When interviewers ask this:

[Vacant]

---

Members don't see this ad.

I've had quite a few interviewers including Chairs and PDs primarily asking me "Do you have any questions for me regarding our programs?" They simply said, "We are pleased to have you here." They did not ask me any probing questions. And if I do ask question about their program, they made sure to emphasize how their program and city are fine match for me. Is this a good sign or a bad sign or means nothing since they do that to everyone?

I have some glitches in my file that I expected them to ask about. So I was surprised that they did not.

 

[Vacant]

I ask this so that I can rank the programs that are more likely to rank me high. I'm wondering their lack of probing questions and just waiting for me to ask questions indicate their lack of interest in me.

It's confusing.

 

[ZagDoc]

I ask this so that I can rank the programs that are more likely to rank me high. I'm wondering their lack of probing questions and just waiting for me to ask questions indicate their lack of interest in me.

It's confusing.

Probably 85-90% of my interviews (been on 7 so far, which probably equals a good 45 individual interviews) have been very benign, conversational, and not probing in the slightest. My guess is that at this point, your application speaks the most about the nitty gritty stuff (they know you are intelligent, hard working, etc) and the interview is more about personality fit. The same interviewers that lobbed softballs also had told me I had an "incredibly strong application", so I dont think that the lack of difficult questions indicated any lack of interest.

 

[alwaysaangel]

I ask this so that I can rank the programs that are more likely to rank me high.

You are not supposed to do this.

Don't try to "game" the match.

Your list takes precedence. It does not hurt you at all to rank your favorite programs the highest, even if you think they will not rank you highly. If that happens so be it, you will not match at the first few and will still match at your favorite program that does rank you highly.

Applicants should never let their rank list be influenced by how much they think a program does or does not like them. (for ranking purposes - if you really didn't get along with the program director and don't think you will be happy there then thats a different story).

 

[Vacant]

You are not supposed to do this.

Don't try to "game" the match.

Your list takes precedence. It does not hurt you at all to rank your favorite programs the highest, even if you think they will not rank you highly. If that happens so be it, you will not match at the first few and will still match at your favorite program that does rank you highly.

Applicants should never let their rank list be influenced by how much they think a program does or does not like them. (for ranking purposes - if you really didn't get along with the program director and don't think you will be happy there then thats a different story).

You sound pretty certain despite you being in the same shoe as I am. I hope you are right. I'm just trying not to end up scrambling.

 

[alwaysaangel]

You sound pretty certain despite you being in the same shoe as I am. I hope you are right. I'm just trying not to end up scrambling.

I'm pretty certain because the match has been explained to the students at my school time and time again.

If you understand how the match works, you know that you list schools in your preferential order and it has no effect on how the programs listed you or how you end up matching.

If an applicant doesn't match and has to scramble its because no program wanted them enough to fit them in. Not because the applicant put their list in some "wrong" order.

 

[Vacant]

If an applicant doesn't match and has to scramble its because no program wanted them enough to fit them in.

Wow, that could be pretty depressing for the faint-hearted.

 

[atsai3]

Wow, that could be pretty depressing for the faint-hearted.

Yeah, too bad for them.

-AT.

 

[iceman77_7]

You are not supposed to do this.

Don't try to "game" the match.

Your list takes precedence. It does not hurt you at all to rank your favorite programs the highest, even if you think they will not rank you highly. If that happens so be it, you will not match at the first few and will still match at your favorite program that does rank you highly.

Applicants should never let their rank list be influenced by how much they think a program does or does not like them. (for ranking purposes - if you really didn't get along with the program director and don't think you will be happy there then thats a different story).

+1000. We joked about this at UCSF this week and I'm shocked people out there still don't know this.

 

[DrKnowLittle]

I'm beginning to think it has less to do with knowledge and more to do with either 1) not taking the time to actually understand the process or 2) feeling as if the system is somehow rigged or going to screw up.

I could put ten different schools that I didn't interview at as 1-10 and #11 would still act as my #1. Rank your preference. From there, just try to edge up on your programs' rank list. All you can really do then, assuming all programs have made up their mind, is to rank your preference.

 

[peppy]

Yeah, it doesn't really matter how the programs rank you as others said.

Personally, I think the "Do you have any questions for me?" interview is more a reflection of the fact that most interviewers are busy people who'd rather not bother to take the time to read through applications thinking of things to ask you about. It's a lot easier for the interviewer to just sit back and let you think of questions to fill the time with.
I personally had a more favorable impression of places where the interviewers took the time to try to think of personalized questions to ask about my application.
At one place, I had already met with the PD while doing an audition rotation and so she could have easily pulled the "I already know about you so do you have any questions for me?" game if she had wanted to be lazy. I was very impressed that, instead, she still made an effort to think of things specific to me to ask about/talk about in my formal interview with her. That shows that the PD really does care about finding the right people for the program in my opinion.

