, there is the pitfall of rambling. So breathe. It's something that one can forget to consciously do, especially under pressure in an interview and as you keep talking, you're just digging yourself into a hole. Breathe. Relax.

If it's something personal, then adding emotion to it is a good way to show a genuine nature, but don't overdo it for the sake of simply mixing it up. In the end, be yourself and you'll be truer to yourself than any carbon-copy, memorized answers ever will be.

 

[Ismet]

Your interviews will vary between what you experienced--the straightforward question/answer style--and a more conversational style where the interviewer may have specific points to get to, but you get to them through conversation. I found the latter to be much easier. It's easier to talk with someone as if you're chatting (professionally) with them instead of being grilled with question after question.

Don't worry too much about your performance in your interview. That's exactly how my first interview went, I thought it went horribly because the interviewer seemed really uninterested, but I got accepted a few weeks afterwards. Don't try to make those interviews more conversational, because that's most likely the style of the interviewer or school, it's not something wrong with you.

Good luck on your upcoming interviews!

 

[Kaustikos]

If your interviewer has a set of predetermined questions that he hopes to have answered (even if read out of some booklet), you "taking control of the pace of the interview" and "trying to take him off-topic" would be a mistake on your part...

If they give you the reins, then obviously you can go your own route/pace. However, your description above doesn't seem to indicate that being the case.

Uh, no, wrong. You may not be familiar with interviews, but they're essentially the same thing as a conversation with a person/dating/patient interviews. You can direct the interview or meander a bit. If someone asks you a question, you can answer it directly while still carrying a conversation about it. It's all about practice and getting to know the questions. By the time you're getting ready for your interview, you shouldn't be practicing how to just answer the question, but also learning how to make this an actual interaction with the person. When someone asks you a question about anything, you have to learn that the ball is in your court. You can choose to hit it back to him directly or change the angle of the shot. Some of the interviewers may be pressed for time, but it doesn't mean you should force yourself to be robotic. In all actuality, I've learned to ask questions back to the person. Those tend to be the best, imo, because you're not making the conversation one-sided, but including the individual.

I've been there/done that and I made it fun. I've done med school/graduate school interviews, and I've seldom relied on one-worded answers.

Example -
Do you feel X will severely impact healthcare?

I answered the question, but then jokingly chimed in "And that's what I feel. But, ya know, I'm always curious to know what someone with experience in this field has to say about it. What do you think?"

That way, I've answered my question and it's not like I'm trying to get answers. I'm just curious about what the individual has to say.

In the end, not every question has to be one-sided. There are some questions where you literally SHOULD ask the question back. Don't be obvious and reask every question.

"What do you do for fun?"

Come on. Ask them that question! They're physicians/etc. Don't you wanna know what they have to say? Even if they sarcastically answer the question, you're definitely getting an idea of who the interviewer is! Sarcastic? I can work with that. Cheerful and optimistic? Even better.

I've only had one "bad" interview and it was when I couldn't dig back far enough in my research to talk about a marker I used for an assay I did for two weeks. I didn't even put that I did this project on my application, but just told them that at the interview. The guy grilled me for 20 minutes. But at the end, he complimented me on not giving up and actually trying. I walk out and close the door...and remember the marker.

 

[Praefectus]

I had an interview a few weeks ago, and it was kind of awkward. Mainly, it consisted of my interviewer reading questions out of a booklet and me answering them. I tried to take him off topic, but he just smiled and nodded when I was talking and then went back to the book of questions. I was wondering if there were any tips to control the direction of the interview because I just felt a bit overwhelmed when he looked at a book, asked a question, listened, and then repeated the process. I was a bit pleased to hear him say "I hope you get accepted here" at the end of the interview, but I know it was just his job to say something to that effect.

I have a decent amount more coming up, and I'm hoping to make it much more casual/conversational instead of just a question and answer session.

What? People do that?

 

[TheShaker]

Maybe the interviewer was inexperienced and just as nervous as you were.

