Reporting an unprofessional interviewer

[fourandtwo]

---

Members do not see this ad.

I had a bad experience with an interviewer recently and I decided to call an admissions member to report this interviewer. I didn't disclose my name or the day I interviewed because I wanted to keep it more anonymous than not. But what do admissions do when they receive negative feedback about one of their interviewers? How will it affect my candidacy and others who were interviewed by the same person?

 

[mscandy]

Not sure. Let's ask some wise insiders @Goro @LizzyM
🙂

 

[21Rush12]

This kind of thing is taken seriously. In theory it should not affect whatsoever your candidacy. In the MMI setting, this usually means that that interviewer's evaluation is not considered and you are evaluated based on the others. I am not sure how this is handled during traditional interviews, but I'm sure Goro can provide a perspective as he has extensive knowledge in this area.

There are systems and practices in place to handle this type of situation. It's important to report this, but I understand where it could be a sticky situation. I think a polite email to the admissions office explaining the situation would go a long way, but I would defer to the adcoms here as far as that goes.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile app

 

[fourandtwo]

This kind of thing is taken seriously. In theory it should not affect whatsoever your candidacy. In the MMI setting, this usually means that that interviewer's evaluation is not considered and you are evaluated based on the others. I am not sure how this is handled during traditional interviews, but I'm sure Goro can provide a perspective as he has extensive knowledge in this area.

There are systems and practices in place to handle this type of situation. It's important to report this, but I understand where it could be a sticky situation. I think a polite email to the admissions office explaining the situation would go a long way, but I would defer to the adcoms here as far as that goes.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile app

I see. I'm wondering now if I should've given them my name / date of interview... According to you, it sounds like they would evaluate my interviewer's evaluation differently now that they have heard from me. By the way, the interviewer I reported is a student at the medical school, and the school mentioned they value the faculty and student evaluations equally.

 

[OrthoTraumaMD]

I had a bad experience with an interviewer recently and I decided to call an admissions member to report this interviewer. I didn't disclose my name or the day I interviewed because I wanted to keep it more anonymous than not. But what do admissions do when they receive negative feedback about one of their interviewers? How will it affect my candidacy and others who were interviewed by the same person?

How was the interviewer unprofessional?


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

 

[fourandtwo]

How was the interviewer unprofessional?


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

For privacy reasons, I PMed you. 🙂

 

[NickNaylor]

First, IMO you should always report this kind of stuff. Unless the admissions department at the school is particularly malignant, they will almost certainly appreciate your feedback. At my medical school, all interviewers were volunteer faculty, some of whom may have very little actual interaction with medical students or trainees. Thus, it is entirely possible that an unhelpful interviewer could be in the interviewing pool without the “big wigs” in the admissions department knowing about it. The only way they’ll know is for you (and others) to provide that feedback.

In terms of your application process... I doubt it will matter all that much. Remember that admissions decisions are ultimately holistic, and a single negative evaluation/interaction/whatever in a sea of otherwise positive stuff will not sink you. It will be viewed for what it is: a clear outlier.

Depending on the individual admissions department, you could potentially be offered an additional interview to “make up” for the bad experience. This happened rarely - but did happen - at my medical school. But there’s no guarantee that that would happen.

In terms of whether or not reporting this would impact you negatively, that’s hard to say. It will depend entirely on how amenable to feedback the people you talk with are.

 

[jm192]

I too am curious as to what happened. Thread needs pics, you and the interviewer.

Kidding.

But really, thread is way more interesting if we know the story.

 

[fourandtwo]

First, IMO you should always report this kind of stuff. Unless the admissions department at the school is particularly malignant, they will almost certainly appreciate your feedback. At my medical school, all interviewers were volunteer faculty, some of whom may have very little actual interaction with medical students or trainees. Thus, it is entirely possible that an unhelpful interviewer could be in the interviewing pool without the “big wigs” in the admissions department knowing about it. The only way they’ll know is for you (and others) to provide that feedback.

In terms of your application process... I doubt it will matter all that much. Remember that admissions decisions are ultimately holistic, and a single negative evaluation/interaction/whatever in a sea of otherwise positive stuff will not sink you. It will be viewed for what it is: a clear outlier.

Depending on the individual admissions department, you could potentially be offered an additional interview to “make up” for the bad experience. This happened rarely - but did happen - at my medical school. But there’s no guarantee that that would happen.

In terms of whether or not reporting this would impact you negatively, that’s hard to say. It will depend entirely on how amenable to feedback the people you talk with are.

Thank you, that was helpful.

 

[Goro]

I had a bad experience with an interviewer recently and I decided to call an admissions member to report this interviewer. I didn't disclose my name or the day I interviewed because I wanted to keep it more anonymous than not. But what do admissions do when they receive negative feedback about one of their interviewers? How will it affect my candidacy and others who were interviewed by the same person?

At our school, the Admission Dean will talk 1:1 with the interviewer at the issue. Usually they get a message to "don't ask that particular question" or "frame your questions in a different way". Keep in mind that you might not be the only person who has had issues with this interviewer. In that case, the person will be dropped from interviewing, or be made to interview with other Adcom members (and senior ones at that).

