What weight do the interviews hold?

[blackbird11384]

---

Members do not see this ad.

Figured I would get some more lively debate going since this forum has been lacking life for the past week or so.

How much weight do you think programs assign to your performance on interviews? Do programs really place all interviewees on a similar playing field and thereafter rank mainly on interview performance? These 15 min casual interviews are never too probing, and the type of casual atmosphere they set up make me think that most applicants will come off as genuine, personable, and intelligent.

On another note, have any of you guys known when you performed well on an interview. Could you just tell that you clicked with most of your interviewers? It's a great feeling when you do.

 

[PokerDoc]

Figured I would get some more lively debate going since this forum has been lacking life for the past week or so.

How much weight do you think programs assign to your performance on interviews? Do programs really place all interviewees on a similar playing field and thereafter rank mainly on interview performance? These 15 min casual interviews are never too probing, and the type of casual atmosphere they set up make me think that most applicants will come off as genuine, personable, and intelligent.

On another note, have any of you guys known when you performed well on an interview. Could you just tell that you clicked with most of your interviewers? It's a great feeling when you do.

Considering how insanely casual all my interviews have been, they seem more like the it can only hurt u kind of deal to me. I don't really know if they helped me all that much, but they would probably hurt me if I was off my game.

 

[drizzt3117]

My impression is that people are not on an even playing field but the interview is very important. They're certainly useful if you have something on your app that the selection committee would like you to explain. That being said, programs tend to have a pre-interview rank list just like applicants do.

 

[blackbird11384]

That being said, programs tend to have a pre-interview rank list just like applicants do.

Do you know this based on what program directors and coordinators have said or are you just going on a hunch? I also think it is likely that they have an idea how they will rank an applicant before they interview, but I don't have any evidence to confidently say that.

 

[drizzt3117]

Do you know this based on what program directors and coordinators have said or are you just going on a hunch? I also think it is likely that they have an idea how they will rank an applicant before they interview, but I don't have any evidence to confidently say that.

Michigan straight up says that on their website. That being said, I know at least two programs do that. I do know that some other programs have immediate debriefing meetings after the interviews, so I don't know if that is used to make an immediate rank or an initial rank list.

 

[PokerDoc]

Michigan straight up says that on their website. That being said, I know at least two programs do that. I do know that some other programs have immediate debriefing meetings after the interviews, so I don't know if that is used to make an immediate rank or an initial rank list.

Also, they must have ranked us to decide who to invite to interviews in the first place and reject everyone else. And I'm sure there is an order for the waitlist when interviewees cancel as well.

 

[Illusive Man]

I think for most people, interviews will neither help nor hurt. It is primarily a way to gauge interest in the program and weed out individuals lacking social/communication skills.

 

[PokerDoc]

I think for most people, interviews will neither help nor hurt. It is primarily a way to gauge interest in the program and weed out individuals lacking social/communication skills.

I agree; kind of why i said it can hurt but not help tremendously (but i'll agree it may swing things in your favor if you connect amazingly well with them).

 

[boogah]

Oh this gosh awful 'do you have any qurations for me' interview opener....really? You're gonna start the interview with that and force me to ask irrelevant unrelated questions for a full 15 minutes? Dangit. I already know enough from the orientation, asking residents, and your website. What else could you tell me? So painful.

 

[SGuttenberg]

Someone conjectured that programs have a pre-int ROL and just bump up the social butterflies and cross out the abnormal psych cases in the other thread. This is probably accurate in my opinion.

I think the interview helps if you're (1) attractive and/or (2) a social butterfly. Everything else being equal, these two factors can have a heavy influence on your final rank, especially if extremely attractive. 😉

Sadly I believe you are correct. The worst part is being ugly and awkward would make research heavy programs more attractive but all the places with great research are also the places that have prestige and fill with beautiful outgoing AOA types.

I'm a terrible actor and for programs I know I'm ranking 6-15 its hard to pretend "I really want to go here" and its getting even harder as the season drags on.

 

[fun8stuff]

Sadly I believe you are correct. The worst part is being ugly and awkward would make research heavy programs more attractive but all the places with great research are also the places that have prestige and fill with beautiful outgoing AOA types.

I'm a terrible actor and for programs I know I'm ranking 6-15 its hard to pretend "I really want to go here" and its getting even harder as the season drags on.

