I don't know, try turning the question around into something that reflects how great of a team player you are.
Like...
"Yes, like everyone, I feel that I have a few unfavorable qualities, but in the professional workplace, I feel like I can put them aside for the sake of the company and I will hopefully be in an environment where my coworkers can support me just as I will support them."
I know many people who prefer to study alone, however that does not make them any less capable of working together with other people. Maybe this should go to blogs? Or you should turn it into a general job interview thread.
you need to give them something that is a weakness but doesn't affect your ability to perform or be a team player
a common example is "my biggest weakness is that my professional network in the area is small" for example if you just moved to the city, or haven't moved there yet
On April 04 2012 00:18 BlueBoxSC wrote: I don't know, try turning the question around into something that reflects how great of a team player you are.
Like...
"Yes, like everyone, I feel that I have a few unfavorable qualities, but in the professional workplace, I feel like I can put them aside for the sake of the company and I will hopefully be in an environment where my coworkers can support me just as I will support them."
don't do this, people hate when you avoid answering their question
Studying in a group in counterproductive. You will study far more effectively alone.
Also, the greatest weakness question is very phoney in the sense that if everyone gave an honest answer then everyone will fail, i.e. in order to pass the question one has to invent an untrue, or half-true answer. For this reason it is a stupid and pointless question for an interviewer to ask.
I suggest you give a generic answer as prescribed by one of the hundreds of interview help guides on the internet.
I would choose a bad quality that isn`t a dealbreaker for the actual job you are doing and try to stay honest. for example as a programer, you could say your weakness is the lack of acurate expressions in smalltalks and therefore you sometimes are missunderstood.
What I've heard is that you want to mention something that has to do with inexperience, rather than a character flaw, and show how you've begun trying to overcome it on your own already.
Or are you asking for advice on how to cover for you flaws?
Because obviously it's a plus to be able to work in a team, but if you can't do it, and really want the job, then I guess the only thing left to do is lie about it.
Edit: er... maybe LIE isn't the right word... maybe... extend the truth .. like... say you PREFER to work alone, although you are able to work in a team (implying you can do both, but you've also stated your preferences)
I wouldn't want to work anywhere that would ask me a question that doesn't say anything useful about myself, and basically just tests my ability to regurgitate a rehearsed answer.
If you have just graduated, just mention the fact that you are inexperienced in the workplace as something that is a possible negative. They will already know that you are inexperienced due to your CV, so you are not really throwing yourself under the bus. Mention consequences of this inexperience such as a current lack of proffessional contacts in your industry and that you are still lacking mentors at this point in your career. None of those are really 'a bad quality' but I think the above will allow you to dodge that without incriminating yourself.
You can also say that you sometimes have a tendency to worry too much that the skills you learn will become obsolete, and this drives you to focus on constantly learning new skills. Basically most people in the IT industry share this fear, so it will be accepted without much further scrutiny.
On April 04 2012 00:24 pirsq wrote: I wouldn't want to work anywhere that would ask me a question that doesn't say anything useful about myself, and basically just tests my ability to regurgitate a rehearsed answer.
gotcha, altough this question is being asked 99% of the time (at least in software development interviews)
Never answer "truthfully" answer what they want to hear is rule 1. Everyone feels pressure, everyone gets stressed, everyone prefers to do work themselves if possible rather than relying on someone else. But thats not what employers want. When i was 16 however i blew a similar awesome job as a BMW parts apprentice, learning how to become a future BMW parts seller to customers cars that are needed to be fixed. I blew it when they asked, what do you want to do in your life. I said i wanted to be a footballing coach and would get my coaching badges whilst working my way up and dreamt of managing a football team. (Wow how young and naive i was!) so it kind of went downhill after that one, but out of 300 applications it was down to me and 2 others so i was rather proud. But yeah back to your point, you need to "bend the truth" and turn yourself into the perfect applicant, think what they want to hear and say that and back it up with other points and examples where and how you have been a team player and where you have not gotten stressed etc.
Good Quality - I am a hard working and conscientious person Bad Quality - I tend to strive for to much perfection on any task given to me.
On April 04 2012 00:22 Keitzer wrote: Wait... are you asking for a lie to tell?
Or are you asking for advice on how to cover for you flaws?
Because obviously it's a plus to be able to work in a team, but if you can't do it, and really want the job, then I guess the only thing left to do is lie about it.
Edit: er... maybe LIE isn't the right word... maybe... extend the truth .. like... say you PREFER to work alone, although you are able to work in a team (implying you can do both, but you've also stated your preferences)
You speak as if "working in a team" is impossible for someone who studies alone.
Or that "working in a team" is a hard thing to do, and a rare quality amongst the general population.
A buffoon can work in a team.
I've never met or known anyone who cannot work in a team.
try admitting a fault, but including how you deal with it. for me, i can become overwhelmed if important expected to make progress on many projects at once, but I've learned to prioritize and take things step by step instead of just boggling at a high workload.
On April 04 2012 00:24 pirsq wrote: I wouldn't want to work anywhere that would ask me a question that doesn't say anything useful about myself, and basically just tests my ability to regurgitate a rehearsed answer.
you will be asked this question in most job interviews, at least if the process is anything like in the USA
There's no bad interview, every interview you do, makes you (or should) better for the next one.
A bad quality can be anything really, what is important is to show them that you've identified it and are working/have worked on improving it, and ideally provide examples of it. Doesnt have to be professionnal experience, can be linked to school or even non-curricular like managing a local sports team, a fundraiser or other social outlet.
I'm usually upfront about these things, you dont want to appear overconfident, but you want to show them that you're always striving on improving yourself, even in areas where you perform well.
If I take back your example about not being a team player. You could explain that during your studies, you got used to relying on yourself and thus dont have as much experience working with a team. At which point you concede that bigger projects needs the involvement of multiple specialists and that you strive to be a part of these large scale projects.
My personal example was the following: I was'nt organized or didnt keep track of my train of thoughts when I worked on design projects or basicly any science projects. I would just scribble things left and right and come up with the answer. As important as it is in school, it is even more so in a company. I've learned to work with agendas, design logs, keep my files and folders up to date, annoted, etc. There's room for improvement still, but I'm aware of it and working on it.
On April 04 2012 00:20 Dujek wrote: You could say,
"I'm not aware of any bad qualities I might have because whenever I discover a problem I work at fixing it quickly."
or something to that effect.
Nope. Never answer the question this way. This question comes up a lot in interviews, and if you BS it with something like "Well, I guess I work TOO hard! hahahaha" 90% of the time, you won't get the job. Employers want real answers, so answer in a real way. That doesn't mean you can't provide a "but" part of the sentence, though.
For example, I would say something like "Well, I've been shy all my life, because I'm an only child and a bit of an introvert. But, I've been working on this problem by (blah blah blah)"
On April 04 2012 00:21 msl wrote: My biggest weakness is my inability to answer questions like this with a straight face.
(I actually said something like this once and got the job)
mind = blown
My then boss was a BOSS, if you know what I mean. But in general, I found that often it is more important to get across your personality rather then finding all the "right" answers. Leave them with the impression that you're a complete person that can think for himself rather then a drone.
(This advice does not apply to workplaces looking for drones (callcenter ect...))
Perhaps you should have only given 1 "bad" quality. Next time they ask you this question, this is the answer that will guarantee you the job: "Haven't come out of the closet."
EDIT: Why should everything be the truth? Successfully convincing someone of the truth of a lie is a matter of having a poker face.
On April 04 2012 00:24 pirsq wrote: I wouldn't want to work anywhere that would ask me a question that doesn't say anything useful about myself, and basically just tests my ability to regurgitate a rehearsed answer.
In my experience, this sort of stuff is commonplace in the HR phase of the interview.
When you move on to the stage where you are interviewed my someone in your area of work, this sort of substanceless bullshit isn't spoken of.
1) i prefer to study alone (failed - not a team player)
teamwork doesnt exist, companies want you to finish your job. Teamwork is more of a who does what kind of thing, and to be fair most places have a boss who tells everyone what to do. Just go for: After the assesment of Whats to do you finish your part quickly and then integrate it with the other when basic functions are done.
2) im stressed out easily (failed - that might be a problem) -> thats why you plan ahead
there are no postive or negative qualities, just try to explain yourself, thats what thery want to see that you can reason(you can give productive feedback in meetings or to customers) and that you keep calm under pressure. Maybe you get stressed out in comfortable in certain situation, but argue thats why you kinda map out in your head(or preplan) what you say or how the conversation goes. Or when you get stressed out when too much people want you to do work at the same time, thats why you plan your appointments and work inquiries.
And the basic HR, tell me a bad quality of yours and you go like i am too ambitious, is old and most HR guys now that method, they probably studied that themselves.
Try to make it something they may be able to identify with. Perhaps wishing you could make more time for exercise or eating healthier, which would fall under laziness/lack of motivation, but so long as you never actually utter those words it will be fine.
All that's really important is not appearing disingenuous.
For example, I would say something like "Well, I've been shy all my life, because I'm an only child and a bit of an introvert. But, I've been working on this problem by (blah blah blah)"
Wow, i think shyness is a good answer. even more when girls are concerned
Don't bullshit. A stupid phony answer is just going to piss people off as you are essentially lying to them, and it won't be hard to spot. Pick something genuine, but either display that you are aware of it and working to fix it, or pick something that isn't really an issue in the workplace.
For example, I would say something like "Well, I've been shy all my life, because I'm an only child and a bit of an introvert. But, I've been working on this problem by (blah blah blah)"
Wow, i think shyness is a good answer. even more when girls are concerned
No, I don't think shyness is a good answer. They would value people who are able to express well thought out opinions.
A.) To weed out anyone who is stupid enough to give you a seriously big flaw. I once had a guy tell me that he can be lazy and is late a lot.
B.) To see if you are realistic and can accept constructive criticism. Can you see flaws that you have? Because everyone has them. And are you willing to work on them? Because that is all anyone can ask of you.
So a great answer would be something like "I have been told I can sometimes be unorganized. However, I have a system that works for me and I am willing to work on my organizational skills."
Answers like " I am a perfectionist" or "I work too hard" are easy tells of someone who is a narcissist or a bold-faced liar who cannot address their own flaws.
Ignore nearly all the advice given so far in this thread. The way you answer all these 'give me your negatives' questions is to give them a negative, which is actually a positive. You don't say something bad, and how you have overcome it. You don't say something bad and how you are working to overcome it. You offer something that is only bad in some perspectives, but it's actually a positive from your potential employer's perspective.
"Well, according to my friends, I don't socialize enough. However, I see it differently. I'm just very goal-oriented and when I am trying to accomplish something, I sacrifice in other areas of my life to achieve that end. I've spent the last several years very focused on my objective of getting the most out of my education so I would be best prepared to enter such a competitive industry such as software development. Blah blah blah.
On April 04 2012 00:22 Keitzer wrote: Wait... are you asking for a lie to tell?
Or are you asking for advice on how to cover for you flaws?
Because obviously it's a plus to be able to work in a team, but if you can't do it, and really want the job, then I guess the only thing left to do is lie about it.
Edit: er... maybe LIE isn't the right word... maybe... extend the truth .. like... say you PREFER to work alone, although you are able to work in a team (implying you can do both, but you've also stated your preferences)
You speak as if "working in a team" is impossible for someone who studies alone.
Or that "working in a team" is a hard thing to do, and a rare quality amongst the general population.
A buffoon can work in a team.
I've never met or known anyone who cannot work in a team.
For comp sci, working in a team actually presents a unique set of challenges. As a fellow comp sci major, I've run into it a lot. Group coding with bad people can be rather difficult. As a result, companies look for people they think can handle group work well. You never want to answer an interview question with a response that makes it seem like you can't handle a group in an IT interview
On April 04 2012 00:29 Aemilia wrote: Perfectionist is always the answer to this.
no it`s not.
When you apply for a job that isn`t special and they just want to check if you are an idiot or not, your suggested answer might work, but so will 1000 others. If you apply for a great job and you have a smart Boss in front of you, who looks for smart, but real employees, this answer will get you nowhere.
When I had my first jobinterview more then 10 years ago this question totally threw me off and I couldn`t really say anything. On my 2nd interview I answered like "I can`t stop myself and always have to finish my work, bla bla bla". meh. My last interview is only a few months back and I actually thought a lot about what I would say when facing this question. The question came up and I had a great answer. I wont say what I actually said, but I can tell you this: It was true. It was a weakness. It totally did not matter with what I had to do in this job.
My biggest weakness is that I intentionally didn't prepare an answer for this common interview question. *coughs and looks all serious* I am honest and straightforward. *friendly and seemingly profound smile* I feel like my biggest weakness at the moment is the fact that I am very much at the beginning of my professional career. I am dedicated and I trained for this job but I don't have the experience that other people might have who have been working in this field for a while as I just finished University. *looks dedicated, motivated and eager to contribute meaningfully to his new professional environment*
Make your weakness something that can be overcome quickly and isn't actually a bad quality. You said you just got your degree: you have a very obvious weakness: lack of experience. If you show that you are dedicated and well equipped for the job, the employer will probably even be happy to kind of "guide" your enthusiasm and make you familiar with common practices etc. in whatever field you work in. Show them that you are eager to actually do something with what you have learned.
On April 04 2012 00:33 Hairy wrote: Don't bullshit. A stupid phony answer is just going to piss people off as you are essentially lying to them, and it won't be hard to spot. Pick something genuine, but either display that you are aware of it and working to fix it, or pick something that isn't really an issue in the workplace.
The fact that you suggest that the OP "picks" something is a admission of phoniness. The question of what is your greatest weakness is a question almost certainly with one singular answer.
The question isn't name a weakness that isn't so bad that it excludes you from the job, nor is it pick a weakness that is mostly irrelevant to work.
It's what is your greatest weakness. You cannot pick something honestly, unless what you pick truly is your greatest weakness
And no answer that is not phoney will get you past this question truthfully. Therefore, there is nothing wrong with giving a generic and typical answer, saying it with a straight face, as this sort of shit is completely unverifiable.
On April 04 2012 00:26 ErrantMind wrote: try admitting a fault, but including how you deal with it. for me, i can become overwhelmed if important expected to make progress on many projects at once, but I've learned to prioritize and take things step by step instead of just boggling at a high workload.
On April 04 2012 00:36 Reborn58 wrote: The real reason for asking this question is:
A.) To weed out anyone who is stupid enough to give you a seriously big flaw. I once had a guy tell me that he can be lazy and is late a lot.
B.) To see if you are realistic and can accept constructive criticism. Can you see flaws that you have? Because everyone has them. And are you willing to work on them? Because that is all anyone can ask of you.
So a great answer would be something like "I have been told I can sometimes be unorganized. However, I have a system that works for me and I am willing to work on my organizational skills."
Answers like " I am a perfectionist" or "I work too hard" are easy tells of someone who is a narcissist or a bold-faced liar who cannot address their own flaws.
This is probably the best advice in this thread atm IMO. Anyone can say they are a perfectionist blah blah but really, employers dont care about that. Personally I use ErrantMind's approach as it allows me to show how I dealt with a situation which is what I believe most employers are more interested in.
On April 04 2012 00:36 Kaitlin wrote: Ignore nearly all the advice given so far in this thread. The way you answer all these 'give me your negatives' questions is to give them a negative, which is actually a positive. You don't say something bad, and how you have overcome it. You don't say something bad and how you are working to overcome it. You offer something that is only bad in some perspectives, but it's actually a positive from your potential employer's perspective.
"Well, according to my friends, I don't socialize enough. However, I see it differently. I'm just very goal-oriented and when I am trying to accomplish something, I sacrifice in other areas of my life to achieve that end. I've spent the last several years very focused on my objective of getting the most out of my education so I would be best prepared to enter such a competitive industry such as software development. Blah blah blah.
'What a phoney' is what I would be thinking, as I sat there sipping my tea.
On April 04 2012 00:15 urbanleg wrote: Hey guys, I just graduated in computer science, i started to look for a cool place to work at,
been so far in 2 interviews, and i got the feeling i blew them at the HR part when i answered this question:
1) i prefer to study alone (failed - not a team player)
2) im stressed out easily (failed - that might be a problem)
any ideas of good "bad" qualities for the next interview i got tomorrow?
p.s - perfectionist won't do since its too obvious these days.
thanks
Well just think about the sort of job you are going to be doing ...
A lot of different tasks: - I get bored if I am not challenged and improving my skills, I dislike routine work.
A lot of coding done after someone else have written the specifications: - I don't like coming up with what to solve, I like to work on what is the best possible way to solve it. I am more of an effective problem solver, than a creative coder.
Solving customer needs when you participate in meetings with customers etc: - I don't like to only code from a technical spec, I need to understand the needs that my program / solution is meant to solve.
And so on.
Basically, say your 'bad quality' is something that is pretty much the opposite of what's required in your job.
Tell them its 2012 and you are concerned with the fact that they are using outdated methods of screening candidates. There is an incredibly high chance that every person they ask this question to has rehearsed an answer or is lying or both.
On April 04 2012 00:36 Reborn58 wrote: The real reason for asking this question is:
A.) To weed out anyone who is stupid enough to give you a seriously big flaw. I once had a guy tell me that he can be lazy and is late a lot.
B.) To see if you are realistic and can accept constructive criticism. Can you see flaws that you have? Because everyone has them. And are you willing to work on them? Because that is all anyone can ask of you.
So a great answer would be something like "I have been told I can sometimes be unorganized. However, I have a system that works for me and I am willing to work on my organizational skills."
Answers like " I am a perfectionist" or "I work too hard" are easy tells of someone who is a narcissist or a bold-faced liar who cannot address their own flaws.
A) Surely someone that is THAT stupid, stupid enough to give a truly honest answer, would have already been weeded out.
B) No constructive criticism is given by asking this question, so this claim is puzzling. Everyone has flaws, everyone can see their own, but this question will not be a catalyst for self-reflection, and it certainly will not induce the interviewee to give the interviewer a completely truthful self-assessment.
the guy said "It always annoys me when I see someone not pulling their weight, and I'm not afraid to tell them"
Takes the focus off you and becomes someone else's fault. Some places also love hearing this crap because it shows you can be confident and assertive so especially useful if it's some sort of supervisorial role.
Bascially you can adapt that to something that superficially sounds like a fault, but shifts attention to someone else. Or honesty, that is also good with the right person.
On April 04 2012 00:26 Pandemona wrote: Never answer "truthfully" answer what they want to hear is rule 1. Everyone feels pressure, everyone gets stressed, everyone prefers to do work themselves if possible rather than relying on someone else. But thats not what employers want. When i was 16 however i blew a similar awesome job as a BMW parts apprentice, learning how to become a future BMW parts seller to customers cars that are needed to be fixed. I blew it when they asked, what do you want to do in your life. I said i wanted to be a footballing coach and would get my coaching badges whilst working my way up and dreamt of managing a football team. (Wow how young and naive i was!) so it kind of went downhill after that one, but out of 300 applications it was down to me and 2 others so i was rather proud. But yeah back to your point, you need to "bend the truth" and turn yourself into the perfect applicant, think what they want to hear and say that and back it up with other points and examples where and how you have been a team player and where you have not gotten stressed etc.
Good Quality - I am a hard working and conscientious person Bad Quality - I tend to strive for to much perfection on any task given to me.
Answers like these sound very generic. Many employers try to get to know your personality and if you stand out from the hundreds of other applicants.
As previously mentioned in the thread, pick a real (but minor) fault you have, then explain how you fixed it or working on it. Hiring managers have heard plenty of answers, especially the ones that turn bad qualities into good qualities. The Office even made a joke of that answer when Michael Scott was interviewing for a position.
Well I think you should try to come up with the most honest and true answer possible. When I got to answer this question during interviews, I basically talk about my lack of organizational skills (noone can really blame you for that except for some very specific positions).
But more than this, the field of the job you're applying for matters a lot. I did business studies and for any commercial positions my main flaw was clearly of being too honest and therefore not being able to promote something I don't believe in at 100%. If I were applying for a job in Human Ressources, I would probably not point at this as a "bad" quality, but I could say I'm too sensitive and might not be able to take the hard decisions that are needed.
On April 04 2012 00:41 CCitrus wrote: Say something that reflects an affinity for the job you're applying for. Something like...
"I have a hard time leaving something unfinished. This leads into my working late into the night more often than I would like."
This would be appropriate for, say, an engineering position or programming position where project deadlines are a big deal.
I disagree completely with this suggestion. First, on what planet is 'I have a hard time leaving something unfinished' a weakness, let alone someone's greatest weakness ? Second, it's full of shit, but that kind of relates to the previous point. Third, you are suggesting that you resist working late into the night to finish something, which tells more about you than the bullshit statement in the first place.
The 'weakness' has to be an actual negative, in certain aspects, but not a negative to your potential employer. And it can't be complete bullshit, like my greatest weakness is that I am willing to work too hard for very little pay. It can't be over the top.
On April 04 2012 00:45 Kennigit wrote: Tell them its 2012 and you are concerned with the fact that they are using outdated methods of screening candidates. There is an incredibly high chance that every person they ask this question to has rehearsed an answer or is lying or both.
This.
Also, if they ask you a BS question, sorry, but you have to play the game and give them a BS answer. welcome to corporate whore-ship. You sound like the type of person who would be better off at a smaller company anyway, and then you won't have to deal with inane questions like this.
If you really must play their game, try to think of qualities that are both a good thing and a bad thing. As was mentioned before, perfectionist, or maybe over-analytical, or you could say, I can sometimes get stressed, but that causes me to work alot harder! (like I said, BS questions deserve BS answers)
On April 04 2012 00:45 Kennigit wrote: Tell them its 2012 and you are concerned with the fact that they are using outdated methods of screening candidates. There is an incredibly high chance that every person they ask this question to has rehearsed an answer or is lying or both.
