How to master interviews for residency or fellowship

[Call Me Dr.]

Another interview season drawing to a close. I didn't interview as many candidates this year as usual, but enough to be reminded of the difference between candidates to know how to master interviews and those who walk in the door like a 3D copy of their ERAS application. I wrote a piece about mastering interviews on my blog but thought I'd share here as well.

If you’re like most interview candidates, your preparation focuses on yourself. You’re worried about dressing well and appearing confident despite your nervousness. You stress about whether you should bring a portfolio or copies of your CV. You tell yourself that you won’t fidget as much next time. You make it through the whirlwind of travelling from city to city, all squeezed between shifts. And, almost as quickly as it began, another season of residency and fellowship interviews are over.

Have you crossed paths with applicants during your interviews who seemed to be on a whole different level? Who appeared completely at ease and confident? The ones that make you more nervous and hope you don’t have to scramble?

What’s the difference between you and skilled interviewees? Top interviewees do the exact opposite to prepare for interviews. They focus on the interviewer.

Flip your perspective on the purpose of interviews and you will be vastly more successful. It's almost impossible to out-compete if everyone is doing the same thing. But, fortunately for you, that same thing isn't very effective. Because. . . .

Nobody cares about you.

The purpose of interviews for residency or fellowship is to convince the program director and faculty that you can fill their needs (and that you're not a serial killer). It is not for you to reiterate the accomplishments that they've already read about in your ERAS app. That's the stuff that gets you the interview, but it's not what gets you ranked higher. Understanding what the program needs and convincing them that you fill that need is what gets you ranked higher.

So, what do program directors want? Certainly, they want housestaff who are good team-players because one of their biggest headaches is when they have housestaff who aren't. They want people who will get along well with the nurses, consultants, etc. so they won't have to field complaints. They want housestaff who are going to pick up extra slack in the program (good pre- and peri-interview research about the program informs you where that slack exists), such as residents to lead morning report or serve on the admission committee. If there's an academic expectation for your specialty, they want housestaff who can complete an academic project within the short timeline of residency or fellowship.

Instead of coming to an interview with a portfolio that's more info about you, put together 3 talking points that emphasize how you have the characteristics that will help the program. For instance, "I'm a strong team-player. In medical school, [anecdote]..." Or, "I really enjoy the sense of accomplishment from completing projects. In medical school, I completed a project on X in X time despite the challenges of [fill in challenges]". Find ways to answer questions with these points in all your interviews.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[dyeguy21]

Also, realize that the interview is just as much the interviewer trying to sell their program to you.

This isn't just you trying to get in anywhere, you are trying to find the right place. If you don't dig it, don't be a jerk. If you like it, just ask more questions about what the program has to offer to advance your career in the direction you wish to take: "What are the match rates for cardiology?" "Do you feel that residents are sought after for fellowships nationwide/in CA/in the midwest?" "Are there any opportunities for medical informatics/quality improvement projects?"

If you think about it this way, I promise you will not be nervous. Act normal and don't be insane. You've made it over the hurdle of qualification and you beat out THOUSANDS of other applicants to secure an interview spot. They are making sure you are the right fit for the program. This doesn't mean that you accomplished a million things in med school and got a 270 Step 1. This means that you are of a similar social attitude and seem to buy into the system the program has put in place.

If you like the program, compliment them on what a great program they have. Don't overdo it, just mention that, "your program seems to really value X and I agree that its a very important part of medical education. I really appreciate that you take the time to highlight that aspect of your program."

 

[Law2Doc]

Also, realize that the interview is just as much the interviewer trying to sell their program to you.

This isn't just you trying to get in anywhere, you are trying to find the right place...

Whether this is at all true totally depends on the specialty and applicant. A great applicant for a less competitive field may get up-sold a lot more than a borderline applicant for a more competitive field. In most cases though, let's be real -- the majority of applicants are going to have to market themselves aggressively. Sure the programs want everyone to rank them highly and so they will put on a nice show for even the weakest of applicants, but in the end the better programs in each specialty are going to have the final say of who gets ranked highly, not vice versa. so no, it's not "just as much" the interviewer trying to sell their program; If you're lucky, it's not totally a one way street.

 

[Frederica]

I would advise applicants to find a balance between aggressive and interest in a program. I remember an applicant who throughout all his/her interviews telling faculty that he/she was THE person for the position. It's a big turn off to be told by an applicant that they are the person for their program.

 

[Law2Doc]

I would advise applicants to find a balance between aggressive and interest in a program. I remember an applicant who throughout all his/her interviews telling faculty that he/she was THE person for the position. It's a big turn off to be told by an applicant that they are the person for their program.

I think it kind of depends in who you are dealing with and how receptive they are to the hard sell. Nobody likes a used care salesman, but truth of the matter is that their hard sell approach does work a lot of the time, which is why that role/stereotype has persisted for the last 70 or so years. And so the fact that a lot of us have a better product to work with than an old Edsel means the approach is even more likely to work some of the time. While I think there's a fine line between confidence and arrogance, or polished versus "slick" sometimes, the few applicants who can take control of the meeting and walk that line positively tend to do very well.

 

[123eyes]

I would advise applicants to find a balance between aggressive and interest in a program. I remember an applicant who throughout all his/her interviews telling faculty that he/she was THE person for the position. It's a big turn off to be told by an applicant that they are the person for their program.

And how would you counsel someone to answer: "So why should we pick you over the other applicants?"

 

[RadOncDoc21]

And how would you counsel someone to answer: "So why should we pick you over the other applicants?"

Probably why I could never master the process... I hated having to "sell" myself.

 

[RadOncDoc21]

My greatest weakness is that I care too much about my patients... "Blah blah blah"

 

[Call Me Dr.]

I would advise applicants to find a balance between aggressive and interest in a program. I remember an applicant who throughout all his/her interviews telling faculty that he/she was THE person for the position. It's a big turn off to be told by an applicant that they are the person for their program.

Great point! There's a difference between telling interviewers that you are THE person for a position vs. letting interviewers draw that conclusion on their own. Focusing the few minutes that you have with interviewers on highlighting your characteristics that fit the program is not a hard sell. It's not about aggressively stating that you're the right person. It's about having spent time in preparation for the interview so that you already know what's important to the program and have prepared talking points that display your strengths in those areas.

As an example, let's say that you have done some background research on a program (like talking to a current or former resident) and know that they require a scholarly project and that some residents have trouble completing them. That's a hassle for PDs and their research mentors. If an interviewer asks you "Tell me about a challenge that you overcame during medical school?" (or any variant of the "overcoming challenges" question), you could answer with an anecdote in which you "overcame" a challenge related to a scholarly project. Such as, "In medical school, I completed a project on X in X time despite the challenges of [fill in challenges]". You're not saying, "I hear that you have residents who don't finish their scholarly projects, but I will so pick me because I'm awesome." You're steering the question towards something that you know will identify a way you can fill their needs. It's a surgical strike rather than a blunt hammer.

 

[Frederica]

And how would you counsel someone to answer: "So why should we pick you over the other applicants?"

First, there is a big difference between being asked "Why should we pick you..." versus "I am the person for your program."

To answer your question: you talk about what you bring to the table (e.g. achievements, research commonalities, etc.) and what you feel you will gain from their program.

As Law2Doc noted above, it's about the product. If you have a good product, it's an easy sell. If you don't, then you will rub the interviewer the wrong way.

It's like dating, if you rub your date the wrong way, you won't get another date.