 

[atsai3]

Yeah, it doesn't really matter how the programs rank you as others said.

Personally, I think the "Do you have any questions for me?" interview is more a reflection of the fact that most interviewers are busy people who'd rather not bother to take the time to read through applications thinking of things to ask you about. It's a lot easier for the interviewer to just sit back and let you think of questions to fill the time with.

That's a rather uncharitable interpretation.
The interview is as much about the applicant trying to find out more information about the program as it is about the program trying to find out more information about the applicant. So an interviewer asking you if you have questions (i.e., about the program) is giving you a chance to find out more about the program.

-AT.

 

[peppy]

Just to make sure it's clear, I'm not saying it's wrong for interviewers to ask applicants if they have any questions at, say, the end of the interview. I just think it shows the interviewer didn't do any prep work (possibly due to being legitimately busy, since most interviewers really are busy people, but also possibly due to plain old-fashioned laziness) when an interviewer makes the focus of the entire interview making the applicant ask questions.
Most of us want to go to an interview feeling like the people at the program want to get to know us better. I think if you really are interested in getting to know someone or find something out about them, you *should* have some questions to ask them...just like programs expect applicants to ask questions!
I mean, think of how badly it would go over if an applicant were to actually say "You know, actually, I don't have any questions. Let's focus on what questions you have about me". 🙂 The conventional wisdom is that if an applicant doesn't have questions to ask at the interview then they will be perceived as "not interested" (even if the applicant may have gone to considerable effort to travel to the intervew). If programs are judging applicants on what questions they ask, why shouldn't applicants judge programs that don't seem interested in actually inquiring into who the applicants are?

Honestly, I quickly became tired of getting asked if I "had any questions" on the interview trail. Is there any candidate out there who doesn't think they had enough chances to ask questions at interviews? Especially when you consider that, if you don't get to ask during the interview, you almost always have the option of emailing or calling with further questions afterwards?
The reality is that I had some specific things I was looking for in a program and usually I could figure out if a program met my needs from their website, SDN, and word of mouth so I really didn't have that many serious burning questions on the interview day. However, there is so much pressure on applicants to think of "questions" for the sake of seeming interested, I had to come up with a long list of questions just to have something to talk about. I guess I feel like if we have to play that game, then programs should humor us by actually asking us questions too. 🙂

 

[ZagDoc]

That's a rather uncharitable interpretation.
The interview is as much about the applicant trying to find out more information about the program as it is about the program trying to find out more information about the applicant. So an interviewer asking you if you have questions (i.e., about the program) is giving you a chance to find out more about the program.

-AT.

There is some truth to this, of course. But when you're asked for the 20th or 30th time on an interview day if you "have any questions", it takes every bit of my willpower to not audibly sigh. I know its part of the "gamemanship" of the interview process designed to gauge program interest, but it can end up being incredibly lame sometimes, and I agree sometimes its a lazy cop-out designed to fill time during an indivdual interview.

 

[jenesaispas0005]

There is some truth to this, of course. But when you're asked for the 20th or 30th time on an interview day if you "have any questions", it takes every bit of my willpower to not audibly sigh. I know its part of the "gamemanship" of the interview process designed to gauge program interest, but it can end up being incredibly lame sometimes, and I agree sometimes its a lazy cop-out designed to fill time during an indivdual interview.

Agree wholeheartedly. I have been on interviews where i have 8 or 9 individual meetings, and at EACH ONE they ask 'So, what questions do you have about us?'. Seriously?! Sometime during the 6 hours of meeting with almost 10 people during the course of the day, going to lunch (and dinner sometimes) with residents and having informational presentations, we run out of questions. It's not fair to judge us on that. At that point I think many of my fellow applicants would agree that the only question on my mind is 'can i go home now?'

 

[smq123]

There is some truth to this, of course. But when you're asked for the 20th or 30th time on an interview day if you "have any questions", it takes every bit of my willpower to not audibly sigh. I know its part of the "gamemanship" of the interview process designed to gauge program interest, but it can end up being incredibly lame sometimes, and I agree sometimes its a lazy cop-out designed to fill time during an indivdual interview.

*sigh*

So, when I was interviewing, I also got the "do you have any questions for me?" a million times. I hated it, and swore that I would NEVER ask that when I conducted interviews.

