How do you respond to the interview question, "What is your greatest weakness?"

[RodISHI]

Yesterday I had to do a phone interview of an experienced hire candidate who seeks to join our firm as a senior manager (one step below "entry level" partner). The interview was going along well and I decided to as one of the easiest "tough" questions there are: What's your greatest weakness?

Well, there's a first time for everything, I suppose. Yesterday was the first time I've asked that question and received an answer that by itself determined my decision about whether to give my imprimatur for hiring the candidate.

The man answered by in effect saying that he's been told that he can be difficult to work with. Upon hearing that, I abruptly ended the interview, asking if he had any questions of me. He didn't and that was that.

I have no idea what led the candidate to think that giving the answer he did could possibly aid and abet his assertion that he'd be a good person for us to hire, but insofar as he gave it, he must have his reasons. What I do know is that being hard to work with and lacking the judgment not to say that in an interview indicated the guy is too stupid and under seasoned for us to hire in any capacity. I was so astounded that I emailed the people who did the preliminary "phone screen" and early stage interviews on the guy to inquire how his abject inanity and unfitness for our firm did not come through when they spoke with him. I was and remain incredulous that the guy made it far enough through the interview process that he got to talk to me.

(Normally, I don't any longer do interviews, but the guy specifically expressed an interest in being part of my practice unit, and I have final say on all manager-and-above experienced hires who aim to it. It was rather serendipitous that I had to be part of the interview team considering him because the unique nature of my unit's work militates for "growing" people more so than finding them from outside the firm.)

The guy could have said any number of things. Hell, he could have gone with one of the standard pat answers to that question, and I'd have at least counted his answer as neither strong nor weak, but as neutral.

So with that as background, how did you answer the question I posed when you have been asked it?

What if he had told you he was a perfectionist?

I'd construe that as a one of the many pat answers to the question.

I probably would have questioned him/her further, "I am a perfectionist, therefore hard to get along with at times"

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

I was asked that question once and I answered with...I sometimes catch myself getting to detailed in my work and it slows my production.
I was going to be making flight hardware for the shuttle program.

I got the job.

I sometimes catch myself getting to detailed in my work and it slows my production.

That's essentially one of the pat answers one expects to receive upon asking that question. If it or something like it is what I get in response, giving that sort of answer neither helps nor hinders the candidate's position with me.

In this case it helped.
They didnt care if you took your time as long as it was right.
NASA was famous for kicking back work for something as trivial as a bevel that had no real function being off a few thousands.

Yeah, but didn't you work on the Challenger?

....oh,the parts were made correctly and to print,you weren't going to slip something by their inspectors thats for damn sure.
They actually worked in inspection at our shop....and God did we hate those bastards.

 

[yiostheoy]

The most important things about an interview is (1) to smile a lot and (2) don't worry be happy -- have confidence.

That's what sells.

Other potential responses to "what is your weakness?" --

- I work to hard

- I put in long hours

- Other people get jealous of my work

Etc.

 

[usmbguest5318]

Why not simply take 10-15 minutes of a simulated run through of a project?
The “Weak” question means you don’t want to hire the candi.

His interview with me, when it started, was but a formality for (1) four of the five other partners on the interview team had emailed saying they recommend we hire the guy and (2) I am on vacation and I was sitting at a pool overlooking the Caribbean when I did the call to interview him. I was of the mind that insofar as four partners thought the guy is "high quality," barring his really screwing up with me, his being hired was a "done deal," as they say.

Those factors combined to make me amenable to hiring the guy. The fact of the matter is that at the outset of the call, the guy was all but hired. I even was satisfied with him and his qualifications until he answered that question as he did. Indeed, but for his by another partner being asked what he wanted to do in the firm, and his answer aligned with what my unit does, he wouldn't have been forwarded to me and would have been hired.

I was already away and on vacation when I learned I'd have to talk to him, and the only reason for the urgency was that he'd to someone else stated he'd like to start ASAP because his wife had taken a new job for which his family had moved and his job wasn't portable. We "fast tracked" his interview process out of respect for his situation and to show from the get-go that we, as much as possible, try to do right by our people, and people in general. Indeed, I'd have been furious were I to have found upon returning from vacation that we'd known of his needs and qualifications yet made no effort to show respect for them when nothing more than moving along with alacrity -- namely asking me to spend an hour or so chatting on the phone with the guy -- was all that was needed to do so.