As others have said, interviews in general don't hold that much weight. In general, there is a rubrik with a bunch of things like clinical grades, USMLE step 1, interview, LORs, research, etc

Each category can be assigned a value (i.e. 1-5, 1=poor, 5=outstanding ... step 1 > 260 may = 5, >245 4, >230 = 3, etc ... all honors = 5).

Most interviewees will get 3s and 4s for the interview... a few will get 5s and 1s. Then a weight will be applied to each category. Usually Step 1 and 3rd year clinical grades ratings will multiplied by a value of say 1.5 (so if you got a 5 for step 1 it will become 7.5). Things like research and LORs multipled by 1.25. School rank by say 1.1. The interview will probably be less important and not multipled by any number. If you are AOA, they may give you say an extra 3 points. These numbers are all approximate.

These values for each applicant are added together in excel and applicants are ranked by their total score. Rank may be adjusted based on subjective factors listed below. People with a score of above X are offerred an interview (or the top 100 are interviewed). Certain schools also require other things like AOA status and/or step 1 > 240 plus a score above X. Others offer auto-interviews for people who rotated there or applicants from the local med school.

After the interview and after the interviews have been scored and the rank list adjusted accordingly, the PD, chiefs, committee, etc will discuss the list and certain candidates may be moved up, down, or off the list (based on subjective factors such as the interview (aside from the score), if someone knows/is friends with/respects the LOR writer, if the applicant is related to an attending at the institution, if you rotated at or if they feel you expressed genuine interest in the program or geographic location, etc).

So in the end the interviews usually doesn't hold much weight- how much more can you really impress them in 15 minutes? And usually the interview is only a single point value in the rubrik that is not weighted that heavily. For most, the interview won't matter. However, if you come off as a nutjob there is the potential that they will throw you off or put you at the bottom of the rank list. A lot of applicants will look very similar on paper even after all of this is done. So quite often, if the people on the committee know or remember you, they may boost you ahead of someone who is close to you on the list that they don't remember. Some places will auto rank applicants from the associated med school at the top providing they meet a minimal criteria.

 

[fun8stuff]

Thanks fun8stuff. That was an awesome post. Clearly you have a great deal of insight into the process.

That said, have you taken a look at recent NRMP PD surveys regarding the most important factors in ranking radio applicants? The results directly conflict with the notion that radio interviews matter little. In fact, almost all of the 8 subcategories of the DR "Residency Interview" section were deemed more important than most "Medical School Performance" subcategories.

Also, when reviewing your analysis, it seems that the interview is doubly important. It not only factors into the numerical analysis, but also factors in the subjective ranking session, which perhaps holds the most weight (if it were to be quantified) of all. So, to give an example, imagine an otherwise marginal candidate for a top 10 program based on the pre-interview ROL. The candidate happens to be (1) extremely attractive, (2) a social butterfly, and (3) an outstanding actor. This candidate scores a perfect 5 on all interview measures (which according to the DR PD survey is comprised of 8 submeasures, all factored into the analysis).

Not only does the interview bump the applicant significantly since most applicants may score a 3 (since this is "average"), but it has an enormous impact on the subjective ranking later. Since the candidate achieved an outstanding perfect interview score, all of the people involved in finalizing the ROL would have fond memories of the applicant and bump them up to the top. This is especially true if there is a "consensus" among those involved, which of course there would be in a case of an applicant with a perfect overall interview performance.

Of course, this is all conjecture and thus an important topic for debate.

hahahaha

 

[PokerDoc]

hahahaha

best.post.ever

 

[2012mdc]

Most of us are normal so the interview won't do much. I think the biggest positive that can happen is really vibing with a PD or an asst PD where they will go to bat for you strongly. This can happen if you're socially gifted or make a strong connection on a subject whether it be academic or non-academic. My hobbies list on ERAS wasn't long or extraordinary (no ironmans or marathons or anything like that) but it still comes up frequently and can really help conversation.

 

[radiologyguy]

Most of us are normal so the interview won't do much. I think the biggest positive that can happen is really vibing with a PD or an asst PD where they will go to bat for you strongly. This can happen if you're socially gifted or make a strong connection on a subject whether it be academic or non-academic. My hobbies list on ERAS wasn't long or extraordinary (no ironmans or marathons or anything like that) but it still comes up frequently and can really help conversation.

interviews are huge. all it takes is for you to not get along with one person, and it's over for you. additionally, if you mesh well with one person then they will pull for you to move up the rank list. if you think they have no real weight on final rankings then you are nuts.