When I first started interviewing candidates this year, guess what I ended up blurting out at the end of every interview? 😳

It's conversation filler. I don't actually really care if you have questions or not. I'm sure you've already asked them. But some interviewees are not very talkative, and so I'll try anything to get them to talk. For the applicants with really interesting backgrounds, I've usually never had to ask if they had questions.

Just some thoughts from the other side of the interviewing table.

 

[QofQuimica]

I have to agree with Peppy that interviewers should ask at least some questions to get to know the applicant. How much can they really get to know me based on my questions to them about elective time and where people live? If the interviewer has actually read my file, they always have plenty of questions for me, because I'm a nontraditional applicant. But even if they haven't read it, they can still ask me to tell them about myself, what I like to do for fun, where do I see myself in ten years, etc. In fact, I generally assume that someone who asks me to tell them about myself probably has not read my file, and I summarize my file and tell them where I want to end up in ten years accordingly.

 

[mcl]

Agree wholeheartedly. I have been on interviews where i have 8 or 9 individual meetings, and at EACH ONE they ask 'So, what questions do you have about us?'. Seriously?! Sometime during the 6 hours of meeting with almost 10 people during the course of the day, going to lunch (and dinner sometimes) with residents and having informational presentations, we run out of questions. It's not fair to judge us on that. At that point I think many of my fellow applicants would agree that the only question on my mind is 'can i go home now?'

Some programs assign specific questions to their interviewers, but I'd imagine that most of the time, interviewers don't know what questions the other interviewers are asking/not asking. Programs definitely don't want to get feedback from applicants indicating there was never an opportunity to ask about their specific questions.

Also, we don't know what is imporant to you as you are comparing/ contrasting the programs you visit. Are you worried about call? Autonomy in making patient management decisions? Affordability of housing? Job opportunities for a spouse/partner? I could give my usual 20-minute PowerPoint driven spiel about the wonders of my program, and yet never address something you care about and need to know in order to make an informed decision come Match time. So I'm always going to ask if you have any questions.

Finally, I don't think it's a bad thing to ask the same question to multiple interviewers to get differing perspectives on an issue.

 

[m1345]

Sorry for bringing back this old thread. This was a problem for me during medical school interviews...after a long day of hearing all about the program, months of pouring over the programs website, SDN, I had a hard time coming up with lists of questions to ask each program (especially interviews with people high up the chain, like PDs). Could we brainstorm a list of good questions that we could keep in mind throughout this season?

 

[shopsteward]

Sorry for bringing back this old thread. This was a problem for me during medical school interviews...after a long day of hearing all about the program, months of pouring over the programs website, SDN, I had a hard time coming up with lists of questions to ask each program (especially interviews with people high up the chain, like PDs). Could we brainstorm a list of good questions that we could keep in mind throughout this season?

If you've got an interview, it should be because you meet the program's minimum criteria for taking you on. After that, you are trying 1) not to raise any red flags by your behaviour at interview days, 2) to take the opportunity of being at the program in person to show them that you are an even better candidate than they first thought, 3) to check that you still want to go the program after you have seen it in person.

So any questions you ask should be directed firstly at showing what a good fit you are for the program. Do this by showing that you have read up on the program and/or area - eg "I saw on the program's website that you really emphasize X/have opportunities for Y. It's something I'm really interested in because of Z: can you tell me any more about it?"

Secondly your questions can be aimed at checking out whether the program is a good fit for you. You have to be a bit careful about this, because if you ask something in the wrong way, it could be a red flag (you are seen to be critical or nit-picky). But something along the lines of "I haven't seen much about X on your website/looking around today: can you tell me how it works in your program?" would be hard to take offence at and shows you are paying attention. Save the trickier questions for someone who is less likely to have an input into the decision on you, and even then keep them as positively framed as possible.

If you don't have any questions, don't just say "No", say something like "It's been a well-organised day and I've already had all my questions answered. I asked about X and was told Y which was interesting/useful to know/made me even keener to join your program." If you can do this, or something like it, your questioner won't feel snubbed.

Choosing trainees/empIoyees is a notoriously difficult process, and there is very little useful research into how to make outcomes less haphazard. My personal view (from both sides of the process) is that an interview going well is as good an indicator as any that person and organisation will be a good fit. But being a good interviewer is difficult, and done properly takes a fair amount of preparation. It may be your interviewer's first time, or they may be insanely busy or tired. A bad interview is as excrutiating for the interviewer as it is for the interviewee.