I wish I was bold enough to do this, but honestly I don't think I would try because getting a job is better than not getting a job. 2012 is an expensive time to live in.
Tell them an honest flaw, the whole purpose of the question is to see if you actually care to self evaluate yourself. Based on most responses in this thread, most people don't.
I said that I was a bad singer. It's funny and you don't have to really say anything bad about work performance. And I got the job. Try to say something that doesn't make you look like a bad employee. (obvious)
The important thing to remember is resume / interviews should be treated like personal advertizing. You have to sell yourself.
In terms of the weakness question, as mentioned by a few above inexperience is a good answer (especially in your case) as long as you follow it up right. Something like.
"Well clearly being a recent graduate I have some inexperience. However with the great training I received at (some collage), and my ability to learn quickly I am confidant I will succeed here at (Company) and in this position (x positoin). There are certainly some things I don't know, but I have been able to learn and excel at anything I have put my mind to.
Notice the use of words like 'will' instead of 'would'. How does "I will succeed here at" read differently then "I would succeed here at"? The latter leaves open the option of failure to be hired, not good.
It may sound presumptuous but it's exactly that kind of muted confidence that employers are looking for.
Good luck!
P.S. Don't use a smart ass answer. They will get you a certainly type of job, but not a professional job. By joking around with questions about yourself like this one, it indicates to them that you think of yourself as a joke, which will get you looks like this one.
On April 04 2012 00:45 Kennigit wrote: Tell them its 2012 and you are concerned with the fact that they are using outdated methods of screening candidates. There is an incredibly high chance that every person they ask this question to has rehearsed an answer or is lying or both.
If I were interviewing someone who had the audacity to tell me I was interviewing them incorrectly, my immediate response would be 'Clearly you wouldn't be happy here. Let's not waste any more of each other's time."
On April 04 2012 00:22 Keitzer wrote: Wait... are you asking for a lie to tell?
Or are you asking for advice on how to cover for you flaws?
Because obviously it's a plus to be able to work in a team, but if you can't do it, and really want the job, then I guess the only thing left to do is lie about it.
Edit: er... maybe LIE isn't the right word... maybe... extend the truth .. like... say you PREFER to work alone, although you are able to work in a team (implying you can do both, but you've also stated your preferences)
You speak as if "working in a team" is impossible for someone who studies alone.
Or that "working in a team" is a hard thing to do, and a rare quality amongst the general population.
A buffoon can work in a team.
I've never met or known anyone who cannot work in a team.
For comp sci, working in a team actually presents a unique set of challenges. As a fellow comp sci major, I've run into it a lot. Group coding with bad people can be rather difficult. As a result, companies look for people they think can handle group work well. You never want to answer an interview question with a response that makes it seem like you can't handle a group in an IT interview
Your completely mixing the issue of working in a team to writing readable code. a skill which is actually quite highly emphasized at university.
Your argument still hinges on the fact that some people cannot work in a team, and that it can be hard for the employer to find someone who can work in a team. This is completely contrary to experience.
You also make it seem like working in a team is a very difficult thing to learn.
On April 04 2012 00:50 SLAYER29 wrote: I said that I was a bad singer. It's funny and you don't have to really say anything bad about work performance. And I got the job. Try to say something that doesn't make you look like a bad employee. (obvious)
Ha! that is a good idea. shows a sense of humor and makes them feel comfortable (alot of times people hate doing interviews as much as they hate getting interviewed)
On April 04 2012 00:45 Kennigit wrote: Tell them its 2012 and you are concerned with the fact that they are using outdated methods of screening candidates. There is an incredibly high chance that every person they ask this question to has rehearsed an answer or is lying or both.
If I were interviewing someone who had the audacity to tell me I was interviewing them incorrectly, my immediate response would be 'Clearly you wouldn't be happy here. Let's not waste any more of each other's time."
Just say this and you'll be fine. "Well my bad quality is a little embarassing but due the the Archimedes principle I ALWAYS overflow the tub when I bathe."
Boom you take the power in the interview by making him feel bad for making you call yourself fat...
On April 04 2012 00:53 Xirroh wrote: The important thing to remember is resume / interviews should be treated like personal advertizing. You have to sell yourself.
In terms of the weakness question, as mentioned by a few above inexperience is a good answer (especially in your case) as long as you follow it up right. Something like.
"Well clearly being a recent graduate I have some inexperience. However with the great training I received at (some collage), and my ability to learn quickly I am confidant I will succeed here at (Company) and in this position (x positoin). There are certainly some things I don't know, but I have been able to learn and excel at anything I have put my mind to.
Notice the use of words like 'will' instead of 'would'. How does "I will succeed here at" read differently then "I would succeed here at"? The latter leaves open the option of failure to be hired, not good.
It may sound presumptuous but it's exactly that kind of muted confidence that employers are looking for.
Good luck!
the problem is - lack of experience is not a quality but a state.
On April 04 2012 00:22 Keitzer wrote: Wait... are you asking for a lie to tell?
Or are you asking for advice on how to cover for you flaws?
Because obviously it's a plus to be able to work in a team, but if you can't do it, and really want the job, then I guess the only thing left to do is lie about it.
Edit: er... maybe LIE isn't the right word... maybe... extend the truth .. like... say you PREFER to work alone, although you are able to work in a team (implying you can do both, but you've also stated your preferences)
You speak as if "working in a team" is impossible for someone who studies alone.
Or that "working in a team" is a hard thing to do, and a rare quality amongst the general population.
A buffoon can work in a team.
I've never met or known anyone who cannot work in a team.
For comp sci, working in a team actually presents a unique set of challenges. As a fellow comp sci major, I've run into it a lot. Group coding with bad people can be rather difficult. As a result, companies look for people they think can handle group work well. You never want to answer an interview question with a response that makes it seem like you can't handle a group in an IT interview
Your completely mixing the issue of working in a team to writing readable code. a skill which is actually quite highly emphasized at universities.
Your argument still hinges on the fact that some people cannot work in a team, and can be hardfor the employer to find someone who can work in a team. This is completely contrary to experience.
You also make it seem like working is a team is very difficult thing to learn.
How fucking hard can it be to work in a team?
A guy here at my work is close to being fired because many people are pissed off with him because he can't work well in a team. Lack of experience can be fixed. Being insufferable and impossible to work with is something that has no guarantee to ever improve.
On April 04 2012 00:55 JTouche wrote: Just say this and you'll be fine. "Well my bad quality is a little embarassing but due the the Archimedes principle I ALWAYS overflow the tub when I bathe."
Boom you take the power in the interview by making him feel bad for making you call yourself fat...
And you got the job!
:D
while the idea is nice personally I'd think that you are stupid for making the bathtub so full that water is spilling.
On April 04 2012 00:22 Keitzer wrote: Wait... are you asking for a lie to tell?
Or are you asking for advice on how to cover for you flaws?
Because obviously it's a plus to be able to work in a team, but if you can't do it, and really want the job, then I guess the only thing left to do is lie about it.
Edit: er... maybe LIE isn't the right word... maybe... extend the truth .. like... say you PREFER to work alone, although you are able to work in a team (implying you can do both, but you've also stated your preferences)
You speak as if "working in a team" is impossible for someone who works alone.
Or that "working in a team" is a hard thing to do, and a rare quality amongst the general population.
A buffoon can work in a team.
I've never met or known anyone who cannot work in a team.
when people ask about being able to work in a team, they are usually asking can you be able to work WELL in a team, as in having good teamwork with others, you know, the guy who blends in nicely with his co-workers. And for course, that isn't suited for everyone, just the extroverted people.
And when people say 'im the type who works alone but can work in a team', it usually means he: a) can work DECENTLY in a team b) can't work in a team, but doesn't want the guy to know
On April 04 2012 00:55 JTouche wrote: Just say this and you'll be fine. "Well my bad quality is a little embarassing but due the the Archimedes principle I ALWAYS overflow the tub when I bathe."
Boom you take the power in the interview by making him feel bad for making you call yourself fat...
And you got the job!
:D
while the idea is nice personally I'd think that you are stupid for making the bathtub so full that water is spilling.
You can be honest but should say what actions you've been taking to stop that bad habit / weakness. If you are not a good team worker (and know it, else you would not admit it), maybe you've been trying to incorporate other people more recently?
My weakness is that I always assume other people have the same background as me**. If you sit in a room with Europeans, Americans and Asians, that will most likely not be the case due to cultural differences, etc. So I went abroad for several semesters. It helped, but I am by no means an expert now.
** and judging by all these healthcare US/EU topics, for instance, I'm not the only one.
There's nothing wrong with preferring to work alone and being productive independently. It's all about what the company is looking for. Some jobs require that kind of independence, and some don't. If you're more productive alone, don't take a job where you have to work in teams all the time.
Interviews are as much a vetting process for the company as it is for you. Use them to your advantage.
You could say "I'm a sore loser" which I guess could be interpreted as something bad but most of the times it's the same as saying "I like to be in first place"
On April 04 2012 00:22 Keitzer wrote: Wait... are you asking for a lie to tell?
Or are you asking for advice on how to cover for you flaws?
Because obviously it's a plus to be able to work in a team, but if you can't do it, and really want the job, then I guess the only thing left to do is lie about it.
Edit: er... maybe LIE isn't the right word... maybe... extend the truth .. like... say you PREFER to work alone, although you are able to work in a team (implying you can do both, but you've also stated your preferences)
You speak as if "working in a team" is impossible for someone who studies alone.
Or that "working in a team" is a hard thing to do, and a rare quality amongst the general population.
A buffoon can work in a team.
I've never met or known anyone who cannot work in a team.
For comp sci, working in a team actually presents a unique set of challenges. As a fellow comp sci major, I've run into it a lot. Group coding with bad people can be rather difficult. As a result, companies look for people they think can handle group work well. You never want to answer an interview question with a response that makes it seem like you can't handle a group in an IT interview
Your completely mixing the issue of working in a team to writing readable code. a skill which is actually quite highly emphasized at universities.
Your argument still hinges on the fact that some people cannot work in a team, and can be hardfor the employer to find someone who can work in a team. This is completely contrary to experience.
You also make it seem like working is a team is very difficult thing to learn.
How fucking hard can it be to work in a team?
A guy here at my work is close to being fired because many people are pissed off with him because he can't work well in a team. Lack of experience can be fixed. Being insufferable and impossible to work with is something that has no guarantee to ever improve.
Yea, that sucks, but it is really quite simple to identify those people who have the natural ability to be a team player if you know how to identify certain personality traits. Asking someone the routine nonsense questions like describe your greatest weakness is not the way to do this however; you'll just end up hiring the best liars.
Why do the HR Barbie and HR Ken dolls take their jobs so seriously? Its because they got sociology degrees in college and they see themselves as the gatekeepers, yet they don't have any creativity in their bones to actually be bothered to find meaningful ways to screen candidates.
When I was helping to hire new crew as a shift manager at a mcdonalds, I remember that question being used for the purpose of seeing if someone is capable of introspection about their performance in a reasonable manner. You don't want to be too hard on yourself, but also, don't give a canned response about "work too hard" or "anal OCD", instead, answer their real question of "how well can you judge your own performance and self improve?" in the light of talking about a fault you are working on improving in yourself. (you can lie, just make it believable)
For example, this was for a university application, but it is the same idea.
"I feel that sometimes, I get frustrated when stumped by hard problems or problems I have never encountered before, but I am working on using that frustration to help me solve the problem. I never give up in the face of these problems, but I would sometimes need a moment or two to think about the problem before solving it."
On April 04 2012 00:22 Keitzer wrote: Wait... are you asking for a lie to tell?
Or are you asking for advice on how to cover for you flaws?
Because obviously it's a plus to be able to work in a team, but if you can't do it, and really want the job, then I guess the only thing left to do is lie about it.
Edit: er... maybe LIE isn't the right word... maybe... extend the truth .. like... say you PREFER to work alone, although you are able to work in a team (implying you can do both, but you've also stated your preferences)
You speak as if "working in a team" is impossible for someone who works alone.
Or that "working in a team" is a hard thing to do, and a rare quality amongst the general population.
A buffoon can work in a team.
I've never met or known anyone who cannot work in a team.
when people ask about being able to work in a team, they are usually asking can you be able to work WELL in a team, as in having good teamwork with others, you know, the guy who blends in. And for course, that isn't suited for everyone, just the extroverted people.
And when people say 'im the type who works alone but can work in a team', it usually means he: a) can work DECENTLY in a team b) can't work in a team, but doesn't want the guy to know
And your interviewing strategy totally caught him out. You've given one example of a person who cannot work in a team, whatever that even means (doesn't know what his doing? refuses to follow orders? is hostile and insulting?), but I've never met anyone who have known anyone or have even heard about anyone who can't work in a team.
On April 04 2012 00:55 JTouche wrote: Just say this and you'll be fine. "Well my bad quality is a little embarassing but due the the Archimedes principle I ALWAYS overflow the tub when I bathe."
Boom you take the power in the interview by making him feel bad for making you call yourself fat...
And you got the job!
:D
while the idea is nice personally I'd think that you are stupid for making the bathtub so full that water is spilling.
On April 04 2012 00:45 Kennigit wrote: Tell them its 2012 and you are concerned with the fact that they are using outdated methods of screening candidates. There is an incredibly high chance that every person they ask this question to has rehearsed an answer or is lying or both.
If I were interviewing someone who had the audacity to tell me I was interviewing them incorrectly, my immediate response would be 'Clearly you wouldn't be happy here. Let's not waste any more of each other's time."
And you'd be wrong.
who cares. He's trying to get a job not trying to prove some1 wrong.
On April 04 2012 00:22 Keitzer wrote: Wait... are you asking for a lie to tell?
Or are you asking for advice on how to cover for you flaws?
Because obviously it's a plus to be able to work in a team, but if you can't do it, and really want the job, then I guess the only thing left to do is lie about it.
Edit: er... maybe LIE isn't the right word... maybe... extend the truth .. like... say you PREFER to work alone, although you are able to work in a team (implying you can do both, but you've also stated your preferences)
You speak as if "working in a team" is impossible for someone who works alone.
Or that "working in a team" is a hard thing to do, and a rare quality amongst the general population.
A buffoon can work in a team.
I've never met or known anyone who cannot work in a team.
when people ask about being able to work in a team, they are usually asking can you be able to work WELL in a team, as in having good teamwork with others, you know, the guy who blends in nicely with his co-workers. And for course, that isn't suited for everyone, just the extroverted people.
And when people say 'im the type who works alone but can work in a team', it usually means he: a) can work DECENTLY in a team b) can't work in a team, but doesn't want the guy to know
Can you give an explicit criteria and definition in plain English (not corporatespeak) for this?
naw, for real, when they ask you such stupid question then its either a huge-ass business which hire ppl to hire ppl and hire ppl to fire ppl and then they just wanna hear what to the first hit on google tells you or you simply couldnt convince them yet and so they dont want you. i have never been asked a bout my bad qualities. if the interview is good, you dont get asked this question;-)
if they still ask, say something like you would be over ambitious, or if you prefer to say non-standard answers say that you never take your work back home. I would like to hear that if i were your boss.
Maybe you could say: my worst quality is that I don't know my worst quality. A paradox in itself, but it shows you are open to criticism and self analysis, I think.
Try to stay positive no matter what question they ask, for instance what is your bad quality?
My bad quality is that I like to work quickly and do not enjoy to sit around.
what are 2 weaknesses?
I do not see at as a weakness but as a challenge something that tests my skill to the maximum in that field of study.
why do I say this? because weakness is negativity it's saying i'm weak and cannot do this.. see things as a challenge , have a hard time with math... it's a challenge to defeat math, not somehting your weak at and cannot do....
On April 04 2012 00:22 Keitzer wrote: Wait... are you asking for a lie to tell?
Or are you asking for advice on how to cover for you flaws?
Because obviously it's a plus to be able to work in a team, but if you can't do it, and really want the job, then I guess the only thing left to do is lie about it.
Edit: er... maybe LIE isn't the right word... maybe... extend the truth .. like... say you PREFER to work alone, although you are able to work in a team (implying you can do both, but you've also stated your preferences)
You speak as if "working in a team" is impossible for someone who works alone.
Or that "working in a team" is a hard thing to do, and a rare quality amongst the general population.
A buffoon can work in a team.
I've never met or known anyone who cannot work in a team.
when people ask about being able to work in a team, they are usually asking can you be able to work WELL in a team, as in having good teamwork with others, you know, the guy who blends in nicely with his co-workers. And for course, that isn't suited for everyone, just the extroverted people.
And when people say 'im the type who works alone but can work in a team', it usually means he: a) can work DECENTLY in a team b) can't work in a team, but doesn't want the guy to know
Can you give an explicit criteria and definition in plain English (not corporatespeak) for this?
How about not being the asshole that nobody wants to work with ?
On April 04 2012 00:22 Keitzer wrote: Wait... are you asking for a lie to tell?
Or are you asking for advice on how to cover for you flaws?
Because obviously it's a plus to be able to work in a team, but if you can't do it, and really want the job, then I guess the only thing left to do is lie about it.
Edit: er... maybe LIE isn't the right word... maybe... extend the truth .. like... say you PREFER to work alone, although you are able to work in a team (implying you can do both, but you've also stated your preferences)
You speak as if "working in a team" is impossible for someone who works alone.
Or that "working in a team" is a hard thing to do, and a rare quality amongst the general population.
A buffoon can work in a team.
I've never met or known anyone who cannot work in a team.
when people ask about being able to work in a team, they are usually asking can you be able to work WELL in a team, as in having good teamwork with others, you know, the guy who blends in nicely with his co-workers. And for course, that isn't suited for everyone, just the extroverted people.
And when people say 'im the type who works alone but can work in a team', it usually means he: a) can work DECENTLY in a team b) can't work in a team, but doesn't want the guy to know
Can you give an explicit criteria and definition in plain English (not corporatespeak) for this?
How about not being the asshole that nobody wants to work with ?
^this. There is more to work than just getting the job done. When you work with other people, you will have to fit in. Imagine you are someone that can't get along with anyone. That lowers morale cause they have to work with you but they dont want to. And it is kinda rude as well.
On April 04 2012 00:22 Keitzer wrote: Wait... are you asking for a lie to tell?
Or are you asking for advice on how to cover for you flaws?
Because obviously it's a plus to be able to work in a team, but if you can't do it, and really want the job, then I guess the only thing left to do is lie about it.
Edit: er... maybe LIE isn't the right word... maybe... extend the truth .. like... say you PREFER to work alone, although you are able to work in a team (implying you can do both, but you've also stated your preferences)
You speak as if "working in a team" is impossible for someone who works alone.
Or that "working in a team" is a hard thing to do, and a rare quality amongst the general population.
A buffoon can work in a team.
I've never met or known anyone who cannot work in a team.
when people ask about being able to work in a team, they are usually asking can you be able to work WELL in a team, as in having good teamwork with others, you know, the guy who blends in nicely with his co-workers. And for course, that isn't suited for everyone, just the extroverted people.
And when people say 'im the type who works alone but can work in a team', it usually means he: a) can work DECENTLY in a team b) can't work in a team, but doesn't want the guy to know
Can you give an explicit criteria and definition in plain English (not corporatespeak) for this?
Really...? Teamwork in a workplace is as much about efficiency as it about having healthy professionnal relationships with your coworkers. In school it does'nt matter as much, since you switch teamates pretty much on a semester basis, and they are only with you for specific classes. In a workplace environment they are with you 35-40+ hours a week, there's no room for hostility or resentment, it pollutes the workplace and makes everyone's work harder.
Not targetting anyone in particular, but if you know nothing about professionnal interviews (as in career and not some meat patties flipper summer job), dont come in here with horrible advices.
Last time i was asked stupid shit like that i said thats a weird question, why should i talk bad about myself - and proceeded to ask the interviewer what her weakness was.
Needless to say she was quite surprised and couldnt tell me either.
err, the op is asking for advice, not what you think about the interview system.
Anyways, the interview is a game for the most parts. The interviewer is gonna be basically smiling at you throughout the whole thing(make sure you smile back). Ask you a series of questions, in the back of their mind they have a checklist for what is "right". of course every interviewer is going to differ from each other, but the generic questions remains the same.
Take the classic "Tell me about yourself question". Its the first question and it basically tell the interviewer if you actually know how to do an interview.
Also, hate to break it to you but you are going to have to play nice with people in most of your jobs. In this day and age, don't like working with other people is a pretty big breaker for jobs.
One question they might ask you is show me a time where you resolved interpersonal problems in a group project. This question is usually revelant for managers but its something to keep in the back of your mind. When this question comes up, you are suppose to give a specfic example of how you dealt with a problem in a workplace before.
My analytical chemistry professor worked in industry before, he was a group leader. when companies hired, he had to go under a 3 hour- pyscoanalysis. Most serious companies go out of their way to hire people who are not assholes
On April 04 2012 01:19 icydergosu wrote: Last time i was asked stupid shit like that i said thats a weird question, why should i talk bad about myself - and proceeded to ask the interviewer what her weakness was.
Needless to say she was quite surprised and couldnt tell me either.
I think you left out a relevant bit of information: Did you get the job?
On April 04 2012 01:19 icydergosu wrote: Last time i was asked stupid shit like that i said thats a weird question, why should i talk bad about myself - and proceeded to ask the interviewer what her weakness was.
Needless to say she was quite surprised and couldnt tell me either.
The suspense is killing me. How are you enjoying your employment at this company ? Certainly you were hired on the spot....
You have to say something stupid and expected. If you're applying for some software development position, something like "I absolutely can't stand unintuitive user interfaces...I have to make sure it's perfect before I'll quit working on it."