 

[evenflow1969]

I was asked that question once and I answered with...I sometimes catch myself getting to detailed in my work and it slows my production.
I was going to be making flight hardware for the shuttle program.

I got the job.

I sometimes catch myself getting to detailed in my work and it slows my production.

That's essentially one of the pat answers one expects to receive upon asking that question. If it or something like it is what I get in response, giving that sort of answer neither helps nor hinders the candidate's position with me.

You have to turn the question around and hit them back with it in a different form.

This is a part of rhetorical sophistry.

They are playing the game with you so you need to play it back on them.

Well, an interviewee may try that with me, but doing so is one of the ways to lessen the odds that I approve their receiving an offer. When I'm the interviewer, I'm not the one being tested, as it were. Candidates are well advised to keep that in mind at all times during their interview process. I suspect in thinking that way about the situation that I'm not rare among principals, most especially not among very senior principals (people in the top three tiers of a firm's management).

See that is where you are wrong. If you are looking at the best candidates they likey have options. You had better belive they are trying to figure out who they are going to work for in that interview. Money is not realy a thing for me any more. My house and cars are paid for, I owe nobody any thing. I could go years with out a pay check. Although mon ey is no longer the biggest concern or even realy a concern, feeling productive is a big concern. I am self employed and do well at it. How ever I am getting to old to be the butcher, the baker and the candle stick maker. I would like to concentrate on one thing and do it well. I find a place that wants to offer real value to their customers and operates with integrity I would likely be there till I die and because I like to succeed above all else, I will do one hell of a job. I will not even entertain the idea of a job that does not offer value and integrity to it's customers. You are scaring away some good applicants with that attitude. If you want applicants that have no where else to go, keep that attitude. If you want applicants that are in demand you may want to sell what you have to offer. If you are high up in the firm you are not likely looking for the average Joe in your interviews. If these are positions of senior management I would think you are looking for exceptional people. These kind of people typically have options.

 

[usmbguest5318]

I was asked that question once and I answered with...I sometimes catch myself getting to detailed in my work and it slows my production.
I was going to be making flight hardware for the shuttle program.

I got the job.

I sometimes catch myself getting to detailed in my work and it slows my production.

That's essentially one of the pat answers one expects to receive upon asking that question. If it or something like it is what I get in response, giving that sort of answer neither helps nor hinders the candidate's position with me.

You have to turn the question around and hit them back with it in a different form.

This is a part of rhetorical sophistry.

They are playing the game with you so you need to play it back on them.

Well, an interviewee may try that with me, but doing so is one of the ways to lessen the odds that I approve their receiving an offer. When I'm the interviewer, I'm not the one being tested, as it were. Candidates are well advised to keep that in mind at all times during their interview process. I suspect in thinking that way about the situation that I'm not rare among principals, most especially not among very senior principals (people in the top three tiers of a firm's management).

See that is where you are wrong. If you are looking at the best candidates they likey have options. You had better belive they are trying to figure out who they are going to work for in that interview. Money is not realy a thing for me any more. My house and cars are paid for, I owe nobody any thing. I could go years with out a pay check. Although mon ey is no longer the biggest concern or even realy a concern, feeling productive is a big concern. I am self employed and do well at it. How ever I am getting to old to be the butcher, the baker and the candle stick maker. I would like to concentrate on one thing and do it well. I find a place that wants to offer real value to their customers and operates with integrity I would likely be there till I die and because I like to succeed above all else, I will do one hell of a job. I will not even entertain the idea of a job that does not offer value and integrity to it's customers. You are scaring away some good applicants with that attitude. If you want applicants that have no where else to go, keep that attitude. If you want applicants that are in demand you may want to sell what you have to offer. If you are high up in the firm you are not likely looking for the average Joe in your interviews. If these are positions of senior management I would think you are looking for exceptional people. These kind of people typically have options.