 

[m1345]

If you've got an interview, it should be because you meet the program's minimum criteria for taking you on. After that, you are trying 1) not to raise any red flags by your behaviour at interview days, 2) to take the opportunity of being at the program in person to show them that you are an even better candidate than they first thought, 3) to check that you still want to go the program after you have seen it in person.

So any questions you ask should be directed firstly at showing what a good fit you are for the program. Do this by showing that you have read up on the program and/or area - eg "I saw on the program's website that you really emphasize X/have opportunities for Y. It's something I'm really interested in because of Z: can you tell me any more about it?"

Secondly your questions can be aimed at checking out whether the program is a good fit for you. You have to be a bit careful about this, because if you ask something in the wrong way, it could be a red flag (you are seen to be critical or nit-picky). But something along the lines of "I haven't seen much about X on your website/looking around today: can you tell me how it works in your program?" would be hard to take offence at and shows you are paying attention. Save the trickier questions for someone who is less likely to have an input into the decision on you, and even then keep them as positively framed as possible.

If you don't have any questions, don't just say "No", say something like "It's been a well-organised day and I've already had all my questions answered. I asked about X and was told Y which was interesting/useful to know/made me even keener to join your program." If you can do this, or something like it, your questioner won't feel snubbed.

Choosing trainees/empIoyees is a notoriously difficult process, and there is very little useful research into how to make outcomes less haphazard. My personal view (from both sides of the process) is that an interview going well is as good an indicator as any that person and organisation will be a good fit. But being a good interviewer is difficult, and done properly takes a fair amount of preparation. It may be your interviewer's first time, or they may be insanely busy or tired. A bad interview is as excrutiating for the interviewer as it is for the interviewee.

Very helpful!! You touched on something that I couldn't figure out how to articulate in my post...I'm worried about looking too "nit picky" or high maintenance in my questions--your strategy seems like it would directly address this.

 

[DEdm]

If you've got an interview, it should be because you meet the program's minimum criteria for taking you on. After that, you are trying 1) not to raise any red flags by your behaviour at interview days, 2) to take the opportunity of being at the program in person to show them that you are an even better candidate than they first thought, 3) to check that you still want to go the program after you have seen it in person.

So any questions you ask should be directed firstly at showing what a good fit you are for the program. Do this by showing that you have read up on the program and/or area - eg "I saw on the program's website that you really emphasize X/have opportunities for Y. It's something I'm really interested in because of Z: can you tell me any more about it?"

Secondly your questions can be aimed at checking out whether the program is a good fit for you. You have to be a bit careful about this, because if you ask something in the wrong way, it could be a red flag (you are seen to be critical or nit-picky). But something along the lines of "I haven't seen much about X on your website/looking around today: can you tell me how it works in your program?" would be hard to take offence at and shows you are paying attention. Save the trickier questions for someone who is less likely to have an input into the decision on you, and even then keep them as positively framed as possible.

If you don't have any questions, don't just say "No", say something like "It's been a well-organised day and I've already had all my questions answered. I asked about X and was told Y which was interesting/useful to know/made me even keener to join your program." If you can do this, or something like it, your questioner won't feel snubbed.

Choosing trainees/empIoyees is a notoriously difficult process, and there is very little useful research into how to make outcomes less haphazard. My personal view (from both sides of the process) is that an interview going well is as good an indicator as any that person and organisation will be a good fit. But being a good interviewer is difficult, and done properly takes a fair amount of preparation. It may be your interviewer's first time, or they may be insanely busy or tired. A bad interview is as excrutiating for the interviewer as it is for the interviewee.

One of the best responses that I have read on SDN. Thanks for the information.

 

[pedsFMG]

If you've got an interview, it should be because you meet the program's minimum criteria for taking you on. After that, you are trying 1) not to raise any red flags by your behaviour at interview days, 2) to take the opportunity of being at the program in person to show them that you are an even better candidate than they first thought, 3) to check that you still want to go the program after you have seen it in person.

So any questions you ask should be directed firstly at showing what a good fit you are for the program. Do this by showing that you have read up on the program and/or area - eg "I saw on the program's website that you really emphasize X/have opportunities for Y. It's something I'm really interested in because of Z: can you tell me any more about it?"

Secondly your questions can be aimed at checking out whether the program is a good fit for you. You have to be a bit careful about this, because if you ask something in the wrong way, it could be a red flag (you are seen to be critical or nit-picky). But something along the lines of "I haven't seen much about X on your website/looking around today: can you tell me how it works in your program?" would be hard to take offence at and shows you are paying attention. Save the trickier questions for someone who is less likely to have an input into the decision on you, and even then keep them as positively framed as possible.

