From interrogation to conversation
In a job interview, the interviewer has a short amount of time to get answers to the questions they have. This often leads to them adopting an ‘interrogation’ style for the interview: I’ve got the questions and you’ll answer them. That can often be unsatisfactory for a variety of reasons, and can also fail to create the best result for the interviewer. So, how can you navigate this dynamic effectively? That’s the focus of this week’s blog.
Some interviewers are highly skilled and will have done a great deal of preparation before they meet you. They’ll read the job spec to understand what the business needs, consider what’s most important for them in the role, and analyse your CV and any notes from previous interviewers. All of this allows them to create a list of well-crafted questions for you. Other interviewers simply won’t have had the time for that level of work and will just have read your CV in the lift on the way up to the meeting room (I’m exaggerating, for effect, but the sentiment rings true). Equally, you’ll have (hopefully) done extensive research and rehearsals for your interview preparation.
Once the meeting starts, you can do your best to establish rapport and create a useful frame. You then have to gauge the way in which the interviewer wants the meeting to go. It is, after all, their meeting and so you have to let them lead. That said, you can definitely influence the way in which it develops.
The upside of an ‘interrogation’ style interview is that it moves through the key issues, from the interviewer’s point of view, in a brisk manner. Assuming that the questions are to-the-point and well-designed, you’ll be able to match them with thoughtful and convincing answers. So far, so good.
There are downsides to this style, however:
First, the calculation of how good a fit you are is being done in the head of the interviewer and you have less opportunity to influence the conclusions they come to than if you’re having an open conversation.
Second, what if the interviewer has not really understood or accepted some of the critical elements of the role and, therefore, the line of questioning is off-target?
Third, what if they don’t ask a question about a key element that they’re looking for? For example, recently a client of mine was given the feedback that he lacked the ‘outgoing and extrovert personality' to be good at marketing and sales’. This idea wasn’t even explored in the interview itself. The interviewer merely had, in my view, a false idea that client-facing professionals need to be extroverts. This isn’t always true - some of the very best sales people, in my experience, are quiet, thoughtful and ask extremely astute, incisive questions to uncover hidden client needs. Here a false assumption by the interviewer was the downfall of an otherwise very strong candidate.
Finally, the dynamic or frame of this style of meeting is not helpful. There may be a tacit understanding that the interviewer has all the power in the interaction. After all, they have the job, you want the job, and you’re there as the supplicant to qualify yourself, and establish that you’re good enough for the role. This isn’t ideal. It would be much better to establish a meeting of equals. The firm and interviewer are looking for the right person and you have a great deal of value to offer - this could make you the right person. Equally, you’re looking for the right role and an environment in which you can flourish. This job and firm might be right for you. Moving to a conversation, if possible, will help you establish an equilibrium that works well for both sides.
So, with these downsides of ‘interrogation’ style interviews in mind, how can you as the candidate open the interview out into a constructive and valuable conversation for both sides?
Well, there are quite a few techniques but let’s look at just two of them here. This is on the understanding that as you gently interrupt the pattern, you’ll be able to keep the conversation going:
Making a statement that demands a question
Perhaps this is best explained with an example. Let’s imagine that in response to a question like ‘why do you want to work here?’, you say ‘I’ve thought carefully about what I’m looking for and I have seven key criteria in both the job and the firm. From my research, this position seems to be a very strong match for five of them’. That statement kind of deserves follow-up questions from them: what are the five and what are the other two? If the interviewer asks that -well, you’re now in a conversation.
Utilisation
Adopt the mindset that anything the interviewer offers you is a gift. You can use this gift to open the meeting and gain both more information and more influence. Imagine that you’re in a meeting and the interviewer mentions that there’s an internal debate about whether the successful candidate should have this or that background. This is an opportunity to use that insight and ask what they think is the right answer and why. You’ll have definitely opened things up and now know what to emphasise to them about yourself. You might also be able to expand that theme and learn more about the opinions of the other interviewers who you might meet in the process.
A final thought is that it’a the interviewer’s role to ‘own’ the interview and it will probably not serve you if they feel that you’re trying to wrest control from them. If they’re clear that, with limited time, an interrogation interview is needed, then you’ll probably have to go along with it. However, you’ll perhaps now see the advantages of gently shifting the meeting into a conversation between professionals and have some techniques that you can experiment with and see if you’re able to achieve that.
—
Navigating an ‘interrogation’ style interview is not always easy, but it can be handled well with careful preparation and astute responses. If you have an upcoming interview and would benefit from a 15 minute no-strings-attached coaching call, do get in touch. We’d be happy to help.