See that is where you are wrong.

TY, but I'm sure I know better than you what is the right way to handle anything and everything having to do with the interview process at my firm. I don't know what makes you think you can be so presumptuous as to tell me that I'm wrong about such a thing.

If you are looking at the best candidates they likey have options.

If that's the case, s/he'd do well to work elsewhere because pulling a stunt like that with me or my colleagues makes it clear to us that our firm is not a good fit for them; thus s/he not a good fit for us.

 

[Votto]

Yesterday I had to do a phone interview of an experienced hire candidate who seeks to join our firm as a senior manager (one step below "entry level" partner). The interview was going along well and I decided to as one of the easiest "tough" questions there are: What's your greatest weakness?

Well, there's a first time for everything, I suppose. Yesterday was the first time I've asked that question and received an answer that by itself determined my decision about whether to give my imprimatur for hiring the candidate.

The man answered by in effect saying that he's been told that he can be difficult to work with. Upon hearing that, I abruptly ended the interview, asking if he had any questions of me. He didn't and that was that.

I have no idea what led the candidate to think that giving the answer he did could possibly aid and abet his assertion that he'd be a good person for us to hire, but insofar as he gave it, he must have his reasons. What I do know is that being hard to work with and lacking the judgment not to say that in an interview indicated the guy is too stupid and under seasoned for us to hire in any capacity. I was so astounded that I emailed the people who did the preliminary "phone screen" and early stage interviews on the guy to inquire how his abject inanity and unfitness for our firm did not come through when they spoke with him. I was and remain incredulous that the guy made it far enough through the interview process that he got to talk to me.

(Normally, I don't any longer do interviews, but the guy specifically expressed an interest in being part of my practice unit, and I have final say on all manager-and-above experienced hires who aim to it. It was rather serendipitous that I had to be part of the interview team considering him because the unique nature of my unit's work militates for "growing" people more so than finding them from outside the firm.)

The guy could have said any number of things. Hell, he could have gone with one of the standard pat answers to that question, and I'd have at least counted his answer as neither strong nor weak, but as neutral.

So with that as background, how did you answer the question I posed when you have been asked it?

My greatest weakness?

Probably my humility.

 

[usmbguest5318]

The most important things about an interview is (1) to smile a lot and (2) don't worry be happy -- have confidence.

That's what sells.

Other potential responses to "what is your weakness?" --

- I work to hard

- I put in long hours

- Other people get jealous of my work

Etc.

Yes, those are yet other pat answers one typically will hear.

 

[koshergrl]

I pick something that doesn't send up alarm bells.

"My greatest weakness is pastry."

 

[koshergrl]

Why not simply take 10-15 minutes of a simulated run through of a project?
The “Weak” question means you don’t want to hire the candi.

His interview with me, when it started, was but a formality for (1) four of the five other partners on the interview team had emailed saying they recommend we hire the guy and (2) I am on vacation and I was sitting at a pool overlooking the Caribbean when I did the call to interview him. I was of the mind that insofar as four partners thought the guy is "high quality," barring his really screwing up with me, his being hired was a "done deal," as they say.

Those factors combined to make me amenable to hiring the guy. The fact of the matter is that at the outset of the call, the guy was all but hired. I even was satisfied with him and his qualifications until he answered that question as he did. Indeed, but for his by another partner being asked what he wanted to do in the firm, and his answer aligned with what my unit does, he wouldn't have been forwarded to me and would have been hired.

I was already away and on vacation when I learned I'd have to talk to him, and the only reason for the urgency was that he'd to someone else stated he'd like to start ASAP because his wife had taken a new job for which his family had moved and his job wasn't portable. We "fast tracked" his interview process out of respect for his situation and to show from the get-go that we, as much as possible, try to do right by our people, and people in general. Indeed, I'd have been furious were I to have found upon returning from vacation that we'd known of his needs and qualifications yet made no effort to show respect for them when nothing more than moving along with alacrity -- namely asking me to spend an hour or so chatting on the phone with the guy -- was all that was needed to do so.