If you don't have any questions, don't just say "No", say something like "It's been a well-organised day and I've already had all my questions answered. I asked about X and was told Y which was interesting/useful to know/made me even keener to join your program." If you can do this, or something like it, your questioner won't feel snubbed.

Choosing trainees/empIoyees is a notoriously difficult process, and there is very little useful research into how to make outcomes less haphazard. My personal view (from both sides of the process) is that an interview going well is as good an indicator as any that person and organisation will be a good fit. But being a good interviewer is difficult, and done properly takes a fair amount of preparation. It may be your interviewer's first time, or they may be insanely busy or tired. A bad interview is as excrutiating for the interviewer as it is for the interviewee.

Thanks shopsteward - that's a really helpful post!

Does anyone have any views on asking questions that you can (have already) answered on the website? My instinct is that it would suggest you haven't even bothered to check out the website closely but: 1) I wonder if the interviewers actually read the website and 2) Some websites are amazingly comprehensive and answer almost anything I'd want to know. Any thoughts on striking a balance? I suppose as you say, just asking them for more details about what you've read.

Thanks!

 

[m1345]

Thanks shopsteward - that's a really helpful post!

Does anyone have any views on asking questions that you can (have already) answered on the website? My instinct is that it would suggest you haven't even bothered to check out the website closely but: 1) I wonder if the interviewers actually read the website and 2) Some websites are amazingly comprehensive and answer almost anything I'd want to know. Any thoughts on striking a balance? I suppose as you say, just asking them for more details about what you've read.

Thanks!

This is something I worry about, too. I think as a general rule you shouldn't ask something that can easily be found on the website, but some websites are extremely comprehensive. I'm probably going to approach preparing for interviews by going through the websites and listing things I would like them to elaborate on...but I'm afraid I won't come up with many questions (w/o looking nitpicky) for the programs w these incredible websites.

 

[gutonc]

This is something I worry about, too. I think as a general rule you shouldn't ask something that can easily be found on the website, but some websites are extremely comprehensive. I'm probably going to approach preparing for interviews by going through the websites and listing things I would like them to elaborate on...but I'm afraid I won't come up with many questions (w/o looking nitpicky) for the programs w these incredible websites.

FWIW, as an interviewer and member of the selection committee (but not involved in the program administration), I have no idea, and don't really care, what's on the program website. Also, since our IT group likes to change the rules on internal website design, management and links on a regular (Q90 minute) basis, I would assume that whatever is there is wrong, out of date or broken. So frankly, I don't care if you ask me questions about stuff that's on the website.

 

[Raryn]

I don't understand the people who can ever even think "well, all my questions were answered so I don't really have anything to ask person #X." FFS, ask the same questions again! If you think it might be in any way, shape, or form important to you, get more than one persons opinion on it. You can even work in something like person Y mentioned such and such, but what is your opinion on this subject as you're discussing it.

Your interviewers will not sit around afterwards discussing what questions you asked (unless you asked something frankly inappropriate) and even if they do, getting multiple peoples perspectives on important things will not be seen as a bad thing.

 

[twright]

I don't understand the people who can ever even think "well, all my questions were answered so I don't really have anything to ask person #X." FFS, ask the same questions again! If you think it might be in any way, shape, or form important to you, get more than one persons opinion on it. You can even work in something like person Y mentioned such and such, but what is your opinion on this subject as you're discussing it.

Your interviewers will not sit around afterwards discussing what questions you asked (unless you asked something frankly inappropriate) and even if they do, getting multiple peoples perspectives on important things will not be seen as a bad thing.

Agree with the previous 2 posts.

I don't even know if I can find the residency program's web site at my institution, and when I get a candidate in my office I'm certainly not going to say or think "wait a minute... that information is on the web site, didn't you see it?" in response to a question.

In any case, even if you think you know all there is to know about a program via SDN (which is... problematic) there is always more to learn by getting someone else's perspective.

 

[blue2000]

You can ask big picture questions that clearly won't be on a website:

1) Where do you see the department/residency program going in the next 5 years?

2) How has your career trajectory been supported by the department

3) (to residents) what do you wish you'd known about this program when you interviewed here?

4) What are you most proud of in this institution?

These questions can be asked to every interviewer, and probably will give you an overall sense of the culture of the place.

I would be careful about nitpicky "benefits" related questions in the interview day, though it's totally legitimate to want to know the answer -- vacation, who pays for parking, retirement. All of those things may play in to your decision, but maybe be better questions for HR or the general GME office. Everyone likes to play in to the fiction that you are so excited about the opportunity to learn at an institution that you couldn't possible care about whether the 401K is matched or not.