Post the interview question you "know" you'll be asked and don't want to answer

[PokerDoc]

---

Members do not see this ad.

"Tell me about yourself"


So simple, so open ended... everyone asks it. I hate talking about myself as it is, but man, I don't think I've ever answered this question the same way twice. My practice interview with my dean brought this question up and it, of all things, was the only thing that really made me stumble.

 

[xx216xx]

"What is your greatest weakness?"

So hard for me to answer without completely screwing myself or sounding like I'm giving a bs answer

 

[godless]

"What is your greatest weakness?"

So hard for me to answer without completely screwing myself or sounding like I'm giving a bs answer

I agree this question sucks. I like interviews were I don't get asked this question. When someone does ask me this question, I think they are doing a lazy job of interviewing.

What do people applying to med school usually say? Anything more original than perfectionist?

 

[drizzt3117]

I agree this question sucks. I like interviews were I don't get asked this question. When someone does ask me this question, I think they are doing a lazy job of interviewing.

What do people applying to med school usually say? Anything more original than perfectionist?

This is actually a great interview question. It's looking for the skill of self-analysis, which is a skill few pre-meds/medical students have. Perfectionist is the worst answer you could possibly give. As a former hiring manager for MBA level positions, I'd immediately toss applicants for giving it.

Interviewers are looking for a real weakness that you've identified and addressed. A good example would be, "I would have to say that one of my biggest weaknesses in medical school has been time management. It's been challenging to get everything done while maintaining balance in my life. However, during third year, I've worked really hard to
become more efficient in my studying and organizing my time, and by the end of the year, I was able to honor my rotations, study for shelf exams, do research, and exercise 3-4x a week.".

The point of the q is to identify a weakness and explain how you've addressed
it. The three worst answers are 1) I'm a perfectionist and I can't tolerate other people being idiots. 2) I'm a perfectionist and I beat myself up over it. 3) I work too hard and ... Any of those 3 just make you look like a douchebag.

 

[PokerDoc]

This is actually a great interview question. It's looking for the skill of self-analysis, which is a skill few pre-meds/medical students have. Perfectionist is the worst answer you could possibly give. As a former hiring manager for MBA level positions, I'd immediately toss applicants for giving it.

Interviewers are looking for a real weakness that you've identified and addressed. A good example would be, "I would have to say that one of my biggest weaknesses in medical school has been time management. It's been challenging to get everything done while maintaining balance in my life. However, during third year, I've worked really hard to
become more efficient in my studying and organizing my time, and by the end of the year, I was able to honor my rotations, study for shelf exams, do research, and exercise 3-4x a week.".

The point of the q is to identify a weakness and explain how you've addressed
it. The three worst answers are 1) I'm a perfectionist and I can't tolerate other people being idiots. 2) I'm a perfectionist and I beat myself up over it. 3) I work too hard and ... Any of those 3 just make you look like a douchebag.

Michael Scott had the greatest answer to this question. Yours is pretty good too.

 

[PhysicsIsBest]

This is actually a great interview question. It's looking for the skill of self-analysis, which is a skill few pre-meds/medical students have. Perfectionist is the worst answer you could possibly give. As a former hiring manager for MBA level positions, I'd immediately toss applicants for giving it.

I disagree. I read a really interesting article by a guy who had spent 15 years researching interview techniques and how interview performance correlates with job performance. His conclusion was that the 10 most commonly asked interview questions, including that one, had almost no bearing on job success. The only interview questions that did reveal future potential were those that were directly related to the type of duty the person would be performing on the job. Prior performance of those sorts of duties was the only reliable predictor.

Most people are pretty bad at conducting interviews. Anybody can come up with a canned answer if they prepare ahead of time, so about the only thing the standard interview is good at is screening out people to lazy to prepare. (And those who are just plain odd, of course, but most med students had to at least seem fairly normal to get in.) Good interviewers are able to systematically elicit the views of the candidate and clarify attitude, motivation, and perception.

I have interviewed plenty of times, and none of my past interviewers were very well trained.