Wow. You sound like such an ass.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

The most important things about an interview is (1) to smile a lot and (2) don't worry be happy -- have confidence.

That's what sells.

Other potential responses to "what is your weakness?" --

- I work to hard

- I put in long hours

- Other people get jealous of my work

Etc.

You could have said, "I get confused on when to use to, two , or too!"

 

[koshergrl]

I was asked that question once and I answered with...I sometimes catch myself getting to detailed in my work and it slows my production.
I was going to be making flight hardware for the shuttle program.

I got the job.

I sometimes catch myself getting to detailed in my work and it slows my production.

That's essentially one of the pat answers one expects to receive upon asking that question. If it or something like it is what I get in response, giving that sort of answer neither helps nor hinders the candidate's position with me.

You have to turn the question around and hit them back with it in a different form.

This is a part of rhetorical sophistry.

They are playing the game with you so you need to play it back on them.

Well, an interviewee may try that with me, but doing so is one of the ways to lessen the odds that I approve their receiving an offer. When I'm the interviewer, I'm not the one being tested, as it were. Candidates are well advised to keep that in mind at all times during their interview process. I suspect in thinking that way about the situation that I'm not rare among principals, most especially not among very senior principals (people in the top three tiers of a firm's management).

See that is where you are wrong. If you are looking at the best candidates they likey have options. You had better belive they are trying to figure out who they are going to work for in that interview. Money is not realy a thing for me any more. My house and cars are paid for, I owe nobody any thing. I could go years with out a pay check. Although mon ey is no longer the biggest concern or even realy a concern, feeling productive is a big concern. I am self employed and do well at it. How ever I am getting to old to be the butcher, the baker and the candle stick maker. I would like to concentrate on one thing and do it well. I find a place that wants to offer real value to their customers and operates with integrity I would likely be there till I die and because I like to succeed above all else, I will do one hell of a job. I will not even entertain the idea of a job that does not offer value and integrity to it's customers. You are scaring away some good applicants with that attitude. If you want applicants that have no where else to go, keep that attitude. If you want applicants that are in demand you may want to sell what you have to offer. If you are high up in the firm you are not likely looking for the average Joe in your interviews. If these are positions of senior management I would think you are looking for exceptional people. These kind of people typically have options.

I am sure that anybody with any integrity finds xelor hard to stomach. You will never convince him of that, however. And he doesn't want exceptional. He just wants someone to make him look good/not expose him..if he is even in a position to hire. If he is, he's looking for a toady/scapegoat.

 

[koshergrl]

The most important things about an interview is (1) to smile a lot and (2) don't worry be happy -- have confidence.

That's what sells.

Other potential responses to "what is your weakness?" --

- I work to hard

- I put in long hours

- Other people get jealous of my work

Etc.

You could have said, "I get confused on when to use to, two , or too!"

"I can't spell MAYONNAISE!"

 

[Indeependent]

I was asked that question once and I answered with...I sometimes catch myself getting to detailed in my work and it slows my production.
I was going to be making flight hardware for the shuttle program.

I got the job.

I sometimes catch myself getting to detailed in my work and it slows my production.

That's essentially one of the pat answers one expects to receive upon asking that question. If it or something like it is what I get in response, giving that sort of answer neither helps nor hinders the candidate's position with me.

You have to turn the question around and hit them back with it in a different form.

This is a part of rhetorical sophistry.

They are playing the game with you so you need to play it back on them.

Well, an interviewee may try that with me, but doing so is one of the ways to lessen the odds that I approve their receiving an offer. When I'm the interviewer, I'm not the one being tested, as it were. Candidates are well advised to keep that in mind at all times during their interview process. I suspect in thinking that way about the situation that I'm not rare among principals, most especially not among very senior principals (people in the top three tiers of a firm's management).

