A good friend of mine recently applied for his company’s general counsel position. The position had recently been vacated and was up for grabs. He had been there for several years and saw this as his chance to finally step up to the big time. So he applied.
As he expected, he was quickly given an interview. He sat down with the CEO one Friday afternoon, ready to demonstrate his ability to take on the challenge of senior management.
The usual pleasantries were exchanged and then the first question.
“Arthur, if you could sum up yourself in five words, what would you say?” asked the CEO. The second question: “What are your major weaknesses?” Then: “Where do you see yourself in five years?”
Arthur by this point had become suspicious. These are the kind of questions one prepares for when leaving university, but not when making the step to a seat on the board of directors.
“Did you tell the CEO that these questions were inappropriate, that he ought to focus on the actual skills required to perform the job?” I asked Arthur over a beer later.
“Well I was a bit surprised by the questions, and I didn’t want to be rude, I really want the job,” he said.
He of course didn’t get the job. It was given to an outsider who happened to be a golfing partner of the CEO. Had Arthur given himself time to think he would have realised then and there that the reason he was being asked such daft questions was that the CEO wasn’t really interested in him as a candidate. The CEO was also just being polite, going through the motions.
So what should Arthur have said? What is the appropriate way to respond to inappropriate job interview questions?
First, realise that the interviewer who asks idiotic question is either not going to hire you or is not someone you would want to work for.
Asking these kinds of standard, look-em-up-on-the-internet job interview questions shows either laziness, disinterestedness or just plain dumbness. So speak the truth.
In response to the query about summing yourself up in five words, I would suggest: “Can answer sensible questions, sensibly.”
Or if you wish to be more direct: “Unsympathetic towards unprepared interviewers.”
And finally, if you feel that simple words are more likely to be understood: “Hoping that your questions improve.”
If you are asked the imbecilic question about what your faults are, don’t go with the equally odious “bit of a perfectionist” or “work too hard” answer. Try: “An uncontrollable urge to give sarcastic answers to stupid questions” or “Tendency to make unkind assumptions about unimaginative interviewers”.
“Where do you see yourself in five years” is a particularly pointless thing to ask even a fresh graduate.
It is so blatantly obvious an attempt to ascertain whether the candidate has ambition, it is practically worthless. The answer the interviewer wants to hear is one that demonstrates ambition without arrogance. So for a graduate, it’s supposed to be something like “to have proven myself capable and be well on my way to partnership”.
For anyone who has been working more than about five years, the answer is either the truth: “your boss” or “a job in a better firm having used this position as a stepping stone” or a lie “working my way towards becoming a long-term contributor to the firm”.
Other more interesting answers might include: “I hear there is good money in Ponzi schemes, so I’m thinking about working towards that” or “having stolen enough stationery from you to start my own newsagent”.
In addition to stupid job interview questions, I should say something about inappropriate questions.
While increasingly rare in many Western countries, it is not unheard of for women in Hong Kong to be asked if they plan to get pregnant (and therefore will require maternity leave), if they are in long-term relationships (and might therefore be at risk of getting pregnant) or if they have a boyfriend (this one is just childish curiosity).
Most websites and advisers will say that this creates a very difficult situation.
If you answer, you are allowing the interviewer to behave inappropriately; if you refuse you might sacrifice your opportunity to get the job even though it’s the right thing to do and so on. This is nonsense. There is nothing difficult about this situation. Lie. Lying is an integral part of job interviews.
The more stupid or inappropriate the questions get, the more you are entitled, almost expected, to lie.
Say you are focused on your career and not thinking about children right now. Say you are gay. Say you hate males and children and particularly male children. You can decide later if you really want the job. And if you take the job and you do get pregnant, say you changed your mind. People do.
My friend Arthur changed his mind about wanting the general counsel job.
Having met the CEO’s golfing buddy, his new boss, he has decided he doesn’t want any job there. So he’s interviewing with other firms, and this time he’s prepared for every question.