 

[2012mdc]

interviews are huge. all it takes is for you to not get along with one person, and it's over for you. additionally, if you mesh well with one person then they will pull for you to move up the rank list. if you think they have no real weight on final rankings then you are nuts.

I didn't say they had no real weight but most people will be able to get along with basically anyone in the setting of a 10 to 20 min interview.

Of course it matters and it varies between programs but when I can see checklists and scoring sheets that are almost completely filled out before the interview it lends credence to the theory that the interview may not have much affect unless it's really good or really bad.

 

[MossPoh]

It'd send warning flags up in my head if there was a huge emphasis on interviews. Historically, people are terrible judges of others, especially in limited interactions. Some people are gifted with social interaction and can win a few extra points, but most are somewhere in the middle. Realistically, you're more likely to screw yourself over in the interview than help your cause.

 

[2012mdc]

To you and the OP...trust me when I say that the interview can have a HUGE impact. Yes, I can tell when I have performed well and yes, it is clear when you "click" with all of the interviewers. This has happened on 90% on my interviews and the PD is obvious about it. If I had to break it down, I would say that the 3 factors I mentioned (look, talk, and acting chops...or more concisely "game") are mostly responsible. The unfortunate part about this is that there is little one can do about your attractiveness, social skills, or acting abilities and that humble, nice people who happen to be ugly/awkward/poor actors may be unfairly judged. Based on my one-on-one conversations with PDs at extremely competitive programs, interview performance is the single most important factor in ranking applicants.

Like I said it varies between programs. I've had PD's at very competitive programs tell me the interview was more for the applicant than the program.

Of course the interview is important if you really shine or if you really suck. But my point is most people will not hurt or help themselves too much. I liken it to Step 1 being very important. Say most applicants at a competitive program will fall between a 250 and a 270 (just an example). I don't think the difference between a 257 and a 263 is important at all. A 210 would be like bombing the interview and a 285 would be like killing it, of course that would have an influence. But most applicants will perform similarly on interviews. The questions are standard and most have prepared adequately for them. You can't really get to know someone in 20 minutes.

Maybe my sample size is too small but at all of my interviews so far everyone has had very similar experiences

 

[drizzt3117]

I think the interviews matter more for some candidates than others. Some people may have something interesting on their app that the selection committee may be interested in and wants to talk to them about first hand. If they are fascinated, than that can boost their candidacy (and vice versa) whereas some people may just be good solid candidates for whom the interview may be less important. I think it does make a bigger difference than people think. I do think a lot of the interview day is for the programs to sell themselves to the applicants, though.

 

[drizzt3117]

I think you're overthinking this. Yes, being rude to ancillary staff is a bad idea, that being said, the janitor vouching for you isn't going to make or break your application. I think a much more logical way to think about it is a skeleton rank list made prior to interviews, with adjustments made for the interview days. I think there's much more room to move down on this list than there is to move up. Imagine a program interviewing 150 people with the people ranked 1-150 prior to interview. Can the person ranked 1 drop out of being ranked to match? Absolutely. Can the person ranked 150 be ranked to match? Much less likely even if they're the perfect amalgam of good looks, charisma, and likeability. That being said, can it happen? Sure.

It is funny that you mention that, because I was thinking of the same analogy earlier today. The difference is that, based on my experiences thus far, a "4" on the interview is very different from a perfect "5," largely due to its aftershock effects on the final ranking session, not the numerical ranking. While the step scores may factor into the numerical ranking, they do not seem to have a big impact on the subjective ranking sessions so a 25X may not differ from a 26X when you chart it out to the final rank. You can see how this is logical to a competitive PD: if I have already set up a formula for calculating rank based on objective factors with what I consider appropriate weighted averages, why consider this value again? If I were to think that was necessary, I would simply rework the original formula so I would not have to deal with the scores again. This would simplify my life and allow me to focus on the only new component -- the interview.