You're supposed to show the (potential) employer that even your bad qualities are an asset.
From what I've found through experience and others' anecdotes, the best answer to "What's your greatest weakness" is to talk about something completely irrelevant to the job description, but then talk about how you're currently in the process of turning that weakness into a strength (or, at least, fixing the weakness so that it no longer hurts you anymore). And the weakness is, of course, specific to whatever is *not* the job you're applying for.
On April 04 2012 00:22 Keitzer wrote: Wait... are you asking for a lie to tell?
Or are you asking for advice on how to cover for you flaws?
Because obviously it's a plus to be able to work in a team, but if you can't do it, and really want the job, then I guess the only thing left to do is lie about it.
Edit: er... maybe LIE isn't the right word... maybe... extend the truth .. like... say you PREFER to work alone, although you are able to work in a team (implying you can do both, but you've also stated your preferences)
You speak as if "working in a team" is impossible for someone who works alone.
Or that "working in a team" is a hard thing to do, and a rare quality amongst the general population.
A buffoon can work in a team.
I've never met or known anyone who cannot work in a team.
when people ask about being able to work in a team, they are usually asking can you be able to work WELL in a team, as in having good teamwork with others, you know, the guy who blends in nicely with his co-workers. And for course, that isn't suited for everyone, just the extroverted people.
And when people say 'im the type who works alone but can work in a team', it usually means he: a) can work DECENTLY in a team b) can't work in a team, but doesn't want the guy to know
Can you give an explicit criteria and definition in plain English (not corporatespeak) for this?
Really...? Teamwork in a workplace is as much about efficiency as it about having healthy professionnal relationships with your coworkers. In school it does'nt matter as much, since you switch teamates pretty much on a semester basis, and they are only with you for specific classes. In a workplace environment they are with you 35-40+ hours a week, there's no room for hostility or resentment, it pollutes the workplace and makes everyone's work harder.
Not targetting anyone in particular, but if you know nothing about professionnal interviews (as in career and not some meat patties flipper summer job), dont come in here with horrible advices.
So basically working efficiently, which is what everyone is (ideally) always required to do, and not being a dickhead to other people.
It must be so hard to find nondickheads who can work efficiently (nothing to do with teamwork, but just work in general).
On April 04 2012 00:22 Keitzer wrote: Wait... are you asking for a lie to tell?
Or are you asking for advice on how to cover for you flaws?
Because obviously it's a plus to be able to work in a team, but if you can't do it, and really want the job, then I guess the only thing left to do is lie about it.
Edit: er... maybe LIE isn't the right word... maybe... extend the truth .. like... say you PREFER to work alone, although you are able to work in a team (implying you can do both, but you've also stated your preferences)
You speak as if "working in a team" is impossible for someone who works alone.
Or that "working in a team" is a hard thing to do, and a rare quality amongst the general population.
A buffoon can work in a team.
I've never met or known anyone who cannot work in a team.
when people ask about being able to work in a team, they are usually asking can you be able to work WELL in a team, as in having good teamwork with others, you know, the guy who blends in nicely with his co-workers. And for course, that isn't suited for everyone, just the extroverted people.
And when people say 'im the type who works alone but can work in a team', it usually means he: a) can work DECENTLY in a team b) can't work in a team, but doesn't want the guy to know
Can you give an explicit criteria and definition in plain English (not corporatespeak) for this?
How about not being the asshole that nobody wants to work with ?
I'm continuously mobbed by a general population of assholes on the street, thus we must setup stringent interview practices relating to the ethereal quality of "teamwork" to target and filter out these assholes from working here.
They are legion and we must stop them, weed them out at all costs.
"My biggest weakness is thinking about this question too much, because I always wonder whether the interviewer is asking it as a serious question, and expecting to use my answer as an actual insight into my character at face value, or whether he/she knows it's a horribly clichéd and meaningless question, and is using it to gain insight into how I deal with questions that offer insight purely based on the way in which a person responds, rather than the actual content of their reply".
On April 04 2012 01:21 AUGcodon wrote: err, the op is asking for advice, not what you think about the interview system.
Anyways, the interview is a game for the most parts. The interviewer is gonna be basically smiling at you throughout the whole thing(make sure you smile back). Ask you a series of questions, in the back of their mind they have a checklist for what is "right". of course every interviewer is going to differ from each other, but the generic questions remains the same.
Take the classic "Tell me about yourself question". Its the first question and it basically tell the interviewer if you actually know how to do an interview.
I gave advice for how such as question can be answered.
Also, hate to break it to you but you are going to have to play nice with people in most of your jobs. In this day and age, don't like working with other people is a pretty big breaker for jobs.
I'd have an impossibly hard time to find an example of a person who hates persons.
One question they might ask you is show me a time where you resolved interpersonal problems in a group project. This question is usually revelant for managers but its something to keep in the back of your mind. When this question comes up, you are suppose to give a specfic example of how you dealt with a problem in a workplace before.
My analytical chemistry professor worked in industry before, he was a group leader. when companies hired, he had to go under a 3 hour- pyscoanalysis. Most serious companies go out of their way to hire people who are not assholes
I've honestly never a had or seen an interpersonal problem in a group project. Ever. This includes almost 1.5 years of work and many years at uni.
Must be hard to live in a world where everything is white or black...(i.e. with no shades of grey)
You dont have to be a dickhead to "not" fit in with the rest of the employees. Can be personnal ambitions or philosophy that goes in contradiction with the company. Can be your preference to act as team lead or in some sort of leadership position while the only position available or most of your tasks is/are supervised.
There's workaround HR people, if you know someone inside the company. Until then, you gotta rely on a decent curriculum and a well written presentation letter, not to mention "perform" well in the actual interview.
On April 04 2012 01:31 Lonyo wrote: "My biggest weakness is thinking about this question too much, because I always wonder whether the interviewer is asking it as a serious question, and expecting to use my answer as an actual insight into my character at face value, or whether he/she knows it's a horribly clichéd and meaningless question, and is using it to gain insight into how I deal with questions that offer insight purely based on the way in which a person responds, rather than the actual content of their reply".
Part of this has to do with the culture of the company conducting the interview. Company A might be looking for a response that indicates you have devoted a significant amount of time to your interview preparation and expects a polished "corporate" type response. A different company, perhaps a small software development company, might look for some personality in the response, something witty, on the spot, whatever.
On April 04 2012 00:22 Keitzer wrote: Wait... are you asking for a lie to tell?
Or are you asking for advice on how to cover for you flaws?
Because obviously it's a plus to be able to work in a team, but if you can't do it, and really want the job, then I guess the only thing left to do is lie about it.
Edit: er... maybe LIE isn't the right word... maybe... extend the truth .. like... say you PREFER to work alone, although you are able to work in a team (implying you can do both, but you've also stated your preferences)
You speak as if "working in a team" is impossible for someone who works alone.
Or that "working in a team" is a hard thing to do, and a rare quality amongst the general population.
A buffoon can work in a team.
I've never met or known anyone who cannot work in a team.
when people ask about being able to work in a team, they are usually asking can you be able to work WELL in a team, as in having good teamwork with others, you know, the guy who blends in nicely with his co-workers. And for course, that isn't suited for everyone, just the extroverted people.
And when people say 'im the type who works alone but can work in a team', it usually means he: a) can work DECENTLY in a team b) can't work in a team, but doesn't want the guy to know
Can you give an explicit criteria and definition in plain English (not corporatespeak) for this?
Really...? Teamwork in a workplace is as much about efficiency as it about having healthy professionnal relationships with your coworkers. In school it does'nt matter as much, since you switch teamates pretty much on a semester basis, and they are only with you for specific classes. In a workplace environment they are with you 35-40+ hours a week, there's no room for hostility or resentment, it pollutes the workplace and makes everyone's work harder.
Not targetting anyone in particular, but if you know nothing about professionnal interviews (as in career and not some meat patties flipper summer job), dont come in here with horrible advices.
So basically working efficiently, which is what everyone is (ideally) always required to do, and not being an dickhead to other people.
It must be so hard to find nondickheads who can work efficiently (nothing to do with teamwork, but just work in general).
Look, even though its required to work efficiently, not everyone is capable of that. Employers need confidence. And the gpa of a person provides (or doesnt provide) that confidence. And also, being a dickhead and not blending in are not the same thing. Believe it or not, you can be a kind person and still not blend in.
On April 04 2012 01:31 Lonyo wrote: "My biggest weakness is thinking about this question too much, because I always wonder whether the interviewer is asking it as a serious question, and expecting to use my answer as an actual insight into my character at face value, or whether he/she knows it's a horribly clichéd and meaningless question, and is using it to gain insight into how I deal with questions that offer insight purely based on the way in which a person responds, rather than the actual content of their reply".
Part of this has to do with the culture of the company conducting the interview. Company A might be looking for a response that indicates you have devoted a significant amount of time to your interview preparation and expects a polished "corporate" type response. A different company, perhaps a small software development company, might look for some personality in the response, something witty, on the spot, whatever.
I cannot fathom why any company would want this.
There are thousand better ways to measure preparedness.
On April 04 2012 01:34 paralleluniverse wrote: I've honestly never a had or seen an interpersonal problem in a group project. Ever. This includes almost 1.5 years of work and many years at uni.
So we can conclude, based on your extensive 1.5 years of work experience, interpersonal problems are a thing of the past and nothing to be considered in hiring interviews.
I had that recently, and I said "I'm fine with stress, I'm fine with nerves, I'm fine with pressure, I'm fine with a cmobination of any 2, but when all 3 come together, just like most people, I don't do too well. However, after only a few days on the job, nerves will go away, and I'll be fine"
On April 04 2012 00:22 Keitzer wrote: Wait... are you asking for a lie to tell?
Or are you asking for advice on how to cover for you flaws?
Because obviously it's a plus to be able to work in a team, but if you can't do it, and really want the job, then I guess the only thing left to do is lie about it.
Edit: er... maybe LIE isn't the right word... maybe... extend the truth .. like... say you PREFER to work alone, although you are able to work in a team (implying you can do both, but you've also stated your preferences)
You speak as if "working in a team" is impossible for someone who works alone.
Or that "working in a team" is a hard thing to do, and a rare quality amongst the general population.
A buffoon can work in a team.
I've never met or known anyone who cannot work in a team.
when people ask about being able to work in a team, they are usually asking can you be able to work WELL in a team, as in having good teamwork with others, you know, the guy who blends in nicely with his co-workers. And for course, that isn't suited for everyone, just the extroverted people.
And when people say 'im the type who works alone but can work in a team', it usually means he: a) can work DECENTLY in a team b) can't work in a team, but doesn't want the guy to know
Can you give an explicit criteria and definition in plain English (not corporatespeak) for this?
Really...? Teamwork in a workplace is as much about efficiency as it about having healthy professionnal relationships with your coworkers. In school it does'nt matter as much, since you switch teamates pretty much on a semester basis, and they are only with you for specific classes. In a workplace environment they are with you 35-40+ hours a week, there's no room for hostility or resentment, it pollutes the workplace and makes everyone's work harder.
Not targetting anyone in particular, but if you know nothing about professionnal interviews (as in career and not some meat patties flipper summer job), dont come in here with horrible advices.
So basically working efficiently, which is what everyone is (ideally) always required to do, and not being an dickhead to other people.
It must be so hard to find nondickheads who can work efficiently (nothing to do with teamwork, but just work in general).
Look, even though its required to work efficiently, not everyone is capable of that. Employers need confidence. And the gpa of a person provides (or doesnt provide) that confidence. And also, being a dickhead and not blending in are not the same thing. Believe it or not, you can be a kind person and still not blend in.
Working efficiently is about working in general, it's got nothing to do with teamwork. It's a quality that is mostly determined by what you know and how smart you are.
So teamwork is now defined as not being an awkward loner or not being a loser with no friends? How well you can start a conversation at lunchtime or entertain a crowd at the Christmas party?
On April 04 2012 00:27 AeroGear wrote: There's no bad interview, every interview you do, makes you (or should) better for the next one.
A bad quality can be anything really, what is important is to show them that you've identified it and are working/have worked on improving it, and ideally provide examples of it. Doesnt have to be professionnal experience, can be linked to school or even non-curricular like managing a local sports team, a fundraiser or other social outlet.
I'm usually upfront about these things, you dont want to appear overconfident, but you want to show them that you're always striving on improving yourself, even in areas where you perform well.
If I take back your example about not being a team player. You could explain that during your studies, you got used to relying on yourself and thus dont have as much experience working with a team. At which point you concede that bigger projects needs the involvement of multiple specialists and that you strive to be a part of these large scale projects.
My personal example was the following: I was'nt organized or didnt keep track of my train of thoughts when I worked on design projects or basicly any science projects. I would just scribble things left and right and come up with the answer. As important as it is in school, it is even more so in a company. I've learned to work with agendas, design logs, keep my files and folders up to date, annoted, etc. There's room for improvement still, but I'm aware of it and working on it.
This, almost have a similar story.
In my experience it is good that you recognize a flaw (of course not tooo major, but can definitely something that you realized during your study or internship) but also to mention that you are improving it or at least thought about how you want to improve it.
On April 04 2012 01:31 Lonyo wrote: "My biggest weakness is thinking about this question too much, because I always wonder whether the interviewer is asking it as a serious question, and expecting to use my answer as an actual insight into my character at face value, or whether he/she knows it's a horribly clichéd and meaningless question, and is using it to gain insight into how I deal with questions that offer insight purely based on the way in which a person responds, rather than the actual content of their reply".
Part of this has to do with the culture of the company conducting the interview. Company A might be looking for a response that indicates you have devoted a significant amount of time to your interview preparation and expects a polished "corporate" type response. A different company, perhaps a small software development company, might look for some personality in the response, something witty, on the spot, whatever.
I cannot fathom why any company would want this.
There are thousand better ways to measure preparedness.
As an employee of a business, you are a representative of that business. At some point, you may come in contact with clients or potential clients. At some point, those clients or potential clients might ask you a question. A company might want their representative to be prepared so handle questions. If someone hasn't bothered to prepare themselves for questions likely to be encountered in a job interview, which determines their own success, why would such a person prepare when in a position representing the company ?
I'm getting the impression that you're "that guy".
On April 04 2012 01:34 paralleluniverse wrote: I've honestly never a had or seen an interpersonal problem in a group project. Ever. This includes almost 1.5 years of work and many years at uni.
So we can conclude, based on your extensive 1.5 years of work experience, interpersonal problems are a thing of the past and nothing to be considered in hiring interviews.
/thread
Interpersonal problems are almost mythical. I've never experienced it. I've never seen it. I never heard of anyone who has seen it. I do not know a single person who knows of a single person who has seen or experienced it or heard of it.
Surely, they must exist somewhere, but it's probably as rare as bird flu.
On April 04 2012 01:31 Lonyo wrote: "My biggest weakness is thinking about this question too much, because I always wonder whether the interviewer is asking it as a serious question, and expecting to use my answer as an actual insight into my character at face value, or whether he/she knows it's a horribly clichéd and meaningless question, and is using it to gain insight into how I deal with questions that offer insight purely based on the way in which a person responds, rather than the actual content of their reply".
Part of this has to do with the culture of the company conducting the interview. Company A might be looking for a response that indicates you have devoted a significant amount of time to your interview preparation and expects a polished "corporate" type response. A different company, perhaps a small software development company, might look for some personality in the response, something witty, on the spot, whatever.
I cannot fathom why any company would want this.
There are thousand better ways to measure preparedness.
As an employee of a business, you are a representative of that business. At some point, you may come in contact with clients or potential clients. At some point, those clients or potential clients might ask you a question. A company might want their representative to be prepared so handle questions. If someone hasn't bothered to prepare themselves for questions likely to be encountered in a job interview, which determines their own success, why would such a person prepare when in a position representing the company ?
I'm getting the impression that you're "that guy".
Because it's your job...
You sound like a HR representative attempting to justify your relevance.
On April 04 2012 01:31 Lonyo wrote: "My biggest weakness is thinking about this question too much, because I always wonder whether the interviewer is asking it as a serious question, and expecting to use my answer as an actual insight into my character at face value, or whether he/she knows it's a horribly clichéd and meaningless question, and is using it to gain insight into how I deal with questions that offer insight purely based on the way in which a person responds, rather than the actual content of their reply".
Part of this has to do with the culture of the company conducting the interview. Company A might be looking for a response that indicates you have devoted a significant amount of time to your interview preparation and expects a polished "corporate" type response. A different company, perhaps a small software development company, might look for some personality in the response, something witty, on the spot, whatever.
I cannot fathom why any company would want this.
There are thousand better ways to measure preparedness.
It shows you care and are really interested in the job. Showing you've done research about the company, what they do, their philosophy and goals is a pretty sound investment in getting the job.
Last interview I had, I put in roughly 40 hours of work into it. Reviewing typical interview questions and answers, reading about the company profile, their accomplishments and awards. It helps in making you much more convincing and confident during the interview. It also confirms to you that you do want the job. The last thing an employer wants is someone who fails the probation period...they lose time and money.
On April 04 2012 00:15 urbanleg wrote: Hey guys, I just graduated in computer science, i started to look for a cool place to work at,
been so far in 2 interviews, and i got the feeling i blew them at the HR part when i answered this question:
1) i prefer to study alone (failed - not a team player)
2) im stressed out easily (failed - that might be a problem)
any ideas of good "bad" qualities for the next interview i got tomorrow?
p.s - perfectionist won't do since its too obvious these days.
thanks
"I sometimes write a little bit too much documentation for my code."
Or you could rephrase the existing ones into more positive things. Working alone when you aren't performing tasks that directly depend on divergent thinking should benefit from you not attempting to perform them whilst trying to socialise.
edit: read more of the thread. Thank god I've never had to do this.
I usually just meet the people hiring me and talk random stuff with them, try to come across as a nice reasonable human being and it always seems to work...
No idea how you Americans hire people, but that just seems weird
On April 04 2012 01:43 paralleluniverse wrote: So teamwork is now defined as not being an awkward loner or not being a loser with no friends? How well you can start a conversation at lunchtime or entertain a crowd at the Christmas party?
This is exactly how many HR people judge potential candidates. I mean hell, in America we voted for the president "we'd rather have a beer with"
Thats just how it goes and you have to play the game if you want to be a corporate drone.
It's more of a psychological assessment than a legitimate question. How well you can evaluate yourself and how well you can articulate that answer. The job interview situation is full of little mental games like this.
On April 04 2012 01:31 Lonyo wrote: "My biggest weakness is thinking about this question too much, because I always wonder whether the interviewer is asking it as a serious question, and expecting to use my answer as an actual insight into my character at face value, or whether he/she knows it's a horribly clichéd and meaningless question, and is using it to gain insight into how I deal with questions that offer insight purely based on the way in which a person responds, rather than the actual content of their reply".
Part of this has to do with the culture of the company conducting the interview. Company A might be looking for a response that indicates you have devoted a significant amount of time to your interview preparation and expects a polished "corporate" type response. A different company, perhaps a small software development company, might look for some personality in the response, something witty, on the spot, whatever.
I cannot fathom why any company would want this.
There are thousand better ways to measure preparedness.
It shows you care and are really interested in the job. Showing you've done research about the company, what they do, their philosophy and goals is a pretty sound investment in getting the job.
Last interview I had, I put in roughly 40 hours of work into it. Reviewing typical interview questions and answers, reading about the company profile, their accomplishments and awards. It helps in making you much more convincing and confident during the interview. It also confirms to you that you do want the job. The last thing an employer wants is someone who fails the probation period...they lose time and money.
Reading up on the company does show you care. Ask about this.
Regurgitating generic answers you read off a website is indicative of nothing of substance.
On April 04 2012 00:22 Keitzer wrote: Wait... are you asking for a lie to tell?
Or are you asking for advice on how to cover for you flaws?
Because obviously it's a plus to be able to work in a team, but if you can't do it, and really want the job, then I guess the only thing left to do is lie about it.
Edit: er... maybe LIE isn't the right word... maybe... extend the truth .. like... say you PREFER to work alone, although you are able to work in a team (implying you can do both, but you've also stated your preferences)
You speak as if "working in a team" is impossible for someone who works alone.
Or that "working in a team" is a hard thing to do, and a rare quality amongst the general population.
A buffoon can work in a team.
I've never met or known anyone who cannot work in a team.
when people ask about being able to work in a team, they are usually asking can you be able to work WELL in a team, as in having good teamwork with others, you know, the guy who blends in nicely with his co-workers. And for course, that isn't suited for everyone, just the extroverted people.
And when people say 'im the type who works alone but can work in a team', it usually means he: a) can work DECENTLY in a team b) can't work in a team, but doesn't want the guy to know
Can you give an explicit criteria and definition in plain English (not corporatespeak) for this?
Really...? Teamwork in a workplace is as much about efficiency as it about having healthy professionnal relationships with your coworkers. In school it does'nt matter as much, since you switch teamates pretty much on a semester basis, and they are only with you for specific classes. In a workplace environment they are with you 35-40+ hours a week, there's no room for hostility or resentment, it pollutes the workplace and makes everyone's work harder.
Not targetting anyone in particular, but if you know nothing about professionnal interviews (as in career and not some meat patties flipper summer job), dont come in here with horrible advices.
So basically working efficiently, which is what everyone is (ideally) always required to do, and not being an dickhead to other people.
It must be so hard to find nondickheads who can work efficiently (nothing to do with teamwork, but just work in general).
Look, even though its required to work efficiently, not everyone is capable of that. Employers need confidence. And the gpa of a person provides (or doesnt provide) that confidence. And also, being a dickhead and not blending in are not the same thing. Believe it or not, you can be a kind person and still not blend in.