 

[drizzt3117]

It's true that a lot of evidence showing case-based interviewing is better than behavioral interviewing (I have a MBA, at least 40% of which you spend learning about interviewing). That being said, it isn't useful for radiology because the vast majority of applicants have no real training in radiology, so testing these skills wouldn't be a good predictor of success. The top strategy consulting/IB firms are using a mix of behavioral and thoroughly random case-based questions to test analytical skills. I have ~6 years experience in interviewing and I can say that it's definitely an art and takes a lot of practice to master. I am sure the average attending interviewing people don't have that much experience doing it and will primarily ask behavioral questions or ones about your resume/education and who you know. Despite being found to be less effective than case-based interviewing, you're still going to see a lot of behavioral interviewing on the trail. It's easy to come up with good answers if you know why they're asking the question. Unfortunately, many don't.

I disagree. I read a really interesting article by a guy who had spent 15 years researching interview techniques and how interview performance correlates with job performance. His conclusion was that the 10 most commonly asked interview questions, including that one, had almost no bearing on job success. The only interview questions that did reveal future potential were those that were directly related to the type of duty the person would be performing on the job. Prior performance of those sorts of duties was the only reliable predictor.

Most people are pretty bad at conducting interviews. Anybody can come up with a canned answer if they prepare ahead of time, so about the only thing the standard interview is good at is screening out people to lazy to prepare. (And those who are just plain odd, of course, but most med students had to at least seem fairly normal to get in.) Good interviewers are able to systematically elicit the views of the candidate and clarify attitude, motivation, and perception.

I have interviewed plenty of times, and none of my past interviewers were very well trained.

 

[PokerDoc]

This is all too scientific for me. My "opinion" is that the interview exists to determine if the candidate is someone 'I like associating with, can tolerate, or even befriend during the work day, and doesn't have any red flags screaming at me.

I think this can all be done in the context of a normal conversation with a few 'interview standard questions' sprinkled in there to fill in slow moments. I remember when I interviewed for med school, many of my interviewers were actually quite good at producing the conversation style interview, the few that weren't just asked questions like they had a list in front of them, and the whole process seemed forced.

 

[colbgw02]

It's true that a lot of evidence showing case-based interviewing is better than behavioral interviewing (I have a MBA, at least 40% of which you spend learning about interviewing). That being said, it isn't useful for radiology because the vast majority of applicants have no real training in radiology, so testing these skills wouldn't be a good predictor of success. The top strategy consulting/IB firms are using a mix of behavioral and thoroughly random case-based questions to test analytical skills. I have ~6 years experience in interviewing and I can say that it's definitely an art and takes a lot of practice to master. I am sure the average attending interviewing people don't have that much experience doing it and will primarily ask behavioral questions or ones about your resume/education and who you know. Despite being found to be less effective than case-based interviewing, you're still going to see a lot of behavioral interviewing on the trail. It's easy to come up with good answers if you know why they're asking the question. Unfortunately, many don't.

I have interviewed medical students for residency, and I expect that I will continue to do so for several years to come. I have no idea how influential my input has been, but presumably it is at least considered, if not valued. I have had precisely zero training on how to interview.

I would never ask about an applicant's greatest weakness, mostly because I know enough to realize that he/she will try to spin the weakness into a positive. If I ask that question, I don't want spin (and presumably, I will otherwise weed out the unprepared candidates). I want honesty, as in an interviewee saying, "well, sometimes I'm an ******* because I think other people do stupid things and I let them know it." I know I won't get honesty, so I don't ask.

I would prefer to take PokerDoc's approach, meaning I would use the interview to try to determine if this person is someone with whom I could stand working. Serious question: does that make me a bad interviewer? If so, what can I do to discern an applicant I'd like to see at my program from the applicant who is just well-prepared? Let's assume case-based questions are off the table, because I am - in fact - a radiologist.

 

[PokerDoc]

I have interviewed medical students for residency, and I expect that I will continue to do so for several years to come. I have no idea how influential my input has been, but presumably it is at least considered, if not valued. I have had precisely zero training on how to interview.

I would never ask about an applicant's greatest weakness, mostly because I know enough to realize that he/she will try to spin the weakness into a positive. If I ask that question, I don't want spin (and presumably, I will otherwise weed out the unprepared candidates). I want honesty, as in an interviewee saying, "well, sometimes I'm an ******* because I think other people do stupid things and I let them know it." I know I won't get honesty, so I don't ask.

I would prefer to take PokerDoc's approach, meaning I would use the interview to try to determine if this person is someone with whom I could stand working. Serious question: does that make me a bad interviewer? If so, what can I do to discern an applicant I'd like to see at my program from the applicant who is just well-prepared? Let's assume case-based questions are off the table, because I am - in fact - a radiologist.

