A professor at a university interviewed for an administrative position at another college (can’t name him for obvious reasons). The job interview was conducted by an outside professional firm, lasted 30 minutes, and he reports that it was among the most intense experiences of his life. He still wakes at night reviewing his answers in his mind. Because we rarely get a look at what goes on in interviews of this sort, it might be useful pass on what happened.
The applicant entered a large board room, completely alone, and waited a few minutes before his interviewer walked in and sat down with him, exuding an explosive friendliness. Introductions were made and then the first question came: What do people say about you? Whoa! In one question this interviewer is going to find out a lot about your character. Are you arrogant, self deprecating, indifferent, egotistical, insecure, Napoleonic, manipulative, or phony? You have to decide in an instant how to position yourself. To say too many nice things is to be delusional. To say too many negative things is to be too revealing. It becomes very clear that there is no faking out this interviewer.
Other questions: What are you passionate about? What book are you reading? Do you believe the author is right or wrong? How do you start your day? What is your life’s goal? What do you think makes a good employee? After each of this questions, there was no explanation, no elaboration, no attempt to draw out the interviewee. They were stated bluntly and cleanly, and followed by silence that waited for an answer. When the person answered, the interviewer scratched cryptic notes down on a yellow pad.
Despite the atmosphere of friendliness, it sounds utterly grueling and yet brilliant in some way. It seems that many employee meltdowns and job calamities result not from a failure of skills but a failure of character. This approach to interviewing deals with this reality upfront. Ingeniously, too, there is nothing in this interview that could be construed as discriminatory or biased, and so everyone stays clear of the law. The questions are penetrating but utterly opened ended. Not only does this seem to yield information that the employer needs; it sets the stage for a good start once the deal is made.