Working efficiently is about working in general, it's got nothing to do with teamwork. It's a quality that is mostly determined by what you know and how smart you are.
So teamwork is now defined as not being an awkward loner or not being a loser with no friends? How well you can start a conversation at lunchtime or entertain a crowd at the Christmas party?
Nobody is gonna expect you to entertain a crowd, that is too much to ask for. A likeable person, to put it short and simply.
personally, I would not want to work for a company that asks questions like that on the interview.
If I was really desperate to land the job, I'd pull something out of my arse along the lines of 'sometimes I get carried away, making our customers' problems my own'
"I sometimes get too passionate about things." Passion is good. And it's basically an advantage.
"I find it hard to refuse helping out collegues, which might spread my out thin across the department." Not really your problem. Your manager should be handling this.
In my experience the answer to this question is mostly irrelevent. When I was working for a legal insurence company, I got to represent the company together with a superior in a couple of job interviews for a position as a lawyer. After the interview, we retired and discussed wether or not to hire the applicant. I can't remember the answer to this question ever being brought up as a reason to either continue or discontinue with the application procedure. Whenever someone was not hired, it was due to a variety of reasons, most commonly a lack of professional skills (ie: not being able to express and present yourself properly) of doubts about the motivation for wanting to work with/for us, in combination with a not so stellar resumé.
Bottom line being, if you ace the interview and have a good resumé, you can blow these questions or just answer with one of the many standard answers (like; being a perfectionist). If you don't ace the interview and/or don't have a good resumé, well, you probably won't get hired regardless of your answer on this question.
Also, remember that the one who you are having the interview with is not a retard and generally has more experience with job interviews than you have. They know many people struggle with these type of questions and will judge the answers to these questions accordingly.
On April 04 2012 01:54 svi wrote: lol i don't understand how preferring to study alone is a bad thing, especially in a antisocial major like computer science.
i'm a CS major myself and programming in a group is retarded.
It's not, really. Sharing ideas and solutions is the entire point of agile programming.
On-thread: really, if I was interviewing someone who said their greatest flaw is "I'm a perfectionist", I'd throw them right out the door. Not because I don't like perfectionists, I just hate liars.
I was just at a job interview. The recruiter was a sexy brunette, with green eyes and legs that went on for miles. With a wink and a suggestive smile, she asked me that one stereotypical job interview question that you always get asked- except this time, it clearly had a double entendre attached to it: "So, what's your greatest weakness?" We locked eyes and she licked her lips. I took off my glasses and stood up, a lock of my hair falling forwards. As I unbuttoned my dress shirt, she gasped in surprise. I dropped my shirt to the side and yelled "Kryptonite!" as I flew out the window. Off to save the world!
On April 04 2012 01:34 paralleluniverse wrote: I've honestly never a had or seen an interpersonal problem in a group project. Ever. This includes almost 1.5 years of work and many years at uni.
So we can conclude, based on your extensive 1.5 years of work experience, interpersonal problems are a thing of the past and nothing to be considered in hiring interviews.
/thread
Interpersonal problems are almost mythical. I've never experienced it. I've never seen it. I never heard of anyone who has seen it. I do not know a single person who knows of a single person who has seen or experienced it or heard of it.
Surely, they must exist somewhere, but it's probably as rare as bird flu.
Just today I read an article about a survey by KPMG indicating that interpersonal problems are common and a big cost factor. The article goes as far as saying an estimated 20% of all cost in business are based on interpersonal conflict.
it's a job interview.... aren't you supposed to lie through your teeth and just tell them what they want to hear?
put yourself in their position and think what answer you would be expecting from a successful candidate.
there isn't necessarily a correct answer, i think it's always how you present yourself and how you come accross. just make sure you don't come accross as a liar or lazy person. don't necessarily be sincere, but make sure you're enthusiastic and alert.
obviously you're enthusiastic because you went to the interview, but always make sure you SHOW that.
i have a pretty terrible record in interviews, but i believe i've improved a lot from each failure
once upon a time i even replied to "what are your main motivations?" with the answer: i'd do anything for money. (not even kidding)
I just had a job interview 6 months ago and got this question (and got the job eventually).
I just said "I like to be in control of things though sometimes this leads me to bite of more then i can chew, however i tend to notice it in time to take necessary precautions so things wont swirl out of hand"
basically what i tried to say is that i am a hard worker, but sometimes want to work to hard. People love hard workers!!
Not sure if its perfect, but hey, i got hired!
ps. i dont mind this question, i hate the question "if id call a friend of you know and asked him to describe you in 5words, what would he say?" more.
On April 04 2012 00:29 Aemilia wrote: Perfectionist is always the answer to this.
No, that's a Michael Scott answer. Do you also work too hard and care too much?
Companies want to know your actual bad qualities. They care much more about the fact that you answered the question honestly than about what you actually said. I wouldn't worry about the answers you gave. While it could imply the things you mentioned, they won't always assume that. I also prefer to work/study alone and get stressed out easily. However, I'm also very capable at working with a team and the stress doesn't affect my ability to produce.
They are my own answers, hence the time put in. The questions are generic though, most frequently asked questions obviously.
Starting to think you're just trolling, not that it bothers me but it would be pretty childish. All these petty complaints about the interview process...should instead think of all the applicants who did'nt get past the first steps.
On April 04 2012 01:58 AeroGear wrote: They are my own answers, hence the time put in. The questions are generic though, most frequently asked questions obviously.
Starting to think you're just trolling, not that it bothers me but it would be pretty childish. All these petty complaints about the interview process...should instead think of all the applicants who did'nt get past the first steps.
I always planned on saying something to this extent: "My worst quality is probably, I'm a product of my enviroment, when im surrounded by good workers, I excel, but when around bad ones, im dragged down." probably can be worded better but you get the idea
On April 04 2012 01:55 DarkPlasmaBall wrote: I was just at a job interview. The recruiter was a sexy brunette, with green eyes and legs that went on for miles. With a wink and a suggestive smile, she asked me that one stereotypical job interview question that you always get asked- except this time, it clearly had a double entendre attached to it: "So, what's your greatest weakness?" We locked eyes and she licked her lips. I took off my glasses and stood up, a lock of my hair falling forwards. As I unbuttoned my dress shirt, she gasped in surprise. I dropped my shirt to the side and yelled "Kryptonite!" as I flew out the window. Off to save the world!
On April 04 2012 02:11 Cuh wrote: I always planned on saying something to this extent: "My worst quality is probably, I'm a product of my enviroment, when im surrounded by good workers, I excel, but when around bad ones, im dragged down." probably can be worded better but you get the idea
I smell bullshit.
Of course I smell bullshit for all the other answers. But I single out this one because it is particularly unique, whereas the others are common enough to not get a raised eyebrow, i.e. they are quite plausible.
But this -- what a strange and random thing to say about yourself. It's not even a weakness.
On April 04 2012 02:11 Cuh wrote: I always planned on saying something to this extent: "My worst quality is probably, I'm a product of my enviroment, when im surrounded by good workers, I excel, but when around bad ones, im dragged down." probably can be worded better but you get the idea
You should plan on saying something else, as this is actually quite a bad answer.
On April 04 2012 02:21 AllHailTheDead wrote: when im asked for a bad quality I usually say I work too hard or Im always early
you know turn it around so its not really a bad quality
hasnt failed me yet
Your potential employer will not consider working too hard as a negative, and the only negative that can come out of you always being early is if he is having an affair with his secretary and you showing up early would get in his way.
Cool places to work at do not ask you those questions. In cool places you are interviewed by programmers (your actual peers or boss) who ask you to write code and possibly previous to being accepted to the interview you were asked to work on a miniproject for a week. In fact the coolest places I've worked on there was no interview (small startup-like places), there was just me being introduced to the team and starting to work right away.
It depends on the company, but sometimes they're looking for honesty as well. For instance, I said that I'm bit unorganized at home, but it's something I focus on at work and I'm working to improve upon it.
This type of response is generally more well received, it shows that you not only are more self aware, but you're willing to make the effort to change for the better. If I heard someone tell me that their weakness was that they work too hard, I'd laugh in their face.
On April 04 2012 02:11 Cuh wrote: I always planned on saying something to this extent: "My worst quality is probably, I'm a product of my enviroment, when im surrounded by good workers, I excel, but when around bad ones, im dragged down." probably can be worded better but you get the idea
You should plan on saying something else, as this is actually quite a bad answer.
It's not just a bad answer, it's a fucking terrible answer. No matter how good the interview was going up until this point if someone said that I would already be thinking about the next candidate.
On April 04 2012 00:19 LaSt)ChAnCe wrote: you need to give them something that is a weakness but doesn't affect your ability to perform or be a team player
a common example is "my biggest weakness is that my professional network in the area is small" for example if you just moved to the city, or haven't moved there yet
On April 04 2012 00:18 BlueBoxSC wrote: I don't know, try turning the question around into something that reflects how great of a team player you are.
Like...
"Yes, like everyone, I feel that I have a few unfavorable qualities, but in the professional workplace, I feel like I can put them aside for the sake of the company and I will hopefully be in an environment where my coworkers can support me just as I will support them."
don't do this, people hate when you avoid answering their question
That is actually really well said, I've also been searching for what to say about that. Awesome idea thanks mate.
On April 04 2012 02:11 Cuh wrote: I always planned on saying something to this extent: "My worst quality is probably, I'm a product of my enviroment, when im surrounded by good workers, I excel, but when around bad ones, im dragged down." probably can be worded better but you get the idea
You should plan on saying something else, as this is actually quite a bad answer.
You could make a little more effort in helping him, lol. There's actually a great quality in there -- the quality of being drawn to other productive people and feeding off of it, thereby improving one's own productivity. He just needs to make that the focal point, rather than this "I'm a product of the environment" thing which I agree, is awk.
Here: "One of my qualities is that while working in settings with others, I'm able to communicate clearly and assimilate the insightful ideas of those around me, thereby improving my own perspective, output, and quality of work. I thrive when placed in settings with other driven people."
On April 04 2012 00:18 BlueBoxSC wrote: I don't know, try turning the question around into something that reflects how great of a team player you are.
Like...
"Yes, like everyone, I feel that I have a few unfavorable qualities, but in the professional workplace, I feel like I can put them aside for the sake of the company and I will hopefully be in an environment where my coworkers can support me just as I will support them."
This is a bad Idea, this answer sounds "canned" or rehearsed, and the interviewer will not get the feeling that they are getting to know the applicant. You want to say something that sounds honest but innocuous. Something like "I have struggled with being a little too slow to ask for help". This is undoubtedly a flaw, but also hints towards being independent and self sufficient. This is a more more positive way to say that you prefer to work alone, which hints towards an anti-social personality.
On April 04 2012 02:11 Cuh wrote: I always planned on saying something to this extent: "My worst quality is probably, I'm a product of my enviroment, when im surrounded by good workers, I excel, but when around bad ones, im dragged down." probably can be worded better but you get the idea
You should plan on saying something else, as this is actually quite a bad answer.
You could make a little more effort in helping him, lol. There's actually a great quality in there -- the quality of being drawn to other productive people and feeding off of it, thereby improving one's own productivity. He just needs to make that the focal point, rather than this "I'm a product of the environment" thing which I agree, is awk.
Here: "One of my qualities is that while working in settings with others, I'm able to communicate clearly and assimilate the insightful ideas of those around me, thereby improving my own perspective, output, and quality of work. I thrive when placed in settings with other driven people."
I had started writing more detail but erased it before posting. I had difficulty putting into words why it was bad. Basically, it's saying I am a spineless jellyfish with no moral compass, no sense of who I am, and can be manipulated easily. Also, it's not merely a bad 'quality', but more a complete lack of identity of yourself, whatsoever. Your tip is good as far as putting a positive like on the thought, but you've completely taken out the tie to 'bad quality' which results in basically ignoring the question.
Basically, I would suggest coming up with something that can be considered a weakness in general, but actually is a good thing, when considered from the potential employer's perspective. Perhaps something like a difficulty in maintaining balance in your life during periods where you're focused on something important to you. Such examples might be some projects you were involved in during college that you were extremely focused on, to the detriment of social relationships. This is a true 'bad' quality, but yet, appealing to an employer since they can expect you to really get into your work, care deeply about it, and do a good job.
On April 04 2012 00:22 Keitzer wrote: Wait... are you asking for a lie to tell?
Or are you asking for advice on how to cover for you flaws?
Because obviously it's a plus to be able to work in a team, but if you can't do it, and really want the job, then I guess the only thing left to do is lie about it.
Edit: er... maybe LIE isn't the right word... maybe... extend the truth .. like... say you PREFER to work alone, although you are able to work in a team (implying you can do both, but you've also stated your preferences)
You speak as if "working in a team" is impossible for someone who studies alone.
Or that "working in a team" is a hard thing to do, and a rare quality amongst the general population.
A buffoon can work in a team.
I've never met or known anyone who cannot work in a team.
For comp sci, working in a team actually presents a unique set of challenges. As a fellow comp sci major, I've run into it a lot. Group coding with bad people can be rather difficult. As a result, companies look for people they think can handle group work well. You never want to answer an interview question with a response that makes it seem like you can't handle a group in an IT interview
Your completely mixing the issue of working in a team to writing readable code. a skill which is actually quite highly emphasized at university.
Your argument still hinges on the fact that some people cannot work in a team, and that it can be hard for the employer to find someone who can work in a team. This is completely contrary to experience.
You also make it seem like working in a team is a very difficult thing to learn.
How fucking hard can it be to work in a team?
No, I am not. That is just one example of ways in which teamwork is important. I'm not saying it's the hardest skill to learn, but it's an important one. Most grads will be able to work in a team. However, there are those who slip through the cracks with poor accountability, poor communication skills, and an inability to compromise. Those are the ones they are trying to screen..
Sometimes I ask too many questions/don't ask enough questions because I like to understand things rather than just doing them.
If "don't ask enough" -> because I want to try and figure things out without bothering other people too much If "ask too many" -> but I try not to ask things all the time, and listen carefully so that I understand what they have said.
On April 04 2012 02:11 Cuh wrote: I always planned on saying something to this extent: "My worst quality is probably, I'm a product of my enviroment, when im surrounded by good workers, I excel, but when around bad ones, im dragged down." probably can be worded better but you get the idea
You should plan on saying something else, as this is actually quite a bad answer.
You could make a little more effort in helping him, lol. There's actually a great quality in there -- the quality of being drawn to other productive people and feeding off of it, thereby improving one's own productivity. He just needs to make that the focal point, rather than this "I'm a product of the environment" thing which I agree, is awk.
Here: "One of my qualities is that while working in settings with others, I'm able to communicate clearly and assimilate the insightful ideas of those around me, thereby improving my own perspective, output, and quality of work. I thrive when placed in settings with other driven people."
I had started writing more detail but erased it before posting. I had difficulty putting into words why it was bad. Basically, it's saying I am a spineless jellyfish with no moral compass, no sense of who I am, and can be manipulated easily. Also, it's not merely a bad 'quality', but more a complete lack of identity of yourself, whatsoever. Your tip is good as far as putting a positive like on the thought, but you've completely taken out the tie to 'bad quality' which results in basically ignoring the question.
Basically, I would suggest coming up with something that can be considered a weakness in general, but actually is a good thing, when considered from the potential employer's perspective. Perhaps something like a difficulty in maintaining balance in your life during periods where you're focused on something important to you. Such examples might be some projects you were involved in during college that you were extremely focused on, to the detriment of social relationships. This is a true 'bad' quality, but yet, appealing to an employer since they can expect you to really get into your work, care deeply about it, and do a good job.
Doh, oops. I sort of wasn't staying on topic, and had totally forgotten it was supposed to still communicate a negative flaw. Maybe he could use that as an example of a good quality, and immediately contrast it by saying something along the lines of: "In contrast, when I'm on my own, I find that I'm less creative and have a narrower perspective than the collective culmination of those qualities in a driven team setting." The 'weakness' is really just an obvious derivative from the fact that more smart heads in one place are should have more creative/productive potential than one smart head (you get the idea, though exceptions exist). I agree though, and it makes me realize how difficult it is to come up with well articulated 'weakness', which shouldn't actually be all that pathetic, as you say, from the employer's perspective.
Haven't read all the replies yet so I'm not sure if this has been mentioned but what I have always understood to be the answer to this question is to name a flaw that you have and how you have worked/are working on minimizing it or turning it into a strength.
There is no bullshit answer that everyone can use, just gotta be honest and convince the interviewer that your weaknesses wont be an issue.
make it specific to your interview and make it something you clearly have spent a lot of time deliberating. In my CS interview, I talked about how I had a bad habit of forcing abstraction on things that often were more different in behavior than intended. Part of being successful is knowing when you need to put together a hack job and when you need to put together a solid, extensible design. Knowing these parts of your personality is more than just what you say to your interviewer, and you should let it influence what kind of job you end up choosing.
This type of question can also be encountered in other areas, perhaps you are on a first date with a hot girl, and she wants to know something bad about you - 'So, why are you still single?'. One might respond that you lack confidence due to an inability to articulate your feelings caused by an enlarged tongue that has a tendency to vibrate uncontrollably. Again, a negative that your interviewer might not find so bad ...
What I think I actually said in my previous job interview (and got the job) was that:
"My biggest weakness I think is that I am a terrible procrastinator - I always put off housework, chores etc, and through university I would often put off courseworks until the last minute. If I had to choose between work, and play, I would always go with play. However, I've not really found this to be a problem in a professional environment because I don't get to make that choice - I am at work, so I HAVE to work, so I don't have the opportunity to procrastinate!"
On April 04 2012 03:01 Kaitlin wrote: This type of question can also be encountered in other areas, perhaps you are on a first date with a hot girl, and she wants to know something bad about you - 'So, why are you still single?'. One might respond that you lack confidence due to an inability to articulate your feelings caused by an enlarged tongue that has a tendency to vibrate uncontrollably. Again, a negative that your interviewer might not find so bad ...
If she's smart too, though, this idea could backfire. She might be too keen and read into it and decide youre supercreepy
On April 04 2012 03:29 Hairy wrote: What I think I actually said in my previous job interview (and got the job) was that:
"My biggest weakness I think is that I am a terrible procrastinator - I always put off housework, chores etc, and through university I would often put off courseworks until the last minute. If I had to choose between work, and play, I would always go with play. However, I've not really found this to be a problem in a professional environment because I don't get to make that choice - I am at work, so I HAVE to work, so I don't have the opportunity to procrastinate!"
This answer will be a no go in most of companies where they ask you these questions, because you will have to take lot of your work home.
I said the complaint I hear the most about myself is my overconfidence. What do you think about that?
Honestly in a job interview it's how you carry yourself from beginning to end. You can say some seriously dumb shit and still get the job if you show confidence and sincerity in what you are saying.
I know if I was interviewing someone I'd see how they can handle themselves in front of me. Definitely watch their body language... that's a HUGE component of a job interview. Just watch how they sit down. Are they slouching? Are they fiddling with their hands? Are their eyes shifting around the room, as if something bad is about to happen? Do they have confidence in their voice? Are they monotone? Do they look like they are really HUNGRY for the job?
I understand that the question, "What are your bad qualities?" Might frighten people to answer in a certain way, but a big portion of your answer is HOW you deliver that answer. You can say something completely stupid, but if the job interviewer thinks you said it with finesse he or she may just try to ignore your answer and continue on with the interview because they like your composure/personality.
Don't let the interviewer feel like you are hiding something from them or make the interview uncomfortable for both of you. The more comfortable the interviewer is with you; obviously the better your chances are of getting the job. The interviewer is going to remember the people that stood out... who were standing straight, proud, and showed that charisma that will be able to merge with whatever team you are joining.
On April 04 2012 03:42 ondik wrote: I said the complaint I hear the most about myself is my overconfidence. What do you think about that?
A couple things. You can't just say 'overconfidence' and leave it at that. You have to make an effort to turn it into a positive. Perhaps highlight some positives that lead to your 'overconfidence'.
Two things I think are very important here:
1. If your 'overconfidence' results in being difficult for co-workers to work with you, that's very bad. It's possible to be considered overconfident, but yet people like being around you because you're charming, and they find your overconfidence endearing. If people still like to be around you, and work with you, despite that overconfidence, make that clear.
2. Your statement wasn't one of introspection, it was relaying that others think that of you. That tells the interviewer that you have actually been told (frequently, since you said 'hear the most') that you are overconfident. Lots can be extracted from that. It might be taken that these people said you were 'over' confident because your skills don't match your confidence, which could even be a statement of your competence (or lack thereof) as seen by your coworkers, which is entirely separate than being difficult to work with.
It's probably better to find another weakness, lol.
On April 04 2012 02:11 Cuh wrote: I always planned on saying something to this extent: "My worst quality is probably, I'm a product of my enviroment, when im surrounded by good workers, I excel, but when around bad ones, im dragged down." probably can be worded better but you get the idea
You should plan on saying something else, as this is actually quite a bad answer.
You could make a little more effort in helping him, lol. There's actually a great quality in there -- the quality of being drawn to other productive people and feeding off of it, thereby improving one's own productivity. He just needs to make that the focal point, rather than this "I'm a product of the environment" thing which I agree, is awk.
Here: "One of my qualities is that while working in settings with others, I'm able to communicate clearly and assimilate the insightful ideas of those around me, thereby improving my own perspective, output, and quality of work. I thrive when placed in settings with other driven people."
I had started writing more detail but erased it before posting. I had difficulty putting into words why it was bad. Basically, it's saying I am a spineless jellyfish with no moral compass, no sense of who I am, and can be manipulated easily. Also, it's not merely a bad 'quality', but more a complete lack of identity of yourself, whatsoever. Your tip is good as far as putting a positive like on the thought, but you've completely taken out the tie to 'bad quality' which results in basically ignoring the question.