See that is where you are wrong. If you are looking at the best candidates they likey have options. You had better belive they are trying to figure out who they are going to work for in that interview. Money is not realy a thing for me any more. My house and cars are paid for, I owe nobody any thing. I could go years with out a pay check. Although mon ey is no longer the biggest concern or even realy a concern, feeling productive is a big concern. I am self employed and do well at it. How ever I am getting to old to be the butcher, the baker and the candle stick maker. I would like to concentrate on one thing and do it well. I find a place that wants to offer real value to their customers and operates with integrity I would likely be there till I die and because I like to succeed above all else, I will do one hell of a job. I will not even entertain the idea of a job that does not offer value and integrity to it's customers. You are scaring away some good applicants with that attitude. If you want applicants that have no where else to go, keep that attitude. If you want applicants that are in demand you may want to sell what you have to offer. If you are high up in the firm you are not likely looking for the average Joe in your interviews. If these are positions of senior management I would think you are looking for exceptional people. These kind of people typically have options.

I am sure that anybody with any integrity finds xelor hard to stomach. You will never convince him of that, however. And he doesn't want exceptional. He just wants someone to make him look good/not expose him..if he is even in a position to hire. If he is, he's looking for a toady/scapegoat.

Very snotty playing with someone’s life like that.

 

[OldLady]

Yesterday I had to do a phone interview of an experienced hire candidate who seeks to join our firm as a senior manager (one step below "entry level" partner). The interview was going along well and I decided to as one of the easiest "tough" questions there are: What's your greatest weakness?

Well, there's a first time for everything, I suppose. Yesterday was the first time I've asked that question and received an answer that by itself determined my decision about whether to give my imprimatur for hiring the candidate.

The man answered by in effect saying that he's been told that he can be difficult to work with. Upon hearing that, I abruptly ended the interview, asking if he had any questions of me. He didn't and that was that.

I have no idea what led the candidate to think that giving the answer he did could possibly aid and abet his assertion that he'd be a good person for us to hire, but insofar as he gave it, he must have his reasons. What I do know is that being hard to work with and lacking the judgment not to say that in an interview indicated the guy is too stupid and under seasoned for us to hire in any capacity. I was so astounded that I emailed the people who did the preliminary "phone screen" and early stage interviews on the guy to inquire how his abject inanity and unfitness for our firm did not come through when they spoke with him. I was and remain incredulous that the guy made it far enough through the interview process that he got to talk to me.

(Normally, I don't any longer do interviews, but the guy specifically expressed an interest in being part of my practice unit, and I have final say on all manager-and-above experienced hires who aim to it. It was rather serendipitous that I had to be part of the interview team considering him because the unique nature of my unit's work militates for "growing" people more so than finding them from outside the firm.)

The guy could have said any number of things. Hell, he could have gone with one of the standard pat answers to that question, and I'd have at least counted his answer as neither strong nor weak, but as neutral.

So with that as background, how did you answer the question I posed when you have been asked it?

Honesty isn't a big value in your book? You asked, you got an answer.
What ARE the standard pat answers? I hate those damned interview questions, and I don't remember what I said. I don't think I got asked all that horseshit stuff for this job. We talked about education and experience, etc.

 

[koshergrl]

I was asked that question once and I answered with...I sometimes catch myself getting to detailed in my work and it slows my production.
I was going to be making flight hardware for the shuttle program.

I got the job.

I sometimes catch myself getting to detailed in my work and it slows my production.

That's essentially one of the pat answers one expects to receive upon asking that question. If it or something like it is what I get in response, giving that sort of answer neither helps nor hinders the candidate's position with me.

You have to turn the question around and hit them back with it in a different form.

This is a part of rhetorical sophistry.

They are playing the game with you so you need to play it back on them.

Well, an interviewee may try that with me, but doing so is one of the ways to lessen the odds that I approve their receiving an offer. When I'm the interviewer, I'm not the one being tested, as it were. Candidates are well advised to keep that in mind at all times during their interview process. I suspect in thinking that way about the situation that I'm not rare among principals, most especially not among very senior principals (people in the top three tiers of a firm's management).