 

[mohad]

"Uh, no, wrong."?... Re-read the OP and my response if you need to. I didn't tell the OP to be a robot with automated answers. Asking an occasional question back to the interviewer isn't what I would call "controlling the pace of an interview". Well, maybe a false sense of "control"... as the interviewee, OP could be cut off on a whim or the interview ended before answering the questions desired (i.e. time simply runs out).

That said, why would OP actively strive to "take an interview off-topic"?

Your example of asking the interviewer "well, what do you think about the issue we are discussing?" is not going off-topic, IMO.

Interviewer: So, OP, tell me about how teams function in medicine and your experiences in the ED with teamwork.
Interviewee: I do great on teams... However, did I mention earlier that my 7th-author manuscript on fruit fly mating habits was accepted for publication 3 weeks ago? Furthermore, I am currently working on an independent project which I will present myself at a regional conference.
Interviewer: *Smiles* mmm-hmm

^^^ off-topic

Don't give bad advice by, in this case, trying to negate mine.

All that said, OP, again you can take the reins and take control if they are given to you... If they aren't -- well, there is a reason for that.

What I meant by off topic was saying something relevant to the answer but giving him bait to bite on for conversations sake. I mentioned traveling and he nodded his head and smiled, and when I asked him about pictures in his room where he was on the beach and whatnot, he just talked about them for barely a minute and went back to his booklet. I thought it was an appropriate little side conversation, but he just said a quick blurb and went on. He didn't come off as a mean person, but he just smiled and nodded a lot when I talked and was a person of a few words. maybe that was just his personality or something. I just couldnt get a read on him.

 

[mfm90]

What I meant by off topic was saying something relevant to the answer but giving him bait to bite on for conversations sake. I mentioned traveling and he nodded his head and smiled, and when I asked him about pictures in his room where he was on the beach and whatnot, he just talked about them for barely a minute and went back to his booklet. I thought it was an appropriate little side conversation, but he just said a quick blurb and went on. He didn't come off as a mean person, but he just smiled and nodded a lot when I talked and was a person of a few words. maybe that was just his personality or something. I just couldnt get a read on him.

It's an interview... Dont force a conversation by asking the interviewer a question. Conversation should come naturally. If it's a list of questions and he doesn't seem interested / doesn't have any follow up conversation just let him move on to the next question. I'm guessing the interviewer was probably just an awkward guy.

 

[mfm90]

Uh, no, wrong. You may not be familiar with interviews, but they're essentially the same thing as a conversation with a person/dating/patient interviews. You can direct the interview or meander a bit. If someone asks you a question, you can answer it directly while still carrying a conversation about it. It's all about practice and getting to know the questions. By the time you're getting ready for your interview, you shouldn't be practicing how to just answer the question, but also learning how to make this an actual interaction with the person. When someone asks you a question about anything, you have to learn that the ball is in your court. You can choose to hit it back to him directly or change the angle of the shot. Some of the interviewers may be pressed for time, but it doesn't mean you should force yourself to be robotic. In all actuality, I've learned to ask questions back to the person. Those tend to be the best, imo, because you're not making the conversation one-sided, but including the individual.

I've been there/done that and I made it fun. I've done med school/graduate school interviews, and I've seldom relied on one-worded answers.

Example -
Do you feel X will severely impact healthcare?

I answered the question, but then jokingly chimed in "And that's what I feel. But, ya know, I'm always curious to know what someone with experience in this field has to say about it. What do you think?"

That way, I've answered my question and it's not like I'm trying to get answers. I'm just curious about what the individual has to say.

In the end, not every question has to be one-sided. There are some questions where you literally SHOULD ask the question back. Don't be obvious and reask every question.

"What do you do for fun?"

Come on. Ask them that question! They're physicians/etc. Don't you wanna know what they have to say? Even if they sarcastically answer the question, you're definitely getting an idea of who the interviewer is! Sarcastic? I can work with that. Cheerful and optimistic? Even better.