Basically, I would suggest coming up with something that can be considered a weakness in general, but actually is a good thing, when considered from the potential employer's perspective. Perhaps something like a difficulty in maintaining balance in your life during periods where you're focused on something important to you. Such examples might be some projects you were involved in during college that you were extremely focused on, to the detriment of social relationships. This is a true 'bad' quality, but yet, appealing to an employer since they can expect you to really get into your work, care deeply about it, and do a good job.
I agree with your second paragraph. This is exactly what I meant when I said "I have a hard time leaving something unfinished. This leads into my working late into the night more often than I would like." I'll admit you've communicated it more clearly. Also, examples are essential.
On April 04 2012 04:01 Mechwarrior wrote: Whenever I get asked this question I just say that, "I am a person who tends to overwork."
Basically it just says that I'm a guy who works a lot and every boss likes to hear that you'll be able to work.
Yes, every boss likes to hear that you'll be able to work. Bosses also tend to like hearing compliments about their tie. However, how your boss might feel about being told you like his tie, when he asked you where is the report that is supposed to be on his desk, is up for debate. In other words, don't ignore the question asked.
On April 04 2012 02:21 AllHailTheDead wrote: when im asked for a bad quality I usually say I work too hard or Im always early
you know turn it around so its not really a bad quality
hasnt failed me yet
Your potential employer will not consider working too hard as a negative, and the only negative that can come out of you always being early is if he is having an affair with his secretary and you showing up early would get in his way.
Touché. Haha laughed a good while at this one. I tend to be a fan of "I'm intolerant of inefficient working enviroments." because, well, i am. Is that bad?
On April 04 2012 02:11 Cuh wrote: I always planned on saying something to this extent: "My worst quality is probably, I'm a product of my enviroment, when im surrounded by good workers, I excel, but when around bad ones, im dragged down." probably can be worded better but you get the idea
I smell bullshit.
Of course I smell bullshit for all the other answers. But I single out this one because it is particularly unique, whereas the others are common enough to not get a raised eyebrow, i.e. they are quite plausible.
But this -- what a strange and random thing to say about yourself. It's not even a weakness.
He always planned on saying something to this extent. Never does it say he did this. Actually, is it even ok to call out someone because they think they're lying in a thread about how to answer a question? Crap, i just fell for trollbait.
I feel like his answer is something accurate about me though, so i this seems like an honest answer i could use.
I have done some interviews, and have also performed 2 job interviews myself, and the most important thing is to be honest and sincere. The question about naming your biggest weakness and your biggest asset is a valid one, since it tells you a lot about the person. Not only what the person says, but also how sincere it is.
Being witty and answering: "I'm a terrible singer" can be good, but you should follow it up by the real answer then. Last time I anwered truthfully:
"One of my weaknesses is that I tend to get lost in the details when solving a problem, which often turn out to be less relevant than initially anticipated. Identifying and focusing on the important issues is very important and I try to remind myself of that every time I am faced with a new problem."
Haven't read any of the responses, usually for this question I like to say when there isn't enough work, I am easily distracted, and need a lot of work to stay motivated. (Usually they don't plan on you not having work so I think this works out okay).
"Im bad at answering this question" If you want something more serious you take something like "I dont know everything about blabla" but then you also add "but Im a fast learner and Im eager to learn blabla" Take something negative but try to turn it into a positive
On April 04 2012 04:38 Bippzy wrote: I tend to be a fan of "I'm intolerant of inefficient working enviroments." because, well, i am. Is that bad?
As long as you don't give the impression that you tend to complain a lot, but that's the first thing that pops in to my head when I hear 'intolerant of inefficient working environments'. I picture someone complaining because their 'better ideas' aren't being implemented and that those in charge are stupid for not acting on that brilliance.
On April 04 2012 04:48 Flumens wrote: It's easy: My biggest weakness? Finding pants that aren't tight in the crotch.
If they don't hire you after that, you don't want to work for them.
I guess you're lucky not to have sexual harassment laws in Canada, because no employer in the U.S. would (let alone, could) hire you after making that statement.
As a workers representative I used to be part of a three man interview team casting commercial clerk apprentices. I always hated when one of my partners asked that question and i hate it when i'm being asked. Nearly all people prepare some stupid reply like "i work too hard" and all that stuff which is usually a lie. People with real creative and/or honest answers used to impress me more. I prefer to admit a minor real weakness and point out that i'm not the guy to lie about it in an interview because the purpose of the interview is them getting to know me as good as possible and i'm an honest guy. Then i point towards my strenghts which counter that weakness. I failed just one of the 10 interviews i had in my "career". (which was a Skype interview and my webcam failed me before the start.)
"my bad quality is that i hate stupid questions like this , everyone knows you are going to ask them and prepare some bullshit like saying they are perfectionist or sth like that.. i dont find the ability ti answer the question in what the interviewer thinks is rigth interesting, im interested much more by the fact that im able to predict you´r gonna make this stupid question that can only have stupid answers.."
i swear im gonna say sth along those lines when i get a job interview
On April 04 2012 04:57 Carras wrote: "my bad quality is that i hate stupid questions like this , everyone knows you are going to ask them and prepare some bullshit like saying they are perfectionist or sth like that.. i dont find the ability ti answer the question in what the interviewer thinks is rigth interesting, im interested much more by the fact that im able to predict you´r gonna make this stupid question that can only have stupid answers.."
i swear im gonna say sth along those lines when i get a job interview
On April 04 2012 04:48 Flumens wrote: It's easy: My biggest weakness? Finding pants that aren't tight in the crotch.
If they don't hire you after that, you don't want to work for them.
I guess you're lucky not to have sexual harassment laws in Canada, because no employer in the U.S. would (let alone, could) hire you after making that statement.
There's no harassment laws in Canada? Surely their society must have crumbled upon itself with the misogynists running wild and raping women silly in the workplace!
"I am so good and dedicated to my job that I make others around me jealous".
But no seriously, from what I've been told the best answer is to be honest and reveal some type of flaw but one that's relatively trivial. I'm about the last person to get advice from wrt to a job interview, but the one I finally settled on was that I have a very fast speaking voice and tend to be better at written communication. This would of course be for something that doesn't involve me talking a lot, if it was I would find something else.
On April 04 2012 04:48 Flumens wrote: It's easy: My biggest weakness? Finding pants that aren't tight in the crotch.
If they don't hire you after that, you don't want to work for them.
I guess you're lucky not to have sexual harassment laws in Canada, because no employer in the U.S. would (let alone, could) hire you after making that statement.
On April 04 2012 04:48 Flumens wrote: It's easy: My biggest weakness? Finding pants that aren't tight in the crotch.
If they don't hire you after that, you don't want to work for them.
I guess you're lucky not to have sexual harassment laws in Canada, because no employer in the U.S. would (let alone, could) hire you after making that statement.
seriously? This is stupid
I guess this type of thing doesn't come across very well over the internet. I have no idea whether Canada has such laws. I wasn't intending to imply they didn't, as I said "I guess", but I was trying to point out the obvious disregard for the fact that no employer subject to such laws could hire someone after making such a statement.
On April 04 2012 04:48 Flumens wrote: It's easy: My biggest weakness? Finding pants that aren't tight in the crotch.
If they don't hire you after that, you don't want to work for them.
I guess you're lucky not to have sexual harassment laws in Canada, because no employer in the U.S. would (let alone, could) hire you after making that statement.
seriously? This is stupid
I guess this type of thing doesn't come across very well over the internet. I have no idea whether Canada has such laws. I wasn't intending to imply they didn't, as I said "I guess", but I was trying to point out the obvious disregard for the fact that no employer subject to such laws could hire someone after making such a statement.
I didnt mean that you were stupid it's just that someone would not get hired because of such a comment is what I think is stupid. Personally I'd stay away from this type of sentence in workenviroment but man those sexual harressment laws in the US seem strict.
How about "I have not found my bad quality yet because nothing about me has ever hindered me in such a way that i was unable to work with others to a certain level or finish the job at hand"?
Would this work out or would it be far and far too vague?
On April 04 2012 05:11 Fragile51 wrote: How about "I have not found my bad quality yet because nothing about me has ever hindered me in such a way that i was unable to work with others to a certain level or finish the job at hand"?
Would this work out or would it be far and far too vague?
My initial thought was that it's not a good response, but then again, the interviewer might give you a look like it was a crappy response. To which, you could reply with a SC appropriate "garbage in garbage out". That might actually work
On April 04 2012 05:11 Fragile51 wrote: How about "I have not found my bad quality yet because nothing about me has ever hindered me in such a way that i was unable to work with others to a certain level or finish the job at hand"?
Would this work out or would it be far and far too vague?
No. Everyone has failings, it is expected to know of at least one of em, unless you're applying to run a lemonade stand with your 9 years old (older) sister.
Edit: Knowing your strenghts and weaknesses, through introspection, is something that has to be done prior or during job search. Is it not something you do once and forget, it is something that is constantly re-evalued.
On April 04 2012 05:11 Fragile51 wrote: How about "I have not found my bad quality yet because nothing about me has ever hindered me in such a way that i was unable to work with others to a certain level or finish the job at hand"?
Would this work out or would it be far and far too vague?
No. Everyone has failings, it is expected to know of at least one of em, unless you're applying to run a lemonade stand with your 9 years old (older) sister.
Edit: Knowing your strenghts and weaknesses, through introspection, is something that has to be done prior or during job search. Is it not something you do once and forget, it is something that is constantly re-evalued.
Yeah, that's what i thought as well. Thanks for the input :D
On April 04 2012 04:38 Bippzy wrote: I tend to be a fan of "I'm intolerant of inefficient working enviroments." because, well, i am. Is that bad?
As long as you don't give the impression that you tend to complain a lot, but that's the first thing that pops in to my head when I hear 'intolerant of inefficient working environments'. I picture someone complaining because their 'better ideas' aren't being implemented and that those in charge are stupid for not acting on that brilliance.
Yeah I'm sorry I'll try again as I see your point.
"I'm frustrated by working environments that are inefficient but prefer not to speak up due to my blunt way of constructive criticism." Well that sounds worse.
uhhh
"I get frustrated if people in the workplace are less efficient than me."
Whatever you chose to state as your "bad quality" you had better follow that up with how you have been addressing this flaw of yours.
I.e. don't just say "I'm really bad at time management... that's my bad quality". That's a terrible answer, and definitely not what the interviewer is looking for. Don't just answer the question flat out. If you are bad with time management, show him that you have been putting an effort to overcome this weakness. Be specific in your examples if you use them.
On April 04 2012 04:38 Bippzy wrote: I tend to be a fan of "I'm intolerant of inefficient working enviroments." because, well, i am. Is that bad?
As long as you don't give the impression that you tend to complain a lot, but that's the first thing that pops in to my head when I hear 'intolerant of inefficient working environments'. I picture someone complaining because their 'better ideas' aren't being implemented and that those in charge are stupid for not acting on that brilliance.
Yeah I'm sorry I'll try again as I see your point.
"I'm frustrated by working environments that are inefficient but prefer not to speak up due to my blunt way of constructive criticism." Well that sounds worse.
uhhh
"I get frustrated if people in the workplace are less efficient than me."
I am really bad at this, as it turns out.
That's why you prepare for these questions ahead of time lol. It makes it real easy for the interviewer to know who prepared and who didn't.
On April 04 2012 04:38 Bippzy wrote: I tend to be a fan of "I'm intolerant of inefficient working enviroments." because, well, i am. Is that bad?
As long as you don't give the impression that you tend to complain a lot, but that's the first thing that pops in to my head when I hear 'intolerant of inefficient working environments'. I picture someone complaining because their 'better ideas' aren't being implemented and that those in charge are stupid for not acting on that brilliance.
Yeah I'm sorry I'll try again as I see your point.
"I'm frustrated by working environments that are inefficient but prefer not to speak up due to my blunt way of constructive criticism." Well that sounds worse.
uhhh
"I get frustrated if people in the workplace are less efficient than me."
I am really bad at this, as it turns out.
"If working on a project I feel everyone isn't performing I can have a tendency to let this frustrate me as I feel it will have an impact on the endproduct. This can lead to me (insert comment about how this can drive you to become bossy, or critical - but in a "polite" manner - we have a quite good expression for it in danish, but I can't really seem to find a translation) of my coworkers."
You're just supposed to give an answer on what you would like to improve about yourself while working there. Just phrase it in a way that talks about what you want to improve.
Don't be stupid and be like "I'm bad at this," say "Well, I need to improve the way I do this."
What is the point of that question? "You lie to me, and then I'll judge you based on how well you lied to me" just doesn't seem like an effective method of choosing who to employ. Unless you're looking for liars I guess.
On April 04 2012 06:19 Frunkis wrote: What is the point of that question? "You lie to me, and then I'll judge you based on how well you lied to me" just doesn't seem like an effective method of choosing who to employ. Unless you're looking for liars I guess.
You aren't being asked to lie, you are being asked what your weakness are and what you do to overcome these and if you are even aware that you have some (EVERYONE has a weakness)...
If you lie at any point during an interview, you shouldn't get the job.
As a developer myself I've had to answer this question a few times, my experience so far is that the best way to handle it is to answer the question in the form of a trade off. I think the key here is to present a legitimate weakness, demonstrate that you're aware of it, and you are aware of both the positive and negative implications it has, and what strategies you employ to manage your weakness.
My personal example has usually been on the issue of perfectionism. The trade off as I explain it is on the plus side, I tend to make high quality code submissions the first time that require much less review effort from others, but on the down side, when it gets tough I hold off much longer to make my initial submissions which potentially can have a severe impact on my personal velocity (the rate at which I check in code). I'll then go on to explain steps I use to mitigate this, for example trying to break up large check ins into smaller more manageable chunks, so that my progress stays more consistent.
So in a way, what I've done here is answered the question in a way that shows a legitimate weakness, but I've sold it to them as a burden I carry, rather than as a weakness that the company will have to significantly compensate for.
On April 04 2012 06:19 Frunkis wrote: What is the point of that question? "You lie to me, and then I'll judge you based on how well you lied to me" just doesn't seem like an effective method of choosing who to employ. Unless you're looking for liars I guess.
You aren't being asked to lie, you are being asked what your weakness are and what you do to overcome these and if you are even aware that you have some (EVERYONE has a weakness)...
If you lie at any point during an interview, you shouldn't get the job.
Agreed, but we all know that provocative questions invite lies and half-truths that limit the effectiveness of the question in the first place, and that there's really no way for the interviewer to determine what they're getting until months after the hire has been made.
It's a question that tries to rattle the cage and get candidates to open up, but it's really not very well thought-out. A better way to do it would be to ask something like "Talk about the biggest mistake you've ever made at work and how you dealt with it."
That's what i would do if I was a hiring manager... JMO.
Anyway, back on topic, don't let "what's your biggest weakness" questions get you down. You should answer them honestly, but measuredly (ie don't exagerate your weakness). Keep it general, and answer with poise and confidence. If you like to study alone, hell maybe it's because you're smarter than everyone else and it bugs you when you have to carry weight for lesser students. This could cause problems in team-based scenarios where someone isn't pulling their weight. Own up to it and take it for what it is - but don't back down from it. The interviewer will respect you. And if they don't, so what? A job where you have to sing Kumbayah with slackers would be hell on Earth, and isn't one that you probably would want to stay at very long.
Give something you could perceive to be a bad quality, but shows an underlying good one
"Well, often I have trouble just handing over tasks to others or delegating a lot, when i start something I tend to really want to see it through to the end"
It's a genuine bad quality, for many positions like managers, but it's a good quality for someone low on the totem pole.
Questions like this are IMO why it's important to get your foot in the door through a personal contact and not some random job application. My last 6 or so interviews I got by getting in touch with the supervisor of the department I wanted to work in through someone I knew and it allowed me to skip the shitty HR screening step. Going straight to an interview with the actual people you will be working for is a much more pleasant interview experience because they're only concerned with asking you relevant questions and not that HR bullshit that no one cares about.
Of course, if you're applying somewhere like microsoft or whatever, their size might cause them to be too bureaucratic to allow that. The big thing that I was taught is to answer a weakness (typically only a minor weakness) and then follow up by saying how you've been working to improve and eliminate that weakness. That said, never say your weakness is that you are too much of a perfectionist(even if it's true) because that comes across as a bullshit "here's my weakness, but lol it isn't really a weakness" type of answer. At least this is according to the people I had to interview with in school. They forced everyone to do several mock interviews to graduate and I'm glad they did. Also, don't say you're "hard working" for the strength question either, because that should be a given.
I'd never ever play the perfectionist card. If you play it, you should really back it up like No_Roo in the last post on the previous page (no offense, but i i think it's still lame, even if you are a perfectionist, most people won't believe you). If e.g there's a tiny tiny mistake in your application or your answers (which can always happen) and they realise it, you're screwed. A promising interview might turn into an embarrassment. Also it's the most lame standard answer if you fail to present it correctly/perfectly.
Also remember there's always luck involved in interviews.
On April 04 2012 00:20 Dujek wrote: You could say,
"I'm not aware of any bad qualities I might have because whenever I discover a problem I work at fixing it quickly."
or something to that effect.
Or, I'm not aware of any bad qualities I might have because I tend to stray from pessimistic thought. Questions like this are best avoided entirely, I suppose it's a company's way of making you use PR/PC talk, avoiding/denying responsibility for the future, that sounded far-fetched to me when I thought it up, but now that I think about it, that may be their exact reason for asking questions such as this.
On April 04 2012 00:45 Kennigit wrote: Tell them its 2012 and you are concerned with the fact that they are using outdated methods of screening candidates. There is an incredibly high chance that every person they ask this question to has rehearsed an answer or is lying or both.
If I were interviewing someone who had the audacity to tell me I was interviewing them incorrectly, my immediate response would be 'Clearly you wouldn't be happy here. Let's not waste any more of each other's time."
Would you give me a sassy finger snap. There's actually very good reason to not want to work at a place like this, and if you are qualified enough one should treat BS interview questions and strong indicator of the nature of the company imo. There's a reason top talent companies and start ups alike have phased out these types of fluff questions - it doesn't tell if you if he's going to be a good programmer, team member, leader, follower, anything.
On April 04 2012 00:15 urbanleg wrote: Hey guys, I just graduated in computer science, i started to look for a cool place to work at,
been so far in 2 interviews, and i got the feeling i blew them at the HR part when i answered this question:
1) i prefer to study alone (failed - not a team player)
2) im stressed out easily (failed - that might be a problem)
any ideas of good "bad" qualities for the next interview i got tomorrow?
p.s - perfectionist won't do since its too obvious these days.
thanks
If you state the above two u should give reasons as to how you cope/make up and how flexible/willing you are to do the opposite (i.e. work with a team)
Totally agree with Kennigit. During my last interview when asked for my weaknesses I told them that I didn't think their questions were appropriate and that by the laws of game theory they're only inviting people to answer further and further from the truth as they can't evaluate most of the interviewed ex post but are trying to base their ex ante evaluation on the data from these people, too, be it consciously or not, thus creating an upwards spiral of rehearsed bullshit (may not have used such colorful language). They continued with more investigative questions.
At the end I told them I tend to forget people's names.
"Why don't I tell you what my greatest weaknesses are? I work too hard. I care too much. And sometimes I can be too invested in my job." -Michael Scott
I like to keep busy, but I often take on more than I can chew. I am learning how to deal with this by first recognizing whenever I get into new projects (professionally and personally) and then seeing how it will affect my current projects. I am learning how to say "no" to others and even to myself so that the quality of my current projects don't suffer. I am glad I became aware of this issue because I have been getting better at dealing with it.
On April 04 2012 00:45 Kennigit wrote: Tell them its 2012 and you are concerned with the fact that they are using outdated methods of screening candidates. There is an incredibly high chance that every person they ask this question to has rehearsed an answer or is lying or both.
If I were interviewing someone who had the audacity to tell me I was interviewing them incorrectly, my immediate response would be 'Clearly you wouldn't be happy here. Let's not waste any more of each other's time."
Would you give me a sassy finger snap. There's actually very good reason to not want to work at a place like this, and if you are qualified enough one should treat BS interview questions and strong indicator of the nature of the company imo. There's a reason top talent companies and start ups alike have phased out these types of fluff questions - it doesn't tell if you if he's going to be a good programmer, team member, leader, follower, anything.
I do not agree with this. Correct me if I'm wrong, but many top talent companies ask questions like this. In fact, in my experience, it is smaller companies that don't ask questions like these.
I don't know what you consider "top talent." But I'm assuming most would include Goldman Sachs, any Big Four accounting firm, or any Fortune 500 really.
On April 04 2012 07:29 Timerly wrote: Totally agree with Kennigit. During my last interview when asked for my weaknesses I told them that I didn't think their questions were appropriate and that by the laws of game theory they're only inviting people to answer further and further from the truth as they can't evaluate most of the interviewed ex post but are trying to base their ex ante evaluation on the data from these people, too, be it consciously or not, thus creating an upwards spiral of rehearsed bullshit (may not have used such colorful language). They continued with more investigative questions.
At the end I told them I tend to forget people's names.
I got my contract 2 days later.
In all likeliness, you didn't get hired because you essentially told the HR person to take his questions and shove-it. You were probably the most qualified, and perhaps your answer showed you were capable of standing up for yourself. In most scenarios, however, it is extremely foolish to tell someone (especially in this economy) to pull something like this. Any half-knowledgeable HR person will most likely ensure you don't get hired. Unfortunately, it is a game of "kiss-ass and conform to corporate culture" and not one of merit. You can choose not to sell-out and find a company that conforms to your principles, but don't be surprised if you don't get hired.