See that is where you are wrong. If you are looking at the best candidates they likey have options. You had better belive they are trying to figure out who they are going to work for in that interview. Money is not realy a thing for me any more. My house and cars are paid for, I owe nobody any thing. I could go years with out a pay check. Although mon ey is no longer the biggest concern or even realy a concern, feeling productive is a big concern. I am self employed and do well at it. How ever I am getting to old to be the butcher, the baker and the candle stick maker. I would like to concentrate on one thing and do it well. I find a place that wants to offer real value to their customers and operates with integrity I would likely be there till I die and because I like to succeed above all else, I will do one hell of a job. I will not even entertain the idea of a job that does not offer value and integrity to it's customers. You are scaring away some good applicants with that attitude. If you want applicants that have no where else to go, keep that attitude. If you want applicants that are in demand you may want to sell what you have to offer. If you are high up in the firm you are not likely looking for the average Joe in your interviews. If these are positions of senior management I would think you are looking for exceptional people. These kind of people typically have options.

I am sure that anybody with any integrity finds xelor hard to stomach. You will never convince him of that, however. And he doesn't want exceptional. He just wants someone to make him look good/not expose him..if he is even in a position to hire. If he is, he's looking for a toady/scapegoat.

Very snotty playing with someone’s life like that.

Nothing more vile than a self serving scumbag who gets a little bit of power.

 

[Indeependent]

That's essentially one of the pat answers one expects to receive upon asking that question. If it or something like it is what I get in response, giving that sort of answer neither helps nor hinders the candidate's position with me.

You have to turn the question around and hit them back with it in a different form.

This is a part of rhetorical sophistry.

They are playing the game with you so you need to play it back on them.

Well, an interviewee may try that with me, but doing so is one of the ways to lessen the odds that I approve their receiving an offer. When I'm the interviewer, I'm not the one being tested, as it were. Candidates are well advised to keep that in mind at all times during their interview process. I suspect in thinking that way about the situation that I'm not rare among principals, most especially not among very senior principals (people in the top three tiers of a firm's management).

See that is where you are wrong. If you are looking at the best candidates they likey have options. You had better belive they are trying to figure out who they are going to work for in that interview. Money is not realy a thing for me any more. My house and cars are paid for, I owe nobody any thing. I could go years with out a pay check. Although mon ey is no longer the biggest concern or even realy a concern, feeling productive is a big concern. I am self employed and do well at it. How ever I am getting to old to be the butcher, the baker and the candle stick maker. I would like to concentrate on one thing and do it well. I find a place that wants to offer real value to their customers and operates with integrity I would likely be there till I die and because I like to succeed above all else, I will do one hell of a job. I will not even entertain the idea of a job that does not offer value and integrity to it's customers. You are scaring away some good applicants with that attitude. If you want applicants that have no where else to go, keep that attitude. If you want applicants that are in demand you may want to sell what you have to offer. If you are high up in the firm you are not likely looking for the average Joe in your interviews. If these are positions of senior management I would think you are looking for exceptional people. These kind of people typically have options.

I am sure that anybody with any integrity finds xelor hard to stomach. You will never convince him of that, however. And he doesn't want exceptional. He just wants someone to make him look good/not expose him..if he is even in a position to hire. If he is, he's looking for a toady/scapegoat.

Very snotty playing with someone’s life like that.

Nothing more vile than a self serving scumbag who gets a little bit of power.

His point of view is his point of view.

 

[evenflow1969]

I was asked that question once and I answered with...I sometimes catch myself getting to detailed in my work and it slows my production.
I was going to be making flight hardware for the shuttle program.

I got the job.

I sometimes catch myself getting to detailed in my work and it slows my production.

That's essentially one of the pat answers one expects to receive upon asking that question. If it or something like it is what I get in response, giving that sort of answer neither helps nor hinders the candidate's position with me.

You have to turn the question around and hit them back with it in a different form.

This is a part of rhetorical sophistry.

They are playing the game with you so you need to play it back on them.

Well, an interviewee may try that with me, but doing so is one of the ways to lessen the odds that I approve their receiving an offer. When I'm the interviewer, I'm not the one being tested, as it were. Candidates are well advised to keep that in mind at all times during their interview process. I suspect in thinking that way about the situation that I'm not rare among principals, most especially not among very senior principals (people in the top three tiers of a firm's management).