The other big hole in the argument is that the interview is not limited to the 20 min spent in the formal interview. It encompasses the entirety of the time in the city, hypothetically starting at check-in to the complimentary hotel lodging. Everyone you encounter is asked about you, from the janitor to the PD or chairman. Hypothetically, imagine a perfect paper applicant who also performs perfectly on every interview measure, but in a momentary lapse of judgment, comes off as an a-hole to a janitor. The janitor then informs the PD of this and the otherwise perfect candidate is now removed entirely from the ROL or dropped to the bottom third. (See "How to blow your shot..." thread to hear it directly from the horse's mouth) You may be shocked at how often this actually occurs. The converse is also true: if everyone from the janitor or PC to the PD or chair loves you, that will of course have a tremendous impact on your final rank due to the subjective rank sessions.

 

[shark2000]

The last time I checked it was 250 pounds.

Unless you are weird or strange or on the other hand very charming, it does not weigh that much. Though programs claim it to be the most important factor, it is not the case. Before you enter the interview room, the interviewer reviews you applications, gets an idea about you and when you enter the room, he/she is very biased.
Strange characters are easily omitted irrelevant of their strength of application.

 

[fun8stuff]

It is funny that you mention that, because I was thinking of the same analogy earlier today. The difference is that, based on my experiences thus far, a "4" on the interview is very different from a perfect "5," largely due to its aftershock effects on the final ranking session, not the numerical ranking. While the step scores may factor into the numerical ranking, they do not seem to have a big impact on the subjective ranking sessions so a 25X may not differ from a 26X when you chart it out to the final rank. You can see how this is logical to a competitive PD: if I have already set up a formula for calculating rank based on objective factors with what I consider appropriate weighted averages, why consider this value again? If I were to think that was necessary, I would simply rework the original formula so I would not have to deal with the scores again. This would simplify my life and allow me to focus on the only new component -- the interview.

The other big hole in the argument is that the interview is not limited to the 20 min spent in the formal interview. It encompasses the entirety of the time in the city, hypothetically starting at check-in to the complimentary hotel lodging. Everyone you encounter is asked about you, from the janitor to the PD or chairman. Hypothetically, imagine a perfect paper applicant who also performs perfectly on every interview measure, but in a momentary lapse of judgment, comes off as an a-hole to a janitor. The janitor then informs the PD of this and the otherwise perfect candidate is now removed entirely from the ROL or dropped to the bottom third. (See "How to blow your shot..." thread to hear it directly from the horse's mouth) You may be shocked at how often this actually occurs. The converse is also true: if everyone from the janitor or PC to the PD or chair loves you, that will of course have a tremendous impact on your final rank due to the subjective rank sessions.

wait, are you being serious? lol... your posts were so ridiculous i thought for sure you were being sarcastic.... let's put it this way: you aren't matching at a top program with a 210 step 1 + great interview, however you may still match at a great program with an average to low-average interview + 255 step 1. Your goals for interviews should be to be polite/cordial and enthusiastically represent your application and why you want to do radiology at that particular program- without being over the top (which we see more than a few times every cycle). Of course you want to be professional with all of the staff.... 99+% of people are in my experience (never witnessed or heard of anyone being rude in the last several years of residency and med school interviews).

 

[fun8stuff]

Given that a program has a Step 1 avg of 240 (for example), the appropriate comparison would be an applicant with an average to low-average 235 Step 1 with an outstanding IV vs. the 255 with an average to low-average IV. In this case, the first applicant would be ranked higher.

At some programs. Most programs would still rank that person with 255 higher unless the interview went really poorly.

 

[jahbrony]

At some programs. Most programs would still rank that person with 255 higher unless the interview went really poorly.

Maybe, maybe not. Obviously hypothetical, but if you're 235 on step 1 and getting interviews at top 25 places, then there's likely something unique about your application. That something could be unique enough to move you higher on a program's ROL.

 

[drizzt3117]

After reading this, I am not sure where you disagree with me... 😛

I don't disagree with you that the IV is impt, I just think it's not like everyone is on even ground once you get to the interview stage. I agree that it's very impt, more than most applicants think.

 

[2012mdc]

I don't disagree with you that the IV is impt, I just think it's not like everyone is on even ground once you get to the interview stage. I agree that it's very impt, more than most applicants think.

I agree that it can be extremely important, I just don't think most applicants are in the extreme, positive or negative. It's important but it's my feeling that most people are similar when interviewing bc the time is so limited. I would guess that most applicants don't affect their rank spot that much.