On April 04 2012 06:59 r00ty wrote: I'd never ever play the perfectionist card. If you play it, you should really back it up like No_Roo in the last post on the previous page (no offense, but i i think it's still lame, even if you are a perfectionist, most people won't believe you). If e.g there's a tiny tiny mistake in your application or your answers (which can always happen) and they realise it, you're screwed. A promising interview might turn into an embarrassment. Also it's the most lame standard answer if you fail to present it correctly/perfectly.
Also remember there's always luck involved in interviews.
I agree completely, it's a tough one to sell, don't do it unless you're very confident that you can back it up. Doubly so in the world of software development where it is such a common weakness. The strategy I use there can be applied to most weaknesses though, the goal of it being to articulate very clearly what trade off is being made because of your weakness, who pays the 'cost' for your weakness, and how it is paid for.
On April 04 2012 02:21 AllHailTheDead wrote: when im asked for a bad quality I usually say I work too hard or Im always early
you know turn it around so its not really a bad quality
hasnt failed me yet
Your potential employer will not consider working too hard as a negative, and the only negative that can come out of you always being early is if he is having an affair with his secretary and you showing up early would get in his way.
Touché. Haha laughed a good while at this one. I tend to be a fan of "I'm intolerant of inefficient working enviroments." because, well, i am. Is that bad?
On April 04 2012 02:11 Cuh wrote: I always planned on saying something to this extent: "My worst quality is probably, I'm a product of my enviroment, when im surrounded by good workers, I excel, but when around bad ones, im dragged down." probably can be worded better but you get the idea
I smell bullshit.
Of course I smell bullshit for all the other answers. But I single out this one because it is particularly unique, whereas the others are common enough to not get a raised eyebrow, i.e. they are quite plausible.
But this -- what a strange and random thing to say about yourself. It's not even a weakness.
He always planned on saying something to this extent. Never does it say he did this. Actually, is it even ok to call out someone because they think they're lying in a thread about how to answer a question? Crap, i just fell for trollbait.
I feel like his answer is something accurate about me though, so i this seems like an honest answer i could use.
Correct, Ive never actually said that at an interview, and im glad for the responses. "product of my enviroment" quote was something i always thought was cleaver, although to be a slight more specific where I'm coming from when i thought of this was that: In NON-LEADERSHIP position, if the foreman (I work in construction) was a slack off and I seen that there is no nothing more in it for me to work alot harder than just to match my peers. Although if everyone around was kicking ass, then i would also. Nt just for the sake of being segragated from the rest of the crew, but just the competitive aspect in me. The same can be said vice versa whereas if i was working so hard making everyone look bad, i would also be excluded.
But looking from an employers aspect i could understand where it may seem like an ignorant thing to say.
I worked in HR for nearly three years and asked this question often myself.
There is no golden answer, you can't win this question flat out.
The interviewer doesn't care about your weaknesses, if you wouldn't be capable of doing the job, you wouldn't sit there in the first place.
It is a "stress" question. You are asking things that will make the other one feeling uncomfortable and generats stress. You want to see how he is reacting, not if he sneezes when sniffing flowers. (Yes I heared that one as well). It shows how good the other one is prepared and if the answer will match his profile in general.
Obviously there are some answers that are a "no go" like:
- I can't deal with stress - I'm not a morning type, I need 2-3 coffee and some hours before I'm even able to work - I'm a heavy drinker / smoker - I smoke weed - I hate working with "XYZ" kind of people
I always appreciated an answer that was explained and reasoned, no matter if I liked it or not. Examples would be:
- I'm very confident in what I'm doing, that often leads other people to think that I have a huge ego or that I'm an ass, which makes it hard sometimes to start a good relationship to other employers, I'm currently trying to step down from this focus and build it up over time so that others are more comfortable with me.
- I can work best with a set target and I lack motivation if there's no clear path visible to me. I have spotted this issue for a while now and I try to use this downtime to develop my skills in areas I think may be useful with the company.
Don't copy those though, they must fit your profile, if you are a nice, friendly guy who is very talkactive and does straight into my eyes without shiver etc I simply don't believe you if you tell me that you are shy towards new teammembers.
Long story short.
Don't lie - Don't copy common internet answers (If the HR is good they will know them because they heared it a thousend times) - Be yourself
On April 04 2012 00:45 Kennigit wrote: Tell them its 2012 and you are concerned with the fact that they are using outdated methods of screening candidates. There is an incredibly high chance that every person they ask this question to has rehearsed an answer or is lying or both.
If I were interviewing someone who had the audacity to tell me I was interviewing them incorrectly, my immediate response would be 'Clearly you wouldn't be happy here. Let's not waste any more of each other's time."
Would you give me a sassy finger snap. There's actually very good reason to not want to work at a place like this, and if you are qualified enough one should treat BS interview questions and strong indicator of the nature of the company imo. There's a reason top talent companies and start ups alike have phased out these types of fluff questions - it doesn't tell if you if he's going to be a good programmer, team member, leader, follower, anything.
But the thread is about offering advice to a job seeker who is posed this question. Most posts have been offering suggestions on how to answer such a question. I'm not an Admin, but wouldn't arguments about the validity of the question and whether we would want to work for a company that asks such a question belong in a different thread ? For sure, an argument can be made that a highly competent, highly sought after employee could turn away from employers with stupid hiring practices, but we don't know if OP is in that position. As far as we know, he's just a guy trying to get a job by being prepared for his interviews.
I always wondered if you answer with something completely unrelated to the world of work. "I don't understand American football" - That is my biggest weakness.
simply reverse the question and make it sound like a strength or something you are working on
for instance
One of my weaknesses is that although I'm an extremely hard worker (yada yada blah blah something about being great) I feel like I have a lot improvement to do before reaching my end goals (describe something about what you want to be doing in the future.. and don't say I want to own this place.. that's dumb). I really feel like this job (something something about being a part of that improvement) and I will be a valued team player during my growth.
For god's sake do not try and 'say a strength as a weakness', or 'turn your weakness into a strength'. We are not stupid. We know what you're doing. You are trying to cheat the question.
State a weakness. You will have a weakness. Don't give an example unless asked. By "example" I mean; don't go saying "yeah one time I failed an assignment because I handed it in late, due to poor time management".
BUT, make sure you say how you try to manage this weakness.
"I have trouble staying on task when doing multiple things at once, I'm currently keeping a 'priority pocket list' to help me work through this weakness".
That is a really token example, but you get the idea. Everyone has a weakness, they want to see if you are aware of yours - and how you actively try to combat it.
I prepped for this for college interviews. These were my weaknesses that I came up with. Generally I would follow each one up with a short description about how I was overcoming it.
I find it hard to say no to people, especially my friends.
When I encounter a hard problem, my first instinct is to work at it alone until I find an answer.
If I'm leading a group, I sometimes have a tendency to micromanage.
Honestly, don't say "I work too hard". That's bullshit and everyone knows it. Plus, I don't think it would be good to memorize a big chunk of text and just regurgitate it out in one huge unnatural flow. Like someone above me said, state your weakness, then give examples if asked.
On April 04 2012 07:59 Trusty wrote: For god's sake do not try and 'say a strength as a weakness', or 'turn your weakness into a strength'. We are not stupid. We know what you're doing. You are trying to cheat the question.
State a weakness. You will have a weakness. Don't give an example unless asked. By "example" I mean; don't go saying "yeah one time I failed an assignment because I handed it in late, due to poor time management".
BUT, make sure you say how you try to manage this weakness.
"I have trouble staying on task when doing multiple things at once, I'm currently keeping a 'priority pocket list' to help me work through this weakness".
That is a really token example, but you get the idea. Everyone has a weakness, they want to see if you are aware of yours - and how you actively try to combat it.
One thousand times this. I started interviewing intern candidates recently and it felt like 90% of them had problems because they "care too much about a task" or are "too perfectionists" or "can`t find enough time" to persue all their awesome interests.
I know most of them are not saying those things in bad faith, they probably heard somewhere the "turn weakness into strenghts" hack and felt it was the norm.
So I changed up a bit my interviewing process and lead the question by first telling them some of the weakness I had at my first job and what I did to overcome them, and from this point forward I heard some much more honest answers.
I can`t speak for what goes on at HR in other firms, but when I ask the question I rarely care about what the weakness is (save some bizarre answers), but rather on his ability to auto-reflect and formulate solutions to self-improve.
On April 04 2012 07:59 Trusty wrote: For god's sake do not try and 'say a strength as a weakness', or 'turn your weakness into a strength'. We are not stupid. We know what you're doing. You are trying to cheat the question.
State a weakness. You will have a weakness. Don't give an example unless asked. By "example" I mean; don't go saying "yeah one time I failed an assignment because I handed it in late, due to poor time management".
BUT, make sure you say how you try to manage this weakness.
"I have trouble staying on task when doing multiple things at once, I'm currently keeping a 'priority pocket list' to help me work through this weakness".
That is a really token example, but you get the idea. Everyone has a weakness, they want to see if you are aware of yours - and how you actively try to combat it.
One thousand times this. I started interviewing intern candidates recently and it felt like 90% of them had problems because they "care too much about a task" or are "too perfectionists" or "can`t find enough time" to persue all their awesome interests.
I know most of them are not saying those things in bad faith, they probably heard somewhere the "turn weakness into strenghts" hack and felt it was the norm.
So I changed up a bit my interviewing process and lead the question by first telling them some of the weakness I had at my first job and what I did to overcome them, and from this point forward I heard some much more honest answers.
I can`t speak for what goes on at HR in other firms, but when I ask the question I rarely care about what the weakness is (save some bizarre answers), but rather on his ability to auto-reflect and formulate solutions to self-improve.
Have you considered not asking the question? This type of question is actually not useful in determining whether the given person will make a good employee.
I'm very proud of my hiring record and I've never asked it, and likewise thankfully I've never been asked it in an interview myself.
Edit: I would recommend this book if you are interested in learning more about how to hire well.
I would say something along the lines of "I never am able to stop doing something until I finish what I started. For example, I don't like to start writing a paper and leave it until it's done." This is basically turning a negative to a positive in one sentence. Making it seem as though your negative is actually something positive.
I'm having a job interview tomorrow as a "scientific guide", basically my job would be to guide tourists through a strolling which recreates the solar system at scale, while explaining various things about the solar system and the Universe as a whole. I was wondering if saying that I am a stressed person would be a good idea, as it might be bad for the job I'm applying for, but not that much - or I don't think so.
You could say: Before i bring my ideas into a team discussion i prefer to study for myself i say something.
When you want to be honest and thats what i would recommend you can always say that you work on your weakness. You should always argue like "i have this weakness but i work on it with doing... For example: if you are stressed out easily just take some minutes to calm down or try to make a working plan so it never gets stressful.
On April 04 2012 09:07 JeanBob wrote: I'm having a job interview tomorrow as a "scientific guide", basically my job would be to guide tourists through a strolling which recreates the solar system at scale, while explaining various things about the solar system and the Universe as a whole. I was wondering if saying that I am a stressed person would be a good idea, as it might be bad for the job I'm applying for, but not that much - or I don't think so.
Definitely do not say you are a stressed person. You should always present the best aspects of yourself in an interview.
How do you even define stressed? Everyone is stressed at some point or another, are they also all stressed people? Do you even truly believe that you are stressed more than your average person?
As someone who has interviewed hundreds of people for positions in retail, and asked the question of what an applicant thought of their greatest strength and greatest need for improvement, I will tell you that absolutely nothing turns me off more than someone saying or implying they don't have any weaknesses.
A simple answer that explains what your weakness is, but that you've identified it and are actively working on improving yourself is all you need. If you're failing your interviews it's probably not because you listed the wrong thing, it's because you weren't confident, had other poor answers, or simply weren't the type of person they were looking for.
I'd hire someone who said "I have a difficult time multitasking sometimes and get tunnel vision on the task I'm working on sometimes. I've been working really hard on improving this though and ask for feedback on a regular basis for things I need to do better." over someone who says they can't think of anything or says something ridiculous like 'Sometimes I'm too nice' or 'I work too hard and try to do too much'.
Those are garbage answers and are basically spit in the face of the person taking their time to interview you.
On April 04 2012 09:18 Vehemus wrote: As someone who has interviewed hundreds of people for positions in retail, and asked the question of what an applicant thought of their greatest strength and greatest need for improvement, I will tell you that absolutely nothing turns me off more than someone saying or implying they don't have any weaknesses.
A simple answer that explains what your weakness is, but that you've identified it and are actively working on improving yourself is all you need. If you're failing your interviews it's probably not because you listed the wrong thing, it's because you weren't confident, had other poor answers, or simply weren't the type of person they were looking for.
I'd hire someone who said "I have a difficult time multitasking sometimes and get tunnel vision on the task I'm working on sometimes. I've been working really hard on improving this though and ask for feedback on a regular basis for things I need to do better." over someone who says they can't think of anything or says something ridiculous like 'Sometimes I'm too nice' or 'I work too hard and try to do too much'.
Those are garbage answers and are basically spit in the face of the person taking their time to interview you.
I hope you realize that every answer to this question is a garbage answer....in that its gonna be rehearsed and fake 99% of the time. The people who give you the "my weakness is this but I'm working to improve it" are bullshitting you too but they're just smart enough to come up with a good rehearsed answer instead of a crappy one. But I hope you don't think you're actually getting honesty when people respond to this question -_-
On April 04 2012 00:15 urbanleg wrote: Hey guys, I just graduated in computer science, i started to look for a cool place to work at,
been so far in 2 interviews, and i got the feeling i blew them at the HR part when i answered this question:
1) i prefer to study alone (failed - not a team player)
2) im stressed out easily (failed - that might be a problem)
any ideas of good "bad" qualities for the next interview i got tomorrow?
p.s - perfectionist won't do since its too obvious these days.
thanks
It doesn't really matter what you say your weakness it, so long as it's not a huge deal and you say you're actively working on fixing it.
Honestly your two faults seems like the worst ones. Those and if you say "I'm not a very good leader". No idea why, but companies seem to be obsessed with having all of their employees be leaders.
On April 04 2012 09:18 Vehemus wrote: As someone who has interviewed hundreds of people for positions in retail, and asked the question of what an applicant thought of their greatest strength and greatest need for improvement, I will tell you that absolutely nothing turns me off more than someone saying or implying they don't have any weaknesses.
A simple answer that explains what your weakness is, but that you've identified it and are actively working on improving yourself is all you need. If you're failing your interviews it's probably not because you listed the wrong thing, it's because you weren't confident, had other poor answers, or simply weren't the type of person they were looking for.
I'd hire someone who said "I have a difficult time multitasking sometimes and get tunnel vision on the task I'm working on sometimes. I've been working really hard on improving this though and ask for feedback on a regular basis for things I need to do better." over someone who says they can't think of anything or says something ridiculous like 'Sometimes I'm too nice' or 'I work too hard and try to do too much'.
Those are garbage answers and are basically spit in the face of the person taking their time to interview you.
I hope you realize that every answer to this question is a garbage answer....in that its gonna be rehearsed and fake 99% of the time. The people who give you the "my weakness is this but I'm working to improve it" are bullshitting you too but they're just smart enough to come up with a good rehearsed answer instead of a crappy one. But I hope you don't think you're actually getting honesty when people respond to this question -_-
Agreed. Practically the entire interview process is bullshit to begin with. Most of the answers are always going to be rehashes, because that's what companies say they want. If you want X, and everyone knows you want X, why are people going to say they bring Y to the table, when they know you care more about X? They'll just answer the questions the way they think you want to hear them, and usually the interviewer will buy it. It's about who sounds like they're the best for the job, not who actually is.
On April 04 2012 00:46 Subversive wrote: I heard a good one once.
the guy said "It always annoys me when I see someone not pulling their weight, and I'm not afraid to tell them"
Takes the focus off you and becomes someone else's fault. Some places also love hearing this crap because it shows you can be confident and assertive so especially useful if it's some sort of supervisorial role.
Bascially you can adapt that to something that superficially sounds like a fault, but shifts attention to someone else. Or honesty, that is also good with the right person.
@abriol nice explanation man! Totally agree.
And Lol at Plexa whoops, I mean Kennigit! :D
I actually really like this one, and not just because I think it's applicable to many jobs, but because that's a quality I find in myself to be completely honest.
I've on the hunt for a job now as I graduate this month, so I hope you don't mind if I snag that.
To discuss the ethics of your response and how they judge it, I do believe it's appropriate to have an answer pre-chosen before being asked it. First of all, so you don't sound like a dumbass coming up with something stupid or something that's obviously bullshit, and second of all, because I think you should give an honest answer and know this kind of thing going through life. With that said, there have been plenty of occasions where I have been in group work at school or my job where I tell people they need to pick up their slack, because I feel disrespected if they just sit there an expect me to pull their weight. I'm just not so sure it's a "bad quality" to be the person who speaks out.
Say either "I used to be shy.... "etc, saying a bad quality you once had, or be honest and say something that could be seen as a good quality, so " I can be impatient at times to get work done". I'm trying to find a placement at the moment and getting rejected a lot, but its just natural so keep going man.
On April 04 2012 09:53 HyperLink wrote: The answer I have always given is: "I have a hard time giving myself credit and taking credit for my accomplishments"
What a horrible answer, but amusing because you're using the interviewer's own bullshit against them.
My answer would be "Sometime I find myself unable to adapt into a relaxed form after putting my focus on one specific task for a long period of time."
Let's infer! This essentially hints that I have been placed under very harsh circumstance in which required my undivided attention. The former part demonstrate how serious I will take the mission handed by the high management. To make it more authentic, I am more than willing to offer up past anecdote of my previous job placement.
On April 04 2012 09:53 HyperLink wrote: The answer I have always given is: "I have a hard time giving myself credit and taking credit for my accomplishments"
What a horrible answer, but amusing because you're using the interviewer's own bullshit against them.
"What's you're worst quality?" "I'm too modest."
It's not horrible but anything everyone says is contrived and that's the nature of the question. At least I'm honest because I really do have trouble with it. I can relate it to stories from my personal life (which is usually a follow up or addendum to the question) and I can demonstrate how I've overcome it in some situations.
On April 04 2012 07:33 jacosajh wrote: I tell the truth.
Something along the lines...
I like to keep busy, but I often take on more than I can chew. I am learning how to deal with this by first recognizing whenever I get into new projects (professionally and personally) and then seeing how it will affect my current projects. I am learning how to say "no" to others and even to myself so that the quality of my current projects don't suffer. I am glad I became aware of this issue because I have been getting better at dealing with it.
On April 04 2012 00:45 Kennigit wrote: Tell them its 2012 and you are concerned with the fact that they are using outdated methods of screening candidates. There is an incredibly high chance that every person they ask this question to has rehearsed an answer or is lying or both.
If I were interviewing someone who had the audacity to tell me I was interviewing them incorrectly, my immediate response would be 'Clearly you wouldn't be happy here. Let's not waste any more of each other's time."
Would you give me a sassy finger snap. There's actually very good reason to not want to work at a place like this, and if you are qualified enough one should treat BS interview questions and strong indicator of the nature of the company imo. There's a reason top talent companies and start ups alike have phased out these types of fluff questions - it doesn't tell if you if he's going to be a good programmer, team member, leader, follower, anything.
I do not agree with this. Correct me if I'm wrong, but many top talent companies ask questions like this. In fact, in my experience, it is smaller companies that don't ask questions like these.
I don't know what you consider "top talent." But I'm assuming most would include Goldman Sachs, any Big Four accounting firm, or any Fortune 500 really.
On April 04 2012 07:29 Timerly wrote: Totally agree with Kennigit. During my last interview when asked for my weaknesses I told them that I didn't think their questions were appropriate and that by the laws of game theory they're only inviting people to answer further and further from the truth as they can't evaluate most of the interviewed ex post but are trying to base their ex ante evaluation on the data from these people, too, be it consciously or not, thus creating an upwards spiral of rehearsed bullshit (may not have used such colorful language). They continued with more investigative questions.
At the end I told them I tend to forget people's names.
I got my contract 2 days later.
In all likeliness, you didn't get hired because you essentially told the HR person to take his questions and shove-it. You were probably the most qualified, and perhaps your answer showed you were capable of standing up for yourself. In most scenarios, however, it is extremely foolish to tell someone (especially in this economy) to pull something like this. Any half-knowledgeable HR person will most likely ensure you don't get hired. Unfortunately, it is a game of "kiss-ass and conform to corporate culture" and not one of merit. You can choose not to sell-out and find a company that conforms to your principles, but don't be surprised if you don't get hired.
most (good) companies hiring CS majors only care about how smart you are/how credentialed you are. they don't give a fuck about shit like this.
On April 04 2012 00:15 urbanleg wrote: Hey guys, I just graduated in computer science, i started to look for a cool place to work at,
been so far in 2 interviews, and i got the feeling i blew them at the HR part when i answered this question:
1) i prefer to study alone (failed - not a team player)
2) im stressed out easily (failed - that might be a problem)
any ideas of good "bad" qualities for the next interview i got tomorrow?
p.s - perfectionist won't do since its too obvious these days.
thanks
I just recently went through multiple interviews for a managerial position (which I got) and my advice would be not to over think it and answer honestly to what your weakness would be from a workforce and competency standpoint. Absolutely do not deflect accountability and speak to anyone elses weaknesses. You need to own this question and let them see that you can critique yourself and your own abilities fairly and accurately.
The key to answering the question is speaking truthfully to what your weakness is and offering what you are doing to work through the weakness and offer specific examples of how.
Answer: My weakness is self-awareness. There have been times in the past where I focus to narrowly on my own goals and what I need to do to accomplish them without taking in to consideration what impacts my actions has on others.