Our Dean has never, ever complained to our committee about a candidate who made a complaint.

 

[21Rush12]

I see. I'm wondering now if I should've given them my name / date of interview... According to you, it sounds like they would evaluate my interviewer's evaluation differently now that they have heard from me. By the way, the interviewer I reported is a student at the medical school, and the school mentioned they value the faculty and student evaluations equally.

I can really only speak for how conflict of interest or other abnormalities are handled in MMI situations, based on my own reading and many discussions about them at a few different schools. This is touted as an advantage of MMI over traditional, in that one abnormality or conflict of interest does not negate the whole interview.

I do think contacting them about it specifically would be a good idea, because it could help other applicants and you as well. If you do it post-decision it will look like complaining/poor sportsmanship.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile app

 

[SterlingMaloryArcher]

Yeah I'm curious on "how"? was it just an inappropriate question (meaning irrelevant) that he asked or was it an Inappropriate question/statement/gesture/innuendo?

 

[Danbo1957]

You need to be careful when making accusations. If an interviewer has one complaint from a thousand interviews, I'm going to look closely at the complainer.

 

[NickNaylor]

You need to be careful when making accusations. If an interviewer has one complaint from a thousand interviews, I'm going to look closely at the complainer.

Agreed, and this is where the OP has to exercise some level of judgment. Was what was said/asked something clearly inappropriate, and by clearly inappropriate I mean something that 99.9% of people would agree shouldn’t be said/asked in an interview? Or did what was said rub you the wrong way or perhaps come across poorly but not, at the end of the day, an overtly unprofessional comment?

In today’s world, everything is offensive, and don’t even get me started on microaggression BS. If what you’re talking about can be classified as a “microaggression,” do yourself a favor and keep it to yourself. That kind of stuff isn’t worth bringing to the attention of the committee.

 

[BombsAway]

I struggled with a similar decision earlier in the cycle at an MD school. At an otherwise wonderfully executed interview day, my first interviewer showed up 15 minutes late (50% of the interview gone) and hadn't read my file. This was in contrast to our welcome briefing from the Dean assuring us that our apps had been read by our interviewers and they were all excited to have meaningful conversations with us. So, sure whatever, not the end of the world, as he told me he'd give me a good eval at the end of our 15 minutes. I go to the next office I'm supposed to be at.

Once there I discover the guy called in sick, and was redirected to interview with the Dean of Something or Other. Cool, great opportunity to impress somebody important (he's on the ExCom). I get there as he is picking my file up–hot off the press–from the printer. He apologizes for not having a chance to read it. No big deal, not his fault. He proceeds to flick through the pages with cursory glances and asks me questions as he goes. Not questions about the content, but pointless clarifying questions that he could answer on his own if he read more than the first sentence of each page.

Anyway, all of this is fine with me, not the end of the world. I'm calm as a cucumber. However, as he gets to the last page of my EC's and comes across some military stuff he sits up in his chair with a freshly furrowed brow. With blissful ignorance this 60ish year-old Dean of Something or Other looks at me and asks "how exactly do you rationalize wanting to switch from a career focused on killing people to a career focused on healing people"?

Maybe that question seems innocuous to a civilian, but I found it to be straight up offensive. Like, if he had looked up from my app and asked "I see here that your mother is so fat, she has smaller fat people orbiting around her. how has this influenced your interests in medicine?" I wouldn't have cared. But he didn't ask that, he asked me some nonsense formed from personal bias as a vietnam-era youth who thinks all servicemembers are baby killers...

Anyway, I thought about reporting the day's events, as I had driven 6 hours each way for a few minutes of worthless conversation, punctuated by an ignorant old man's bias. But i'm old enough to know when to pick one's battles. This dude is the Dean of Something or Other, and sits on the Executive Committee. Not a winnable fight.

So in your case it would be important to know who the interviewer is, and what kind of power they wield. Are they a random volunteer faculty? A new adjunct? A seasoned assistant professor? Or a Dean of Something or Other? The further to the right they lie on that continuum, the more egregious the offense would need to be. The Dean would probably need to go full Harvey Weinstein to precipitate any real action. But that is just my jaded opinion of how the world works.

 

[Goro]

I struggled with a similar decision earlier in the cycle at an MD school. At an otherwise wonderfully executed interview day, my first interviewer showed up 15 minutes late (50% of the interview gone) and hadn't read my file. This was in contrast to our welcome briefing from the Dean assuring us that our apps had been read by our interviewers and they were all excited to have meaningful conversations with us. So, sure whatever, not the end of the world, as he told me he'd give me a good eval at the end of our 15 minutes. I go to the next office I'm supposed to be at.

Once there I discover the guy called in sick, and was redirected to interview with the Dean of Something or Other. Cool, great opportunity to impress somebody important (he's on the ExCom). I get there as he is picking my file up–hot off the press–from the printer. He apologizes for not having a chance to read it. No big deal, not his fault. He proceeds to flick through the pages with cursory glances and asks me questions as he goes. Not questions about the content, but pointless clarifying questions that he could answer on his own if he read more than the first sentence of each page.