See that is where you are wrong. If you are looking at the best candidates they likey have options. You had better belive they are trying to figure out who they are going to work for in that interview. Money is not realy a thing for me any more. My house and cars are paid for, I owe nobody any thing. I could go years with out a pay check. Although mon ey is no longer the biggest concern or even realy a concern, feeling productive is a big concern. I am self employed and do well at it. How ever I am getting to old to be the butcher, the baker and the candle stick maker. I would like to concentrate on one thing and do it well. I find a place that wants to offer real value to their customers and operates with integrity I would likely be there till I die and because I like to succeed above all else, I will do one hell of a job. I will not even entertain the idea of a job that does not offer value and integrity to it's customers. You are scaring away some good applicants with that attitude. If you want applicants that have no where else to go, keep that attitude. If you want applicants that are in demand you may want to sell what you have to offer. If you are high up in the firm you are not likely looking for the average Joe in your interviews. If these are positions of senior management I would think you are looking for exceptional people. These kind of people typically have options.

See that is where you are wrong.

TY, but I'm sure I know better than you what is the right way to handle anything and everything having to do with the interview process at my firm. I don't know what makes you think you can be so presumptuous as to tell me that I'm wrong about such a thing.

If you are looking at the best candidates they likey have options.

If that's the case, s/he'd do well to work elsewhere because pulling a stunt like that with me or my colleagues makes it clear to us that our firm is not a good fit for them; thus s/he not a good fit for us.

Ya, you Know better! Great answer! Expected from some one who is of senior management. Obvously there is nothing left for you to learn or improve on. Here is what you forget. I did not just interview for you. I am not asking you for a job. I would not take it any way. I do not need to impress you. You put a thread on a political site where people argue all day. Did you think your senior management position prohibits some one from disagreeing with you? If I am not on your pay roll. You want to tell me how it goes you are going to need a better argument than " I think I know better". Do you want to poke a hole in my logic as explained. You can take the I am me so I know better and shove it up your fucking ass. If you are so far superior argue the logic!

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

I had a job interview yesterday, and I was happy that there were none of those stupid generic questions I get all of the time. I consider those questions to be time wasting and laziness on the part of the interviewer.

My interview actually involved my experience and how that matched up with the duties needed to perform the job. It was actually an enjoyable interview.

 

[koshergrl]

Yesterday I had to do a phone interview of an experienced hire candidate who seeks to join our firm as a senior manager (one step below "entry level" partner). The interview was going along well and I decided to as one of the easiest "tough" questions there are: What's your greatest weakness?

Well, there's a first time for everything, I suppose. Yesterday was the first time I've asked that question and received an answer that by itself determined my decision about whether to give my imprimatur for hiring the candidate.

The man answered by in effect saying that he's been told that he can be difficult to work with. Upon hearing that, I abruptly ended the interview, asking if he had any questions of me. He didn't and that was that.

I have no idea what led the candidate to think that giving the answer he did could possibly aid and abet his assertion that he'd be a good person for us to hire, but insofar as he gave it, he must have his reasons. What I do know is that being hard to work with and lacking the judgment not to say that in an interview indicated the guy is too stupid and under seasoned for us to hire in any capacity. I was so astounded that I emailed the people who did the preliminary "phone screen" and early stage interviews on the guy to inquire how his abject inanity and unfitness for our firm did not come through when they spoke with him. I was and remain incredulous that the guy made it far enough through the interview process that he got to talk to me.

(Normally, I don't any longer do interviews, but the guy specifically expressed an interest in being part of my practice unit, and I have final say on all manager-and-above experienced hires who aim to it. It was rather serendipitous that I had to be part of the interview team considering him because the unique nature of my unit's work militates for "growing" people more so than finding them from outside the firm.)

The guy could have said any number of things. Hell, he could have gone with one of the standard pat answers to that question, and I'd have at least counted his answer as neither strong nor weak, but as neutral.

So with that as background, how did you answer the question I posed when you have been asked it?

Honesty isn't a big value in your book? You asked, you got an answer.
What ARE the standard pat answers? I hate those damned interview questions, and I don't remember what I said. I don't think I got asked all that horseshit stuff for this job. We talked about education and experience, etc.

No, honesty isn't a value to him.