To work through this I've taken the time to build relationships with my peers and share our goals with each other so that we can learn from each other and improve our teamwork.
The key is to choose something that is real to you because if they go to ask you questions off the cuff you need to be able to answer honestly and accurately.
Also remember that most companies do an interview process where you're graded on a point scale for each answer. You answer doesn't have to be the "right" answer... but it needs to be one that gets you an adequate amount of points.
The last time I was asked this question during a job interview, I decided to be perfectly honest, so I said + Show Spoiler +
"FOOLISH MORTAL, I HAVE NO WEAKNESS! MUAHAHAHAHA!" and then proceeded to incinerate the room by shooting fire from my eyes. Sadly, I didn't get the job.
State something that can be a strength and use it as a case of sometimes overdoing that strength. For instance you could say something like, "One of my weaknesses is my attention to detail. While it is constructive in critically analyzing a project, sometimes I like to put too much emphasis on the minute rather than the broader picture." In that statement you counterbalance anything negative by hitting on a buzz-word type phrase - 'detail-oriented.'
Later on, you can place more emphasis on the positive qualities of your meticulous work ethic. You can't simply dodge the question...that's not reasonable and everywhere is going to ask you something stupid like this. They want to see you have wits and the ability to perform in difficult position. Asking self-condemning questions are for some reason HRs big deal right now. You can mention a past weakness that you've really worked on and provide examples of continual progress around that weakness. It shows you have the ability to identify a trait that you can improve and that you are taking steps to do so. Dumb questions like this are a chance for you to give an intelligent answer.
On April 04 2012 09:18 Vehemus wrote: As someone who has interviewed hundreds of people for positions in retail, and asked the question of what an applicant thought of their greatest strength and greatest need for improvement, I will tell you that absolutely nothing turns me off more than someone saying or implying they don't have any weaknesses.
A simple answer that explains what your weakness is, but that you've identified it and are actively working on improving yourself is all you need. If you're failing your interviews it's probably not because you listed the wrong thing, it's because you weren't confident, had other poor answers, or simply weren't the type of person they were looking for.
I'd hire someone who said "I have a difficult time multitasking sometimes and get tunnel vision on the task I'm working on sometimes. I've been working really hard on improving this though and ask for feedback on a regular basis for things I need to do better." over someone who says they can't think of anything or says something ridiculous like 'Sometimes I'm too nice' or 'I work too hard and try to do too much'.
Those are garbage answers and are basically spit in the face of the person taking their time to interview you.
I came in here to post basically what this says.
Claiming you have no weaknesses, or trying to spin a negative quality that's actually positive ("I work too hard" or whatever) is not a good answer and will immediately be flagged as bullshit. I'm amazed that people here are actually recommending that you do this, and I wonder if any of them have ever actually hired someone before. Interviewers are looking for ways you might be bending (or outright breaking) the truth to make yourself more appealing, and claiming perfection is about as not-truthful as it gets.
State your flaw, and then what you do to compensate and correct it. ("I get disorganized easily, so I've devised personal systems that keep my files in order and easily accessible while I'm focusing on a project.")
This is not a test at school. A correct answer to this question is not a matter of providing factual information. Do not attempt to handle this type of question head on.
It's a game. The question-answer format is a pretense for the interviewer to learn about you the human being.
The interviewer wants to see how you handle pressure and stress. If this question doesn't stump you, a good interviewer will find one that will. While you can rehearse answers to potential interview questions, and it helps, but you should also be prepared to answer questions that catch you off guard.
In the meantime, in your mind you need to be aware of what the real game is. You need remember that a question like this is supposed to simulate a difficult situation so the interviewer can see if you stay calm. You can stall for time by repeating the question back to the interviewer. "What is my biggest weakness..." Ultimately you need to be able to answer the question without long silent pauses, keeping your voice steady, looking the interviewer straight in the eye, and giving a sold, succinct answer. If you're spouting off total bullshit, so be it.
You know it's bullshit. The interviewer knows it's bullshit. But the point is that neither of you let on that you know it's bullshit. And then, guess what? It's not really bullshit anymore, because a larger purpose has been served.
So, when you're in an interview and suddenly it feels like the interviewer has caught you in some sort of trap, just remember that this was intentional, and now the real interview has begun. Everything was just set-up. Be objective. Don't identify with the fear.
Answer the difficult question from the place where you understand that's it's supposed to be a difficult question, and it's not supposed to have an easy answer.
I hope this helps. I bet a lot of people will suggest good answers to this question, but I wanted to get you thinking about the interview game itself. Any good book on interviewing will get you thinking about things from the interviewer's point of view and you'll start to see how each question has a purpose behind it, and they are sequenced in a strategic way (if the interviewer know's what s/he's doing, which isn't always a guarantee.) I'm sorry I couldn't write a better response but I have to go to bed.
I just don't really understand what to say in job interviews and I am not one to generally oblige to the "standards". What confuses me even more that managers/hiring staff all vary in their preferences, some of them like confident arrogant people, some like people that state their weaknesses.
I hate job interviews for crap jobs and I hate working crap jobs.
I have never failed an interview in my life, and it has more to do with confidence and sincerity than fancy answers that make you sound like an ideal employee. The reason you got an interview in the first place is because your resume meets their minimum requirements. The interview is for them to judge your character, and giving halfassed answers and praising yourself when asked for criticism is worse than admitting a weakness. Most of the time it isn't even your answer, but how you answer questions. Is it natural? Are you friendly? Are you nervous? Are you obviously spouting rehearsed lines?
I never practice for interviews, and never practice answering questions. Why? Because I know who I am, what I want, why I am doing what I do. They ask a question, I tell them the truth. And it works, every time.
However I do not work in corporate because I own my own business, and I would never hire any of you giving these answers. I would rather a person with a real weakness (even if he does not identify how he is working on it) than someone who thinks they can give me some bullshit answer and get away with it.
Edit: When asked my weakness, I always tell the truth, "I have difficulty following orders from someone I do not respect or admire." That's why I'm the boss.
Then again, if someone put a gun to my head and said "answer this question right now" I might say:
"I don't think of myself in terms of strengths or weaknesses, just qualities and capabilities. When there's a problem I use the tools at hand to resolve it."
Depending on how I read the interviewer, I might also say
"Are there any particular weaknesses required for this position?"
most interviewers think they are smarter than you.
see lichter's post.
I will admit "weakness" in conversation because I discovered long ago that self-effacing behavior disarms people. It will convince almost anyone that they've connected with you and that what you say next will be true. It's especially effective in joke form, and doubly so when you can draw out a similar admission from your interviewer.
Funny interview story, I applied for a job I was moderately overqualified for and the dude kept harping on some project I did 3 years previous in my undergrad. Like, he wanted specifics. He asked me for like a list of all the variables I had in my regression and what my specific results were.
Alas, I answered one important question wrong. He asked me if I was considering a PhD program. I told him the truth.
On April 04 2012 00:21 msl wrote: My biggest weakness is my inability to answer questions like this with a straight face.
(I actually said something like this once and got the job)
This is great to know. I've considered giving a pretty similar answer many times and never ended up doing it, but seeing as how stupid the question is and how little it will surely benefit the employer to ask it, it seems like the only good answer to me. Could you tell me what the job position and field was? I wonder whether it would depend on the exact type of person the employer was as to how they would respond to this answer or if all employers using this question are actually testing to see if you have the guts to point it out to them.
Some of my initial thoughts in regard to the question in the title:
1) I don't see my qualities as 'good' or 'bad' but rather 'strong' and 'weak'
2) "Bad" qualities as an employee? Just in general?
Clarification is needed if they expect a factual answer. If they ask such a vague question then they really shouldn't be upset with a somewhat bullshitty or dishonest response.
This was on QI! They actually said that most interviews are decided within the first 15 seconds or something, but they also talked about this question. Apparently the best thing to do is to give a genuine fault, but one that isn't really insidious. Something like 'sometimes I get bogged down in details, but I get there in the end!'
Interviews are a really superficial awful experience. More than anything what matters is past experience, references, and your presence (attitude etc... if you are likable and confidence basically). It probably wasn't really that you answered that question a certain way (unless you sounded nervous or hesitant), but more than someone else just had nicer hair than you.
You need to frame bad as area of improvement. So for example you could say that in University you tended to study alone and say it was more because the course work wasn't geared to group work. You learned to work independently and efficiently as a result but feel that you are looking for an opportunity to grow as someone who undertakes group projects.
So if your bad quality is nerves you can say that you tend to get nervous but that you look forward to continuing to work on keeping calm and that you are excited to work with experienced computer programmers for example to help you learn to control your nerves.
Getting a job can be so ridiculous. I've had to fill out multi-page psychology examinations for a shitty $10/hr job. Because of how shitty the economy is, and how high unemployment is (especially in my state where workers have some minimum rights), there were an insane amount of people applying for this POS garbage lol. Things are even worse now though.
Those kinds of questions are tricky. I always to try to flip it around and give them bad qualities or character flaws that aren't necessarily bad, like "I'm sometimes too detail oriented when coding." Then give them examples of bad coding practice stuff that I see all the time and it drives me crazy, like concatenation everywhere instead of a StringBuffer, or using import package.*. or "Sometimes I'm too honest and it may offend people"
It's best to be ready for these softball questions though, because they are fairly common interview questions. Have a good answer for stuff like best quality, worst quality, how well do you work in a team, describe a time when you exhibited leadership or a particularly hard challenge you overcame. The answers usually aren't that important, more often it's how well you communicate them, and poise.
Oh, and when they ask you if you have any questions try not to ask them "What do you do?" It's boring and most interviewers hate it. Ask them something relevant.
This was well said on the last page, I'd like to reiterate the answers usually aren't important + Show Spoiler +
On April 04 2012 11:09 Ashakyre wrote: Urbanleg,
This is not a test at school. A correct answer to this question is not a matter of providing factual information. Do not attempt to handle this type of question head on.
It's a game. The question-answer format is a pretense for the interviewer to learn about you the human being.
The interviewer wants to see how you handle pressure and stress. If this question doesn't stump you, a good interviewer will find one that will. While you can rehearse answers to potential interview questions, and it helps, but you should also be prepared to answer questions that catch you off guard.
In the meantime, in your mind you need to be aware of what the real game is. You need remember that a question like this is supposed to simulate a difficult situation so the interviewer can see if you stay calm. You can stall for time by repeating the question back to the interviewer. "What is my biggest weakness..." Ultimately you need to be able to answer the question without long silent pauses, keeping your voice steady, looking the interviewer straight in the eye, and giving a sold, succinct answer. If you're spouting off total bullshit, so be it.
You know it's bullshit. The interviewer knows it's bullshit. But the point is that neither of you let on that you know it's bullshit. And then, guess what? It's not really bullshit anymore, because a larger purpose has been served.
So, when you're in an interview and suddenly it feels like the interviewer has caught you in some sort of trap, just remember that this was intentional, and now the real interview has begun. Everything was just set-up. Be objective. Don't identify with the fear.
Answer the difficult question from the place where you understand that's it's supposed to be a difficult question, and it's not supposed to have an easy answer.
I hope this helps. I bet a lot of people will suggest good answers to this question, but I wanted to get you thinking about the interview game itself. Any good book on interviewing will get you thinking about things from the interviewer's point of view and you'll start to see how each question has a purpose behind it, and they are sequenced in a strategic way (if the interviewer know's what s/he's doing, which isn't always a guarantee.) I'm sorry I couldn't write a better response but I have to go to bed.
I have never had a job interview where I didn't get the job.
1) make constant eye contact when you talk, it shows confidence and that you aren't having to think about your answers aka they are honest / coming from the heart
2) don't fiddle with things, keep your hands and everything still.
3) to answer question about what to say when they ask something bad about you, say something that can be interpreted as positive. Like "I trust people too easily because I believe in the inherent good of people".
Since you've probably already talked about yourself and your strengths, I'd say "actually I think I've already answered that, since what can be a strength in one domain can be seen as a weakness in another". I'd then go on to describe how one or more of my strengths can be construed as a weakness, eg "as I said I'm honest and straightforward. Under the wrong circumstances, when my ability to analyze my behavior is impaired, this could lead to me coming across as too straightforward and "pushy".".
i think the "default" way of answering this question is to mention something you have trouble with or some sort of actual weakness, and then explain how you deal with it and try to correct it
On April 04 2012 12:50 Kaitlin wrote: My greatest weakness is that I don't have a fucking job. I'm working very hard to remedy that situation as we speak ...
haha. yeah, well there's that too.
I think the important thing is to project that you're there to get paid for your skills, not dick around in an interview. You're available because of circumstance, not because you've shopped around and no one wants you. If your company doesn't get you your competitor will and you'll crush the company you're interviewing for just like everyone else in my way.
just remember. Im not here to ask you for a job. I dont NEED your job. I dont need you to throw me a bone. Im here because I can do your job and you pay well enough for me to consider doing work for you.
Really, honestly and truly I treat a 10 man analysis firm the same as Goldman Saachs.
I don't buy into showing desperation for a job. That you would do anything for THAT chance. Would I do anything for A chance? Yeah. But that's different.
I also don't agree with saying you're willing to do anything at a company. Sorry, I paid my dues when I went to grad school and I'm not going to bring you coffee or be your personal bitch. I'll play the game and start where everyone else in my position does, but I won't let you have me for less than market value.
I'm thankful for the job opportunities I've had over the years, just like my employer was grateful(hopefully) to have me working for him. I guess I dont understand the attitude coming from some of the posters. Depending on your career path, some fields of work are pretty small knit. If you burn bridges left and right, chances are they wont let you cross anywhere.
On April 04 2012 13:20 RedTerror wrote: You stay silent and just hand them a card saying "My biggest weakness is my preparedness borders on arrogance"
That's funny
Seriously though, go with the advice of the posters who have said that you need to identify a real weakness and not try to give a fake weakness that's actually a strength. They're looking for introspection not the ability to be a clever politician. If you're already planning on preparing for this question, it shouldn't take much more time to sit down and make a list of your bad qualities / areas for improvement and think about which of them you'd like to discuss with an interviewer than it would take to prepare some sort of canned response to the question. Only the former will not only help you with the interview, but it will be helpful to you in terms of your own personal and/or professional growth as well.
In the interview for the first (non-temporary/part time) job I had, the boss asked me to just start naming my strengths and naming my weaknesses.... dozens of each. The interview, which lasted 8 hours and allowed me to talk with most of the people in the office, was actually a pretty cool experience -- by the end of the day, I already felt like I knew what working there would be like and I assume the group had a decent feel for my personal traits as a potential employee. Which is really the point of an interview. (as somebody else mentioned, they'll learn about your technical skills from your resume and talking to your references)
On April 04 2012 00:15 urbanleg wrote: Hey guys, I just graduated in computer science, i started to look for a cool place to work at,
been so far in 2 interviews, and i got the feeling i blew them at the HR part when i answered this question:
1) i prefer to study alone (failed - not a team player)
2) im stressed out easily (failed - that might be a problem)
any ideas of good "bad" qualities for the next interview i got tomorrow?
p.s - perfectionist won't do since its too obvious these days.
thanks
You'd obviously know the specifics of your situation better than I But how sure are you that the interview was the deciding factor? The job market is really rough -- something like 5 people are unemployed for every 1 job available, and that means you're competing against potentially hundreds or thousands of other applicants. It's a good sign that you're getting interviews, but even then you are likely just one of the people they selected to interview.
Prior to the "great recession" I'd never had a single college or job application turned down. But when the recession hit and I got laid off, I applied for many listed positions and just never heard back, and had two interviews where I did not end up being hired. (although I do think I kinda blew one of them, but the other I felt confident at the end of it and still wasn't hired)
The job market makes a big difference, especially if you're a recent graduate and may be competing against other applicants with more experience than you.
This is not a test at school. A correct answer to this question is not a matter of providing factual information. Do not attempt to handle this type of question head on.
It's a game. The question-answer format is a pretense for the interviewer to learn about you the human being.
The interviewer wants to see how you handle pressure and stress. If this question doesn't stump you, a good interviewer will find one that will. While you can rehearse answers to potential interview questions, and it helps, but you should also be prepared to answer questions that catch you off guard.
In the meantime, in your mind you need to be aware of what the real game is. You need remember that a question like this is supposed to simulate a difficult situation so the interviewer can see if you stay calm. You can stall for time by repeating the question back to the interviewer. "What is my biggest weakness..." Ultimately you need to be able to answer the question without long silent pauses, keeping your voice steady, looking the interviewer straight in the eye, and giving a sold, succinct answer. If you're spouting off total bullshit, so be it.
You know it's bullshit. The interviewer knows it's bullshit. But the point is that neither of you let on that you know it's bullshit. And then, guess what? It's not really bullshit anymore, because a larger purpose has been served.
So, when you're in an interview and suddenly it feels like the interviewer has caught you in some sort of trap, just remember that this was intentional, and now the real interview has begun. Everything was just set-up. Be objective. Don't identify with the fear.
Answer the difficult question from the place where you understand that's it's supposed to be a difficult question, and it's not supposed to have an easy answer.
I hope this helps. I bet a lot of people will suggest good answers to this question, but I wanted to get you thinking about the interview game itself. Any good book on interviewing will get you thinking about things from the interviewer's point of view and you'll start to see how each question has a purpose behind it, and they are sequenced in a strategic way (if the interviewer know's what s/he's doing, which isn't always a guarantee.) I'm sorry I couldn't write a better response but I have to go to bed.
great post, this should be passed along.
The main focus of the interview, in my opinion (but I don't have a lot of experience) is to merely testing your sincerity, if you are a real person, any notable drawbacks, how you present yourself and also how you do when you are under stress or in a new environment. The average interviewer would answer to the question pretty straight forward, but a more experienced one can elaborate upon the answers, making the whole interview feel a bit more relaxed (e.g. your smile would not look like an awkward polite smile), easier for the interviewee to ask questions, easier for you to deliver more information about yourself
On April 04 2012 13:20 RedTerror wrote: You stay silent and just hand them a card saying "My biggest weakness is my preparedness borders on arrogance"
That's funny
Seriously though, go with the advice of the posters who have said that you need to identify a real weakness and not try to give a fake weakness that's actually a strength. They're looking for introspection not the ability to be a clever politician. If you're already planning on preparing for this question, it shouldn't take much more time to sit down and make a list of your bad qualities / areas for improvement and think about which of them you'd like to discuss with an interviewer than it would take to prepare some sort of canned response to the question. Only the former will not only help you with the interview, but it will be helpful to you in terms of your own personal and/or professional growth as well.
In the interview for the first (non-temporary/part time) job I had, the boss asked me to just start naming my strengths and naming my weaknesses.... dozens of each. The interview, which lasted 8 hours and allowed me to talk with most of the people in the office, was actually a pretty cool experience -- by the end of the day, I already felt like I knew what working there would be like and I assume the group had a decent feel for my personal traits as a potential employee. Which is really the point of an interview. (as somebody else mentioned, they'll learn about your technical skills from your resume and talking to your references)
An interview that lasts for 8 hours is not the initial screening interview, which is generally when such a question would be asked. Companies can't afford to spend an entire day with an applicant unless they are about to be hired.
You know it's bullshit. The interviewer knows it's bullshit. But the point is that neither of you let on that you know it's bullshit. And then, guess what? It's not really bullshit anymore, because a larger purpose has been served.
What is this "larger purpose"? Finding a Winston Smith? :D
Or basically stating that "2+2=5" on these bullshit applications and interviews?
"What's your bad quality?"... "I lie at interviews and sell out like a whore to capitalism like my sister that works at a collection agency".
how did you get this degree from college when you cant answer a simple minded question to test your people skills, how do you expect to be able to code/ make and use complex programs when you cant answer these easy interview questions while writing and using code to make any program is insanely complicated?
What I usually answer is something along the lines of "I'm not very good at selling myself. I like being myself and being honest about my abilities".
It entirely depends on the job I guess. If you're applying for a small firm, consider saying something like "I am not comfortable in a big company, where communication isn't efficient and politics are more important than your real skills". Try to think of something specific.
In any case in most situations it doesn't matter what you say, it's all about how you say it. And don't believe anyone who tells you to avoid bullshit, especially if you're talking to an HR person. HR managers feed on cattle excrement.
This is something I'm beginning to think about now as well. I am going to be graduating this semester with my bachelors in computer science, and ideally will be getting some kind of software engineering position. So, after reading some of the posts here and reflecting I'd likely answer with something like this:
"My biggest weakness would be that I dwell on failures too much; and while that can be and often times is a motivator, I try to tell myself that making a mistake isn't the end of the world, it's how I fix it and how I use that knowledge going forward that is important."
Try bs-ing them as much as you can, job interviews, especially at big companies considering who they manage to hire for some positions and how people consider you should "react" to an interview will chose a guy which answered positive by bs-ing half the questions and used the "negative" answer on the least important things thus not making you seem like a "mr perfect" which even one of them dumb pr guys would realize its not the truth.
You know it's bullshit. The interviewer knows it's bullshit. But the point is that neither of you let on that you know it's bullshit. And then, guess what? It's not really bullshit anymore, because a larger purpose has been served.
What is this "larger purpose"? Finding a Winston Smith? :D
Or basically stating that "2+2=5" on these bullshit applications and interviews?
"What's your bad quality?"... "I lie at interviews and sell out like a whore to capitalism like my sister that works at a collection agency".
I knew I'd have to revisit this.
The larger purpose is to see how you communicate and get along along with others in weird situations. Can you communicate without cynicism, immaturity, and defensiveness?
You know it's bullshit. The interviewer knows it's bullshit. But the point is that neither of you let on that you know it's bullshit. And then, guess what? It's not really bullshit anymore, because a larger purpose has been served.