 

[shark2000]

Not to overstate the point, but you're obviously wrong. If the 255's interview went "really poorly," they run the risk of not being ranked at all, let alone higher than an applicant with an outstanding interview. If it went poorly, then they would be at the bottom of the ROL regardless of their stats. This has been repeated by every PD I have ever talked to, both within and outside of Radiology, at both top 5 and lower tier programs.

Here is what a resident posted in another thread:
A quick example: We interviewed someone a few years ago who had a step 1 >270, an amazing CV, and great letters of recommendation from top surgeons at Ivory tower hospitals. Unfortunately, outside of the interview this person was wound about as tight as a swiss watch. They made no attempt to talk to the other applicants and minimal conversation to the residents. They looked bored on the tour and again asked no questions. Basically with their behavior told us they were unhappy to be there. This person was never rude to anyone, didn't complain about anything, had no social gaffes. But really didn't make that great of an impression. Result: ranked but not very highly.

That is an extreme case. Most applicants look the same on the day of interview. There are not any super-charming characters in medicine. If you are such a charismatic character that can impress the interviewer in less than 10 minutes to rank your 210 higher than 270, then you do not belong to medicine. You should have been a famous multimillionaire by now.
There are 5% horrible weird introverted ones that are ranked low. But for the rest it is the same. Nobody will rank you higher because you like painting and the other applicant likes drawing.

 

[choweee]

If the above is true re: importance of interviews, then what does that mean for the relative importance of lesser factors like LOIs (or thank you letters, for those who believe they matter)? This conversation would then lead me to believe that they don't influence ranking.

Also, if pre-interview rank lists exist, and interviews are not game-changers for less-competitive applicants, then those who are hesitant to accept interviews off a waitlist would be correct in believing that they are already further down a program's list, and in the grand scheme of things, will have a more difficult time matching at said program than their non-waitlisted peers.

I just got a phone call this morning (Tuesday) for an unexpected open interview spot this Friday. If I'm in, say, the bottom-quartile of this program's interview list, which is usually around 80 applicants for most programs, they better go way down their rank list before I even have a chance of matching there.

 

[teal27]

did that program happen to be SLR?

 

[PokerDoc]

did that program happen to be SLR?

lol they called me too but I declined

 

[Radiculous]

I don't disagree with you that the IV is impt, I just think it's not like everyone is on even ground once you get to the interview stage. I agree that it's very impt, more than most applicants think.

Agree with DrizzT. Likely varies from program to program, but many I believe have a pre-interview gestalt which is not exactly a ROL but more like tiers or groupings of applicants based on the applicant's overall file. How easily the applicant can move himself or herself to the front of the pack based on interview performance also likely varies widely among programs. I think it is definitely true that you can hurt yourself more than help potentially because any single faux pas or misstep may be enough to send you hurtling to the bottom of the ROL (or not be ranked at all). However, I don't think it's true that everyone at the interview stage is on equal footing. That being said, clicking with interviewers and selling yourself well to a program goes a long way.

I was very anxious about this process early due to a personal situation that requires me to have certain geographic preferences and horror stories from close friends with great numbers who didn't match; the anxiety over this caused me to overthink details somewhat idiotically. But 2012mdc/DrizzT posts have all proven accurate -- it's not about the small stuff, it's about overall fit, and we all just need to chill.

 

[2012mdc]

i happen to be light-hearted, bubbly, and personable throughout interviews because its who I am...i just hope it doesn't come off as unprofessional. I can't usually tell how I did after interviews...

In another field like gen surg or ortho that might be problematic but I don't think so in rads.

Granted I've only been on 6 rads interviews but everyone has been nice. There was one place where the interviews were awkward (other applicants agreed) but they still weren't malignant. Even people at big name places with reps of being "malignant" were nice. It's still radiology.

It seems like programs have a few simple goals in the interview season.
1) Is this applicant a douche/jerk/a-hole?
This is accomplished by observation during the pre-interview dinner and throughout the interview day.

2) Would this applicant be happy here (in the program and in the city)?
Many have asked about specific interests in radiology and the common "Where do you see yourself in 10 years?" question. They also give you the opportunity to ask specific questions about the program which can highlight the potential "fit"

My outside interests and hobbies have come up frequently and many times are discussed in the context of are they easily accessible.

 

[jazzman84]

In another field like gen surg or ortho that might be problematic but I don't think so in rads.