2 comments:
Lying - an integral part of job interviews
29 November 2009
A good friend of mine recently applied for his company’s general counsel position. The position had recently been vacated and was up for grabs. He had been there for several years and saw this as his chance to finally step up to the big time. So he applied.
As he expected, he was quickly given an interview. He sat down with the CEO one Friday afternoon, ready to demonstrate his ability to take on the challenge of senior management.
The usual pleasantries were exchanged and then the first question.
“Arthur, if you could sum up yourself in five words, what would you say?” asked the CEO. The second question: “What are your major weaknesses?” Then: “Where do you see yourself in five years?”
Arthur by this point had become suspicious. These are the kind of questions one prepares for when leaving university, but not when making the step to a seat on the board of directors.
“Did you tell the CEO that these questions were inappropriate, that he ought to focus on the actual skills required to perform the job?” I asked Arthur over a beer later.
“Well I was a bit surprised by the questions, and I didn’t want to be rude, I really want the job,” he said.
He of course didn’t get the job. It was given to an outsider who happened to be a golfing partner of the CEO. Had Arthur given himself time to think he would have realised then and there that the reason he was being asked such daft questions was that the CEO wasn’t really interested in him as a candidate. The CEO was also just being polite, going through the motions.
So what should Arthur have said? What is the appropriate way to respond to inappropriate job interview questions?
First, realise that the interviewer who asks idiotic question is either not going to hire you or is not someone you would want to work for.
Asking these kinds of standard, look-em-up-on-the-internet job interview questions shows either laziness, disinterestedness or just plain dumbness. So speak the truth.
In response to the query about summing yourself up in five words, I would suggest: “Can answer sensible questions, sensibly.”
Or if you wish to be more direct: “Unsympathetic towards unprepared interviewers.”
And finally, if you feel that simple words are more likely to be understood: “Hoping that your questions improve.”
If you are asked the imbecilic question about what your faults are, don’t go with the equally odious “bit of a perfectionist” or “work too hard” answer. Try: “An uncontrollable urge to give sarcastic answers to stupid questions” or “Tendency to make unkind assumptions about unimaginative interviewers”.
“Where do you see yourself in five years” is a particularly pointless thing to ask even a fresh graduate.
It is so blatantly obvious an attempt to ascertain whether the candidate has ambition, it is practically worthless. The answer the interviewer wants to hear is one that demonstrates ambition without arrogance. So for a graduate, it’s supposed to be something like “to have proven myself capable and be well on my way to partnership”.
For anyone who has been working more than about five years, the answer is either the truth: “your boss” or “a job in a better firm having used this position as a stepping stone” or a lie “working my way towards becoming a long-term contributor to the firm”.
Other more interesting answers might include: “I hear there is good money in Ponzi schemes, so I’m thinking about working towards that” or “having stolen enough stationery from you to start my own newsagent”.
In addition to stupid job interview questions, I should say something about inappropriate questions.
While increasingly rare in many Western countries, it is not unheard of for women in Hong Kong to be asked if they plan to get pregnant (and therefore will require maternity leave), if they are in long-term relationships (and might therefore be at risk of getting pregnant) or if they have a boyfriend (this one is just childish curiosity).
Most websites and advisers will say that this creates a very difficult situation.
If you answer, you are allowing the interviewer to behave inappropriately; if you refuse you might sacrifice your opportunity to get the job even though it’s the right thing to do and so on. This is nonsense. There is nothing difficult about this situation. Lie. Lying is an integral part of job interviews.
The more stupid or inappropriate the questions get, the more you are entitled, almost expected, to lie.
Say you are focused on your career and not thinking about children right now. Say you are gay. Say you hate males and children and particularly male children. You can decide later if you really want the job. And if you take the job and you do get pregnant, say you changed your mind. People do.
My friend Arthur changed his mind about wanting the general counsel job.
Having met the CEO’s golfing buddy, his new boss, he has decided he doesn’t want any job there. So he’s interviewing with other firms, and this time he’s prepared for every question.
Post a Comment