What is this "larger purpose"? Finding a Winston Smith? :D
Or basically stating that "2+2=5" on these bullshit applications and interviews?
"What's your bad quality?"... "I lie at interviews and sell out like a whore to capitalism like my sister that works at a collection agency".
I knew I'd have to revisit this.
The larger purpose is to see how you communicate and get along along with others in weird situations. Can you communicate without cynicism, immaturity, and defensiveness?
Yes, I should put in a disclaimer not to listen to my calls for integrity and idealism... it won't land you a job.
Havent read all replies, but you could always bring up something absolutely obvious which they already know about, so that admitting it doesnt make you look any worse.
If you have no work experience from the field you're applying to, your biggest weakness is: "since I've just recently graduated from school, my biggest weakness is not having had a real job in this field ever before, thus not having much experience". If you worked with it during a summer job, your biggest weakness is "only" having worked with it during a summer job and not "for real". If you've only have a short term job in the field before, your weakness is exactly that. Etc.
They already know about it, they wouldnt have brought you to the interview if they didnt want you anyway. Wont make you look bad, and actually has some solid truth in it.
You know it's bullshit. The interviewer knows it's bullshit. But the point is that neither of you let on that you know it's bullshit. And then, guess what? It's not really bullshit anymore, because a larger purpose has been served.
What is this "larger purpose"? Finding a Winston Smith? :D
Or basically stating that "2+2=5" on these bullshit applications and interviews?
"What's your bad quality?"... "I lie at interviews and sell out like a whore to capitalism like my sister that works at a collection agency".
I knew I'd have to revisit this.
The larger purpose is to see how you communicate and get along along with others in weird situations. Can you communicate without cynicism, immaturity, and defensiveness?
Yes, I should put in a disclaimer not to listen to my calls for integrity and idealism... it won't land you a job.
I want to help this kid get a job. No one's going to value his political opinions if he's unemployed. Can we go back to helping him, please?
We all get frustrated by the interview process. I just think the best way to deal with the unfairness is to be sympathetic to the interviewer's point of view.
Once this kid has money, he can contribute to the political party of his choice. I hope, myself, that it isn't the 1984 party, but it's his choice, not mine. Anyway, he's going to have to answer the same questions even if he interviews at an environmental non-profit.
My ideals say: help this kid get a job and shut up about politics. I see this as a real opportunity to make a positive change in the world, one person at a time. This earnest young person can go anywhere on the internet for political indoctrination (which I'm sure he got plenty of in college anyway) but he came here for advice on interviewing successfully.
Speaking as a business professional who has interviewed in the past:
The question is designed for two purposes: 1) see if you can admit a fatal flaw which takes you out immediately, and; 2) assess your ability to self-assess and improve.
Your biggest weakness typically should be something that you don't need at your current level, but would need for advancement. You respond by saying what the weakness is, why it is your weakness, and how you are working on managing it.
(Logic is that if you had the skill set and experience for a higher level job, why are you applying for this one?).
Example: My biggest weakness is that while I have adequate sales skills and am known well at a regional level, I don't have a lot of contacts outside of the state, which limits my ability to grow beyond where I am currently. I have begun attending out-of-town trade shows in attempt to expand my network and have begun making progress....
You know it's bullshit. The interviewer knows it's bullshit. But the point is that neither of you let on that you know it's bullshit. And then, guess what? It's not really bullshit anymore, because a larger purpose has been served.
What is this "larger purpose"? Finding a Winston Smith? :D
Or basically stating that "2+2=5" on these bullshit applications and interviews?
"What's your bad quality?"... "I lie at interviews and sell out like a whore to capitalism like my sister that works at a collection agency".
I knew I'd have to revisit this.
The larger purpose is to see how you communicate and get along along with others in weird situations. Can you communicate without cynicism, immaturity, and defensiveness?
Yes, I should put in a disclaimer not to listen to my calls for integrity and idealism... it won't land you a job.
I want to help this kid get a job. No one's going to value his political opinions if he's unemployed. Can we go back to helping him, please?
We all get frustrated by the interview process. I just think the best way to deal with the unfairness is to be sympathetic to the interviewer's point of view.
Once this kid has money, he can contribute to the political party of his choice. I hope, myself, that it isn't the 1984 party, but it's his choice, not mine. Anyway, he's going to have to answer the same questions even if he interviews at an environmental non-profit.
My ideals say: help this kid get a job and shut up about politics. I see this as a real opportunity to make a positive change in the world, one person at a time. This earnest young person can go anywhere on the internet for political indoctrination (which I'm sure he got plenty of in college anyway) but he came here for advice on interviewing successfully.
Oh, and ZvP mutas way OP.
No you're right, I was trying to point out some of the political bullshit to look out for in the hiring process that I always ran into, but perhaps that doesn't really help him. Probably better discussed elsewhere.
I responded honestly and got the optometrist job I currently have , been here for 4 years now and learned a lot:
"I sometimes get absent-minded when thinking in specific cases (for instance a new GP Lens adaptation i havent done before) , i try to overcome it by being organized in my workplace as it helps me to set priorities on things.
dont know if absent-minded is actually the exact translation i was looking for... Its more that i get distracted easily when thoughts about some particular case "assault me" while checking other more mechanical stuff...
but i think its clear that if you show yourself as you are , are willing to work in the company and improve into it , not acting as a maniac is usually enough if you have the required set of skills for the job. It helped me a lot being enthusiastic of joining the company because I knew their work ethics went along mine.
You know it's bullshit. The interviewer knows it's bullshit. But the point is that neither of you let on that you know it's bullshit. And then, guess what? It's not really bullshit anymore, because a larger purpose has been served.
What is this "larger purpose"? Finding a Winston Smith? :D
Or basically stating that "2+2=5" on these bullshit applications and interviews?
"What's your bad quality?"... "I lie at interviews and sell out like a whore to capitalism like my sister that works at a collection agency".
I knew I'd have to revisit this.
The larger purpose is to see how you communicate and get along along with others in weird situations. Can you communicate without cynicism, immaturity, and defensiveness?
Yes, I should put in a disclaimer not to listen to my calls for integrity and idealism... it won't land you a job.
I want to help this kid get a job. No one's going to value his political opinions if he's unemployed. Can we go back to helping him, please?
We all get frustrated by the interview process. I just think the best way to deal with the unfairness is to be sympathetic to the interviewer's point of view.
Once this kid has money, he can contribute to the political party of his choice. I hope, myself, that it isn't the 1984 party, but it's his choice, not mine. Anyway, he's going to have to answer the same questions even if he interviews at an environmental non-profit.
My ideals say: help this kid get a job and shut up about politics. I see this as a real opportunity to make a positive change in the world, one person at a time. This earnest young person can go anywhere on the internet for political indoctrination (which I'm sure he got plenty of in college anyway) but he came here for advice on interviewing successfully.
Oh, and ZvP mutas way OP.
No you're right, I was trying to point out some of the political bullshit to look out for in the hiring process that I always ran into, but perhaps that doesn't really help him. Probably better discussed elsewhere.
Don't answer this question with a humblebrag, that's just going to annoy your interviewer. A good interviewer who asks this question is interested in how aware you are of your own weaknesses, and what your approach is to dealing with them. I usually answer with some variation of "I can be very forgetful, which I deal with by keeping a todo list."
for questions like this, you should be tying it to your strength, eg: i'm really good at producing slides (strength) however sometimes that can be time consuming especially for just a weekly meeting (weakness). i'm really good at excel spreadsheets and producing models, however sometimes i work too quick and dive into it too much, making rework or adjustments painful
i've interviewed about 50 people and when i ask that question i want to see how they can correlate it back to their strengths
No such thing as being too obvious or cheesy in a job interview. Unless you're applying to google or something all a business (especially big business) wants to know is that you will work with others and have as few problems and professional disruptions as possible. I've got many jobs where I've literally vomited bullshit onto the desk and they've seemed pleased that I'm willing presenting myself in such a clearly fake way.
If it's a smaller business (usually with non-HR people conducting the interview) then just be honest and confident. I've known people who've answered questions like "how do you deal with stress?" by saying "I don't have time for it. I have a wife and 3 kids and a mortgage. I work too hard etc" which could sound like they're already stressed, but ultimately if its delivered with some degree of percieved confdence and honesty they were succeessful in their interviews.
Don't stress too much, just admit yeah this is a weakness, but I deal with it etc. etc.
You could try to be honest and give him a legit bad quality in you. It could be more or less a trust type of thing where your employer wants to see if you'll go out of your way to make your self sound better than you are. Because you have to remember none of us are perfect, so if your "bad quality" isn't that your hobby is killing people, then you'll be fine.
On April 04 2012 19:38 AmericanUmlaut wrote: Don't answer this question with a humblebrag, that's just going to annoy your interviewer. A good interviewer who asks this question is interested in how aware you are of your own weaknesses, and what your approach is to dealing with them. I usually answer with some variation of "I can be very forgetful, which I deal with by keeping a todo list."
I totally agree.
Cliché responses (e.g. I work too hard) don’t really work for ‘real jobs’. Interviewers have heard those type of responses a million times, and they’re looking for unique and thought out responses. For the OP’s question, you need to pick a development area that won’t put you in the hole for the position, and you need to mention how you’ve or are addressing it.
I always say that literally my only weakness is my ridiculous arrogance. Or that some people have said that I am better and smarter than all my previous employers, or indeed my interviewer. Or that my only crime is loving too much.
Or, if I actually want the job, I pick a weakness that I've made some improvement on and explain how, but it depends what the position is I guess. For example if it's a job that specifies someone who works well in a fast paced environment, I won't say that I've had problems keeping my temper in a previous job but I've been improving it by blah blah blah.
EDIT: The first ones are serious, I have had job interviews for jobs I didn't actually want (already got a job but got talked into going to interviews for 'practice') so I mucked around with them a bit. For one I showed up wearing 11 ties. The guy just told me to please leave
I really detest this type of question. That said, I don't remember it being asked when I interviewed (software developer) and I was interviewed by 3 different people.
On April 04 2012 23:38 Craton wrote: I really detest this type of question. That said, I don't remember it being asked when I interviewed (software developer) and I was interviewed by 3 different people.
As someone who used to suck at job interviews, my perspective changed when I had to hire someone for the first time. Job interview questions are simply designed to show that you have put some effort into preparation. That is why the same questions come up every time--if you are committed to finding a job, you will be ready with an answer to the "basic" questions ("What's your biggest weakness?" "Where do you see yourself in 5 years?" "Describe a time when you solved a problem in a work environment?"). All you need is to do is be prepared--the biggest mistake people make is thinking too much about them DURING the interview.
Answer the question by turning it around into something that is actually good about yourself.
For instance, my answer to the question is that I sometimes get so involved solving a problem that I lose track of the bigger picture (which is just a different way of saying that I am hardworking).
Not sure if what I'm suggesting has been said before:
You can answer in a way which identifies a possible weakness, but come up with a reply on how you're aware of it and the steps you are taking to overcome it.
On April 04 2012 19:03 Fraud wrote: Speaking as a business professional who has interviewed in the past:
The question is designed for two purposes: 1) see if you can admit a fatal flaw which takes you out immediately, and; 2) assess your ability to self-assess and improve.
Your biggest weakness typically should be something that you don't need at your current level, but would need for advancement. You respond by saying what the weakness is, why it is your weakness, and how you are working on managing it.
(Logic is that if you had the skill set and experience for a higher level job, why are you applying for this one?).
Example: My biggest weakness is that while I have adequate sales skills and am known well at a regional level, I don't have a lot of contacts outside of the state, which limits my ability to grow beyond where I am currently. I have begun attending out-of-town trade shows in attempt to expand my network and have begun making progress....
I find this whole thing hilarious though. You can't be honest if you actually have some real weaknesses but have to come up with some vague artificial bullshit that'll impress the interviewer and pretty much everyone is doing the same thing.
I've already given my answer to this conundrum, and stated whose advice I think is better.
But I just want to draw anyone reading's attention to Paralleluniverse's posts in this thread. He makes about 8-9 all in the space of an hour, all on pages 1-5. And nowhere does he actually give advice. Every post is contrary in nature and a dig at someone else. Once, near the middle, he gives his own idea, which is a covert form of disapproval on the question itself. But everwhere else he attacks other people's comments in this thread.
I just want to highlight that this is the antithesis of good posting.
This whole thread was one of the most interesting reads on TL not concerning Starcraft so far. Sadly there are some who have obviously not finished school yet, but try to act cool here. Telling someone that he is stupid for asking such a question does not lead anywhere. However, some answers are pretty cool and I am happy I do not live in the corporate US world.
"I'm a bad singer" is probably one of the most awesome answers posted in this thread yet :-)
One question employers ask me that sometimes gets me is "Where do you see yourself in 5 years?". I have an inability to plan for the future so I sometimes fumble a bit with a response.
Overall though I've landed all but 1 job I've had an interview for. I'd say I got my interview skills down pretty well. I'm also overqualified for a lot of the jobs I've went into and the HR person was hesitant in hiring me. Fortunately I've convinced them otherwise, but in the long run hiring me was probably a bad idea because I jump ship once I find a higher paying job. (I do give notices though, because it's NEVER a good idea to burn bridges.)
I had a job interview for a position as a petroleum engineer for Shell, and when I was asked this, I used "I sometimes focus too much on making things perfect" Pretty epic because it its also a good thing. Hint: I got the job.
This is semi related, but if you're a comp-sci major, you'll get farther being able to do a fizzbuzz in every language on your resume than figuring out the perfect answer to a question like that.
Most people would be shocked at how few comp-sci majors are hire-able because they completely lock up when given the most basic programming task.
On April 05 2012 11:01 visual77 wrote: This is semi related, but if you're a comp-sci major, you'll get farther being able to do a fizzbuzz in every language on your resume than figuring out the perfect answer to a question like that.
Most people would be shocked at how few comp-sci majors are hire-able because they completely lock up when given the most basic programming task.
I'm an electrical engineering major but I filled up on CS courses for tech electives, I remember a former teacher telling us about a student who, after graduating and entering the workforce, still didn't know what the difference between a stack and a queue was. The professor demanded that he return his diploma.
On April 05 2012 11:01 visual77 wrote: This is semi related, but if you're a comp-sci major, you'll get farther being able to do a fizzbuzz in every language on your resume than figuring out the perfect answer to a question like that.
Most people would be shocked at how few comp-sci majors are hire-able because they completely lock up when given the most basic programming task.
I'm an electrical engineering major but I filled up on CS courses for tech electives, I remember a former teacher telling us about a student who, after graduating and entering the workforce, still didn't know what the difference between a stack and a queue was. The professor demanded that he return his diploma.
Stack and Queue?
Wait a stack is when you have pushes and pops. Hardware stuff. Queues are just a container for holding stuff. Yes no? Or does it have to do with how you remove stuff from the two data structures?
On April 05 2012 11:01 visual77 wrote: This is semi related, but if you're a comp-sci major, you'll get farther being able to do a fizzbuzz in every language on your resume than figuring out the perfect answer to a question like that.
Most people would be shocked at how few comp-sci majors are hire-able because they completely lock up when given the most basic programming task.
it's probably more a case of inflated knowledge instead of genuine not knowing. You learn so much in school and university that you will forget most of it fast if you dont use it constantly. So a fresh master in comp science might be really great at the complicated stuff but completely fail at the more entry level stuff because in the last 2 years he never had to think about that or do anything related.
On April 05 2012 11:01 visual77 wrote: This is semi related, but if you're a comp-sci major, you'll get farther being able to do a fizzbuzz in every language on your resume than figuring out the perfect answer to a question like that.
Most people would be shocked at how few comp-sci majors are hire-able because they completely lock up when given the most basic programming task.
I'm an electrical engineering major but I filled up on CS courses for tech electives, I remember a former teacher telling us about a student who, after graduating and entering the workforce, still didn't know what the difference between a stack and a queue was. The professor demanded that he return his diploma.
Stack and Queue?
Wait a stack is when you have pushes and pops. Hardware stuff. Queues are just a container for holding stuff. Yes no? Or does it have to do with how you remove stuff from the two data structures?
Like LIFO for stacks and FIFO for queues?
haha why is push and pop hardware stuff? :D do you think there's some kind of buffer with a spring inside your computer where it physically pushes in things and pops them off again like a PEZ dispenser? i hope not ^^ Of course it's all data structures. The classic memory stack is just the most popular way of organizing the memory bank your hardware offers, but it's still a behavior definition rather than a hardware element.
LIFO and FIFO is pretty much the correct distinction. For a queue you think horizontally, you add to the end (or sometimes in the middle if you have a priority queue) and take out at the front, for a stack you think vertically, both adding and taking out is done on top (or both at the bottom, whichever way you like more, point is everything behind the one end point is "benched" and inaccessible).
Something that surprises me about this thread is how many people use whether or not they got a job to justify whether or not their answer to one question in particular was good. You could easily give a poor answer and still get the job. You could easily give a great answer and not get the job.
Also surprised there were multiple people trying to use their "track record" on interviews to give their opinion credence. I'd like to see a list of every interview they've been on along with how competitive and high level it was.
On April 05 2012 11:01 visual77 wrote: This is semi related, but if you're a comp-sci major, you'll get farther being able to do a fizzbuzz in every language on your resume than figuring out the perfect answer to a question like that.
Most people would be shocked at how few comp-sci majors are hire-able because they completely lock up when given the most basic programming task.
it's probably more a case of inflated knowledge instead of genuine not knowing. You learn so much in school and university that you will forget most of it fast if you dont use it constantly. So a fresh master in comp science might be really great at the complicated stuff but completely fail at the more entry level stuff because in the last 2 years he never had to think about that or do anything related.
If you can't do a fizzbuzz, you can't do complicated stuff. It's using the most common programming commands possible that would be used routinely by anyone who writes anything. At it's heart it is a loop, some if statements and some print statements.
1. after learning something new you need time to yourself to absorb and refine the ideas (ie study alone)
2. You tend to over prepare for important tasks (ie stress out), which may cause you to adjust the priority of other tasks (don't need to say the second part I guess)
It's allllll in the wording haha. Also it'd be nice if you had examples
I am a 25 year old engineering grad (at age 23) that just got a job in the finance sector if you're curious. And only been through two interviews since grad (got both jobs). I'm inexperienced though at both life and interviews so take my advice with a grain of salt :p
On April 05 2012 22:34 micronesia wrote: Something that surprises me about this thread is how many people use whether or not they got a job to justify whether or not their answer to one question in particular was good. You could easily give a poor answer and still get the job. You could easily give a great answer and not get the job.
Also surprised there were multiple people trying to use their "track record" on interviews to give their opinion credence. I'd like to see a list of every interview they've been on along with how competitive and high level it was.
On April 05 2012 22:34 micronesia wrote: Something that surprises me about this thread is how many people use whether or not they got a job to justify whether or not their answer to one question in particular was good. You could easily give a poor answer and still get the job. You could easily give a great answer and not get the job.
Also surprised there were multiple people trying to use their "track record" on interviews to give their opinion credence. I'd like to see a list of every interview they've been on along with how competitive and high level it was.
so whats your bad quality?
I already addressed what I would want to talk about if asked this earlier in the thread. I would not give the same answer each time necessarily.
And no, I don't believe that I specifically have one bad quality that stands out over all other qualities.
On April 05 2012 11:01 visual77 wrote: This is semi related, but if you're a comp-sci major, you'll get farther being able to do a fizzbuzz in every language on your resume than figuring out the perfect answer to a question like that.
Most people would be shocked at how few comp-sci majors are hire-able because they completely lock up when given the most basic programming task.
Lol, I actually had an interview where right at the end they gave me 5 minutes to do something like this.
I screwed up. I didn't fail it by any means, as the logic was there, but my syntax was wrong so ultimately it didn't work. Kinda happens when you haven't really programmed in a while.
Needless to say I didn't get the job, but that doesn't mean anyone that did it right was a better programmer than me, nor that I can't program well. People panic, freeze up, and make mistakes, especially in an interview setting.
i don't think it matters what your weakness is i think the important part is showing that you have worked to remedy your weakness or found ways around it.
one thing i have said is that i can be forgetful but i make up for it by being organized and keeping a detailed calendar with all my appointments on it.
In a general sense would one apply some humor just to get things going? If I was the interviewer instead of the interviewee, I certainly would enjoy that.
Best advice I can think of is to be genuine. Which probably equals to being honest or selectively honest for most people.
Put your self in the employers shoes. You want to know what people are actually like and it's hard to get a good feel for the hordes of scripted people, plus it's often the normal people that sticks out.
Also, the big fear employers/interviewers often have is simply hiring someone that wont do their job. Might want to keep that in mind.
Barney would say, "Uhm, my only default is being too awesome." Lol
All jokes aside, I myself am someone who is easily stressed too. BUT, I know why I'm easily stressed and it's cuz I'm pretty perfectionist and I always need my projects to be perfectly well organized. For example: this summer I am the head coordinator for a pretty big summer camp. And if I don't know in advance EVERYTHING that's happening (like which member of my staff is doing what, what happens when, or if I don't have a solution planned for every problem that might possibly happen - missing kid, kid getting sick/hurt, etc.) I stress myself out. Being stressed out is a bad thing, but that also is linked to one of my qualities. So if I were in an interview, instead of saying, "I'm easily stressed out" or "I'm a control freak", I would say, "I'm perfectionist and I like to be overly organized, and that often leads to me being stressed out." (And I would definitely leave out, "I ain't a team player." You know that's a bad side of you so just work that one out on the side.)
So think of why you're stressed out. What stresses you? I'm not saying you should lie (don't do that), but you're trying to sell yourself at an interview. Try finding something bad about you that is also related to a good side of you.