Granted I've only been on 6 rads interviews but everyone has been nice. There was one place where the interviews were awkward (other applicants agreed) but they still weren't malignant. Even people at big name places with reps of being "malignant" were nice. It's still radiology.

It seems like programs have a few simple goals in the interview season.
1) Is this applicant a douche/jerk/a-hole?
This is accomplished by observation during the pre-interview dinner and throughout the interview day.

2) Would this applicant be happy here (in the program and in the city)?
Many have asked about specific interests in radiology and the common "Where do you see yourself in 10 years?" question. They also give you the opportunity to ask specific questions about the program which can highlight the potential "fit"

My outside interests and hobbies have come up frequently and many times are discussed in the context of are they easily accessible.

I definitely agree that outside interests carry significant weight in telling programs what kind of a person you really are. At most of my interviews so far (prelim/TY and rads) the bulk of the time was spent discussing my interest in watch collecting and repair, with one program director starting off the interview with, "So, Swiss or American?"

Reading your interviewers is also a critical skill; if someone has a Ron Paul button on the lapel of their jacket that's hanging on the chair behind them, you will score way more points if you can tailor your answers to that ideology, especially when asked questions like, "Where do you see medicine going in the current climate of healthcare reform?"

I've gotten one post-interview e-mail from a rads PD saying that everyone thought I would be a great match, so I hope my strategy is working!

 

[VIRads]

I've gotten one post-interview e-mail from a rads PD saying that everyone thought I would be a great match, so I hope my strategy is working!

I've gotten one of those that was a forwarded message. Me thinks they are playing games and sending them to most applicants at this particular program.

 

[jazzman84]

I've gotten one of those that was a forwarded message. Me thinks they are playing games and sending them to most applicants at this particular program.

Mine wasn't a forwarded e-mail. Why do you think we are talking about the same program?

 

[badasshairday]

The interview depends on the program. Some definitely have some pre interview list.

 

[shark2000]

I definitely agree that outside interests carry significant weight in telling programs what kind of a person you really are. At most of my interviews so far (prelim/TY and rads) the bulk of the time was spent discussing my interest in watch collecting and repair, with one program director starting off the interview with, "So, Swiss or American?"

Reading your interviewers is also a critical skill; if someone has a Ron Paul button on the lapel of their jacket that's hanging on the chair behind them, you will score way more points if you can tailor your answers to that ideology, especially when asked questions like, "Where do you see medicine going in the current climate of healthcare reform?"

I've gotten one post-interview e-mail from a rads PD saying that everyone thought I would be a great match, so I hope my strategy is working!

What do you expect to be asked during interview?
Put yourself in the shoes of the interviewer. You have a very busy schedule, you have to teach residents and fellows and you are conducting a very busy personal life. Now all of a sudden you have to interview people.

Do you expect them to ask you radiology questions?
Do you expect to be asked medicine or USMLE question?

They just chat with you. The only topic that you two can talk about is about you and your interests. Be sure that the answers are not important at all. The important thing is to make the impression that you are a normal person, you can interact with people and you are not going to be a pain in the neck. That's all.
In radiology they have to sit with you in the same room for at least 8-9 hours a day. They want to make sure you can get along with people easily.
Nobody cares what you do or eat in your spare time, unless it raises some red flags.

 

[fun8stuff]

What do you expect to be asked during interview?
Put yourself in the shoes of the interviewer. You have a very busy schedule, you have to teach residents and fellows and you are conducting a very busy personal life. Now all of a sudden you have to interview people.

Do you expect them to ask you radiology questions?
Do you expect to be asked medicine or USMLE question?

They just chat with you. The only topic that you two can talk about is about you and your interests. Be sure that the answers are not important at all. The important thing is to make the impression that you are a normal person, you can interact with people and you are not going to be a pain in the neck. That's all.
In radiology they have to sit with you in the same room for at least 8-9 hours a day. They want to make sure you can get along with people easily.
Nobody cares what you do or eat in your spare time, unless it raises some red flags.

exactly. and of course ALL have a pre-interview list. how do you think they decide who to interview? your goal should be to be relaxed and normal on the interview- fit the mold and jump through the hoops. most of the candidates with high scores/grades/etc will tell you that the most of the programs kissed their ass during the interview. majority only care about whats on paper and that you can hold a 15 minute conversation.

 

[SGuttenberg]

Forget "first aid for step 1", "how to win freinds and influence people" should've been the book I religiously read over and over during medical school.