I've only had one "bad" interview and it was when I couldn't dig back far enough in my research to talk about a marker I used for an assay I did for two weeks. I didn't even put that I did this project on my application, but just told them that at the interview. The guy grilled me for 20 minutes. But at the end, he complimented me on not giving up and actually trying. I walk out and close the door...and remember the marker.

and this is bad advice.. don't be this guy.

 

[Law2Doc]

imo, just answering the question directly, to the point and without small talk is much better because there is less room for error or saying something the interviewer doesn't like.

Absolutely not. This isn't a cross examination where they are actually looking for an answer and you can hurt yourself by saying something else. In most cases they don't even care what your answers are, just that you are well thought out and able to schmooze. It's the small talk that really matters. The goal is to have a conversation, let the interviewer get to know you and hopefully have him leave feeling like you'd be a good person to work with.

 

[Law2Doc]

It's an interview... Dont force a conversation by asking the interviewer a question. Conversation should come naturally. If it's a list of questions and he doesn't seem interested / doesn't have any follow up conversation just let him move on to the next question. I'm guessing the interviewer was probably just an awkward guy.

Disagree. Yes the interviewer was clearly unskilled and going through the questions he thinks he should be asking. But it would be foolish not to at least attempt to hit on a topic he is interested in and get him off the script. Somebody will accomplish this and the interviewer will remember that interview as a good one, compared to the other dozen that just answered his questions. In the end nobody cares about the answers to those questions. They care about the gestalt feeling of how you conducted yourself and how well you sold yourself, and whether you seemed like someone they would find interesting to work with.

 

[Law2Doc]

and this is bad advice.. don't be this guy.

I wouldn't ask an interviewer what "they did for fun", but the rest actually was quite reasonable advice. The interviewers prefer you to be "this guy" over the one that just politely answers questions and doesn't steer the conversation if given the chance.

 

[1289]

had an experience similar to this a couple weeks ago OP. it was a blind interview and i had my topics for the "telll me about yourself" all figured out beforehand, and the interviewer never said this, instead started right off the bat asking me ethical/random questions. i'm just putting my faith in the fact that this person has been an interviewer for many years and probably does all of them like this (i hope)

 

[Kaustikos]

"Uh, no, wrong."?... Re-read the OP and my response if you need to. I didn't tell the OP to be a robot with automated answers. Asking an occasional question back to the interviewer isn't what I would call "controlling the pace of an interview". Well, maybe a false sense of "control"... as the interviewee, OP could be cut off on a whim or the interview ended before answering the questions desired (i.e. time simply runs out).

That said, why would OP actively strive to "take an interview off-topic"?

Your example of asking the interviewer "well, what do you think about the issue we are discussing?" is not going off-topic, IMO.

Interviewer: So, OP, tell me about how teams function in medicine and your experiences in the ED with teamwork.
Interviewee: I do great on teams... However, did I mention earlier that my 7th-author manuscript on fruit fly mating habits was accepted for publication 3 weeks ago? Furthermore, I am currently working on an independent project which I will present myself at a regional conference.
Interviewer: *Smiles* mmm-hmm

^^^ off-topic

Don't give bad advice by, in this case, trying to negate mine.

All that said, OP, again you can take the reins and take control if they are given to you... If they aren't -- well, there is a reason for that.

You're absolutely right, don't try to even steer the conversation. I'm a horrible person at interviews and haven't been given high remarks for how well I talk with people. Better yet, I haven't used that same approach during my patient interviews during medical school because it doesn't help earn me a great review/grade.

I disagree with what you're saying because I've done exactly what I said and so have several of my friends in class. I could easily try to bring more examples of how to control the pace or even steer the conversation into a friendly/better atmosphere, but it seems like a lot of people have this stress-induced paranoia that if you're not robotic, you won't get in. This goes with my entire theory about how a lot of pre-meds should have a mandatory semester/year of working in an environment of sales. You learn how to talk to people and realize quickly the errors/mistakes people make when talking. The interview is a conversation. It requires two people. How many interviews have you actually had? How many outside of school? Don't give advice when you're not the one with the experience.