The reason I made my post, and as a result appreciate your approach to the interview, is because the question/answer format can be prepared for. My answer to that question, good or bad, does nothing to tell you if I am someone you can sit next to for 12 hours a day. The interview is only 10-15 minutes long, and I think it should be used to simulate an environment that would exist if I was someone working along side you. No preparation in the world can change the person I am, that is already set in stone. The best interviewers create an environment that leads to normal every day conversation between two normal human beings.

I cannot comment on how residency interviews go, I've never been on one (yet!). But I do truly hope I end up in a position where I have multiple options. If I know myself, I'm going to remember every single interaction on my interview day, even with the secretary. It'll all matter to me when I try to figure out where I best fit in. If my interviewer does nothing but ask questions off of my CV or challenge me as to why my grades are so average, he or she isn't going to learn anything about me, and I'm not going to know anything about how I fit at this program either. I know there are many like myself who would feel blessed to be accepted anywhere, but the interview process works both ways, programs want you to chose them too. And the best way for human beings to get a true and honest feel for each other, is through normal, non-scripted interaction.

 

[drizzt3117]

I would never ask about an applicant's greatest weakness, mostly because I know enough to realize that he/she will try to spin the weakness into a positive. If I ask that question, I don't want spin (and presumably, I will otherwise weed out the unprepared candidates). I want honesty, as in an interviewee saying, "well, sometimes I'm an ******* because I think other people do stupid things and I let them know it." I know I won't get honesty, so I don't ask.

I would prefer to take PokerDoc's approach, meaning I would use the interview to try to determine if this person is someone with whom I could stand working. Serious question: does that make me a bad interviewer? If so, what can I do to discern an applicant I'd like to see at my program from the applicant who is just well-prepared? Let's assume case-based questions are off the table, because I am - in fact - a radiologist.

I don't think it's a bad strategy, I think in the end finding people that you relate with and feel like you could work with is important. That being said, I'm not sure it really screens for people that you don't want, it's certainly easy to act agreeable for a few minutes, after all. The other problem with "tougher" interviews is the obvious one that interviewees are also getting an impression of the program from whoever they meet.

I'm not really sure what the best solution is. I'm not necessarily arguing that case-based interviewing as applied in IB/SC is the right solution, after all, we did hire the people who triggered the global financial crisis 🙂

 

[Radiculous]

"So.. do you have any questions for me?"

 

[PhysicsIsBest]

I know there are many like myself who would feel blessed to be accepted anywhere, but the interview process works both ways, programs want you to chose them too.

So it's like Avatar? Awesome!

 

[PhysicsIsBest]

I don't think it's a bad strategy, I think in the end finding people that you relate with and feel like you could work with is important. That being said, I'm not sure it really screens for people that you don't want, it's certainly easy to act agreeable for a few minutes, after all. The other problem with "tougher" interviews is the obvious one that interviewees are also getting an impression of the program from whoever they meet.

I'm not really sure what the best solution is. I'm not necessarily arguing that case-based interviewing as applied in IB/SC is the right solution, after all, we did hire the people who triggered the global financial crisis 🙂

Don't feel bad, those RSG's are squirrelly and good at tricking people. The complicated schemes they dream up are incredible - all leveraged to the hilt, of course. Too bad for them they can't fool the market forever. Credit default swaps, short selling, pump and dump...actually, that sounds like fun. If I had it to do over again, I'd make some different career choices!

(RSGs = Really Smart Guys)

 

[drizzt3117]

Don't feel bad, those RSG's are squirrelly and good at tricking people. The complicated schemes they dream up are incredible - all leveraged to the hilt, of course. Too bad for them they can't fool the market forever. Credit default swaps, short selling, pump and dump...actually, that sounds like fun. If I had it to do over again, I'd make some different career choices!

(RSGs = Really Smart Guys)

My buddy is 31 and retired now. He bought like 300k of cds on bear stearns back in the day... Good times.

 

[DrBowtie]

Why should we pick you compared with candidate X who is better than you in <blank>

 

[MossPoh]

People are really really bad at judging whether someone will be successful. They are much better at deciding whether the other person is someone they would hate their life being around.

I've found the answers you give are
much less important than smiling, giving confident answers, eliminating distracting nervous habits and knowing everything there is to know about the program/position you are interviewing for.

 

[deleted103644]

"Why in god's name are you not wearing any pants?!?"

 

[jazzman84]

"Why in god's name are you not wearing any pants?!?"

I take them off when I sit down to maintain the crease.