Anyway, all of this is fine with me, not the end of the world. I'm calm as a cucumber. However, as he gets to the last page of my EC's and comes across some military stuff he sits up in his chair with a freshly furrowed brow. With blissful ignorance this 60ish year-old Dean of Something or Other looks at me and asks "how exactly do you rationalize wanting to switch from a career focused on killing people to a career focused on healing people"?

Maybe that question seems innocuous to a civilian, but I found it to be straight up offensive. Like, if he had looked up from my app and asked "I see here that your mother is so fat, she has smaller fat people orbiting around her. how has this influenced your interests in medicine?" I wouldn't have cared. But he didn't ask that, he asked me some nonsense formed from personal bias as a vietnam-era youth who thinks all servicemembers are baby killers...

Anyway, I thought about reporting the day's events, as I had driven 6 hours each way for a few minutes of worthless conversation, punctuated by an ignorant old man's bias. But i'm old enough to know when to pick one's battles. This dude is the Dean of Something or Other, and sits on the Executive Committee. Not a winnable fight.

So in your case it would be important to know who the interviewer is, and what kind of power they wield. Are they a random volunteer faculty? A new adjunct? A seasoned assistant professor? Or a Dean of Something or Other? The further to the right they lie on that continuum, the more egregious the offense would need to be. The Dean would probably need to go full Harvey Weinstein to precipitate any real action. But that is just my jaded opinion of how the world works.

I hope that you reported that SOB.

 

[BombsAway]

I hope that you reported that SOB.

I did not.

 

[Piglet2020]

I struggled with a similar decision earlier in the cycle at an MD school. At an otherwise wonderfully executed interview day, my first interviewer showed up 15 minutes late (50% of the interview gone) and hadn't read my file. This was in contrast to our welcome briefing from the Dean assuring us that our apps had been read by our interviewers and they were all excited to have meaningful conversations with us. So, sure whatever, not the end of the world, as he told me he'd give me a good eval at the end of our 15 minutes. I go to the next office I'm supposed to be at.

Once there I discover the guy called in sick, and was redirected to interview with the Dean of Something or Other. Cool, great opportunity to impress somebody important (he's on the ExCom). I get there as he is picking my file up–hot off the press–from the printer. He apologizes for not having a chance to read it. No big deal, not his fault. He proceeds to flick through the pages with cursory glances and asks me questions as he goes. Not questions about the content, but pointless clarifying questions that he could answer on his own if he read more than the first sentence of each page.

Anyway, all of this is fine with me, not the end of the world. I'm calm as a cucumber. However, as he gets to the last page of my EC's and comes across some military stuff he sits up in his chair with a freshly furrowed brow. With blissful ignorance this 60ish year-old Dean of Something or Other looks at me and asks "how exactly do you rationalize wanting to switch from a career focused on killing people to a career focused on healing people"?

Maybe that question seems innocuous to a civilian, but I found it to be straight up offensive. Like, if he had looked up from my app and asked "I see here that your mother is so fat, she has smaller fat people orbiting around her. how has this influenced your interests in medicine?" I wouldn't have cared. But he didn't ask that, he asked me some nonsense formed from personal bias as a vietnam-era youth who thinks all servicemembers are baby killers...

Anyway, I thought about reporting the day's events, as I had driven 6 hours each way for a few minutes of worthless conversation, punctuated by an ignorant old man's bias. But i'm old enough to know when to pick one's battles. This dude is the Dean of Something or Other, and sits on the Executive Committee. Not a winnable fight.

So in your case it would be important to know who the interviewer is, and what kind of power they wield. Are they a random volunteer faculty? A new adjunct? A seasoned assistant professor? Or a Dean of Something or Other? The further to the right they lie on that continuum, the more egregious the offense would need to be. The Dean would probably need to go full Harvey Weinstein to precipitate any real action. But that is just my jaded opinion of how the world works.

I agree that the wording could have been better, but isn't this like an ethical question one would get an MMI? (ie if you are an army doctor in the front lines and you have to rationalize saving someone who will go out & kill other people, perhaps later inevitably dying from injuries, etc).

I think all interviewers have inherent biases about the person they are interviewing...even if they don't express it. Some will like you.. and some won't (and probably make that known through body language), unfortunately.

 

[Goro]

I agree that the wording could have been better, but isn't this like an ethical question one would get an MMI? (ie if you are an army doctor in the front lines and you have to rationalize saving someone who will go out & kill other people, perhaps later inevitably dying from injuries, etc).

I think all interviewers have inherent biases about the person they are interviewing...even if they don't express it. Some will like you.. and some won't (and probably make that known through body language), unfortunately.

The way it was worded was inflammatory and disrespectful.

 

[BombsAway]

I agree that the wording could have been better, but isn't this like an ethical question one would get an MMI? (ie if you are an army doctor in the front lines and you have to rationalize saving someone who will go out & kill other people, perhaps later inevitably dying from injuries, etc).

I think all interviewers have inherent biases about the person they are interviewing...even if they don't express it. Some will like you.. and some won't (and probably make that known through body language), unfortunately.

I do not agree with your first assessment, and I don't think anyone disagrees with your second point.