What I meant by off topic was saying something relevant to the answer but giving him bait to bite on for conversations sake. I mentioned traveling and he nodded his head and smiled, and when I asked him about pictures in his room where he was on the beach and whatnot, he just talked about them for barely a minute and went back to his booklet. I thought it was an appropriate little side conversation, but he just said a quick blurb and went on. He didn't come off as a mean person, but he just smiled and nodded a lot when I talked and was a person of a few words. maybe that was just his personality or something. I just couldnt get a read on him.

You did the right thing. More experience with those kinds of dilemmas/talking to people helps a lot. In the end, you did no harm asking about that. You could've made a side-story about your vacations or places you've been to, as well.

and this is bad advice.. don't be this guy.

🙄
The guy who's had a successful career track outside of school landing multiple jobs at great pharmaceutical companies/graduate research? The person who's never had a bad patient interview? The person who's been there/done that and can show you a physical example of how well I do on my interviews? Tell you what, why don't you tell me about how much fun you and the interviewer have had in conversations? My interviews come off ending great and I ask questions back to them. If you sit down and can't gauge the type of person the interviewer is in less than 5 minutes, then you haven't learned a thing about how to interview/talk to people. EVERYONE wants to say something/has something to say. You just have to learn how to get that from them. Is that bad advice? No, it's how you're going to be getting information from patients. If you don't learn this now, good luck handling patients.

I wouldn't ask an interviewer what "they did for fun", but the rest actually was quite reasonable advice. The interviewers prefer you to be "this guy" over the one that just politely answers questions and doesn't steer the conversation if given the chance.

Thank you!

 

[MedPR]

Also be thankful for interviews that seem like the interviewer has a pre-determined (by the school or other adcom members) list of questions. In my limited experience (e.g 1 interview) they don't ask follow up questions or "test" you on things. Very straight forward stuff that they want to ask every interviewee so they have a more-or-less standardized interview experience.

 

[Kaustikos]

Wow, that is really an amazing story, Ron Popeil. Next time I am visiting Indiana I will be sure to sign up for your "sales" course.

Really, did you even read what I wrote? Namely being in regards to "off topic"? Maybe you just didn't understand? No, nevermind, I don't care.

For POSTERITY, as I said originally, don't be a robot during interviews; feel free to have a conversation. DO STEER the conversation when given the chance! However, it is unwise to try to outright "take control" of the interview - as an interviewee - you are not in command. Let the interviewer ask his questions, don't "strive to go off topic". Rather incorporate whatever it is what you want to talk about organically into what is being discussed. Be a person.

Why our friend above mentions his "awesome patient interviews" is silly and pointless...perhaps only to brag (which, judging from his blog history of extensively writing drivel which no one reads/comments on -- perhaps it's due to a bit of narcissism? whatev. Quench that thirst, little buddy. Tell us more about how awesome you are! 🙂)... obviously the physician [i.e. med student] is the one expected to be symbolically "in control" during a patient interview by default (you play the role of authority on the "health matter", not the interviewee. It follows that you are free to take the reins or hand them to the patient as much as you wish without repercussions. You have the power.)

You really don't get it, do you?

First of all; if you can't see the point I'm making about developing communication skills as a pre-med to help you in your career as a physician, then I don't know how to help you. You laugh at that like it's a joke, but I would love for you to argue why it wouldn't help you. Go ahead and explain how developing rhetoric/skills to interact with people is going to somehow hurt you. I'll await your response.


Second; I really don't give any concern about who follows/comments on my blog. I'm writing it down so that if I ever need to explain to someone what it's like being a non-trad who's pursuing medical school years later than the norm, I have the site to show them. Go ahead and continue trying to belittle me with that instead of presenting a reason for your counter-argument.


Third; You are again missing my point about my interview skills. How else am I going to prove the point that what I've done/suggest does lead to a successful interview than to basically beat it over your heads that I've done it and it's worked. You're laughing at my examples probably because none of you seem to have grasped the idea that "this guy" has been there/done that and can attest to what I say. If you want to try to insult me THAT way, that's awesome. You're just making an ass out of yourself and showing everyone around here how little you know about this.

Fourth - You keep saying I missed your point... but I didn't.

Okay, let's go ahead and review, shall we?

If your interviewer has a set of predetermined questions that he hopes to have answered (even if read out of some booklet), you "taking control of the pace of the interview" and "trying to take him off-topic" would be a mistake on your part...

Read that part and explain to me how what I said isn't pertaining to your posts? You're saying it's a mistake. I disagreed with that.

If they give you the reins, then obviously you can go your own route/pace. However, your description above doesn't seem to indicate that being the case.

Yeah, this is where you're wrong. But don't believe me. It really doesn't bother me if you find fault with my posts. But realize that you're going to be in for a nice lesson in humility when you don't take my advice. Robotics only takes you so far. It's a platform for you to work with, but you can choose to just do the bare minimum instead of excel.

 

[mfm90]

I think we can all agree that "Kaustikos" sounds like a huge tool and clearly has no friends

 

[Kaustikos]

I do not disagree with you on this matter. Communication skills are very useful for anyone - especially one in a service profession such as medicine.
Communication skills ≠ "trying to take him off-topic" (which is what I was originally arguing against and you later responded with "uh, no, wrong").



As I mentioned above, I apologize for this. I can see that you spent a lot of time on it.



medical school interview ≠ patient interview
medical school interview ≠ job interview
medical school interview ≠ selling pharma

Now, of course, there are countless similarities. You are in the presence of another person. You are communicating with the said person. However, the intricacies are different and not directly in relationship 100%. For this, the primary proof that you can claim as support for your interviewing skills is what is directly applicable to medical school interviewing -- that being, medical school interviewing. And, with that said, you have obviously been accepted to at least one school...so we, as readers, can conclude that [at minimum] your methodology will not get one to fail outright.

However, none of this is what I was arguing. Again, I spoke originally of "actively trying to go off topic".... NOT about reflecting the same question back onto the interviewer.



I advocated against being a robot; however, I also said to not approach the interview as if you are THE man in charge (read: "control"). I will await my nice lesson in humility.

At this point I'm just going to agree to disagree. I don't see either of us changing our minds.

I think we can all agree that "Kaustikos" sounds like a huge tool and clearly has no friends

Of course. Insults are the best way to argue.

 

[Law2Doc]

Also be thankful for interviews that seem like the interviewer has a pre-determined (by the school or other adcom members) list of questions. In my limited experience (e.g 1 interview) they don't ask follow up questions or "test" you on things. Very straight forward stuff that they want to ask every interviewee so they have a more-or-less standardized interview experience.

You don't want a "standardized interview experience", and end up having your fate determined by the equivalent of a coin flip. You want an opportunity to shine and sell yourself. While unskilled interviewers may stick to a script initially out of inexperience, concern of treading on "disallowed" topics, etc., they actually really do appreciate it (sometimes in retrospect) if the interview evolves naturally into a conversation. You don't want to do abrupt changes if topics, but if you are given an opening, you really should take it. Follow up an answer to a question with a related question. If they ask you about a specific research project you worked on, answer it, and then segue into what you are working on now, and so on. It's really truly a marketing meeting, not a cross examination. You hurt yourself by being standardized, one of many plain vanilla interviews. You know somebody else is going to shine, market themselves more effectively, and make you look less personable.

It's pretty eye opening when you get to med school and beyond and see who gets in easily and who fails to "get it" and funnels themselves right into the wait list pile.