Interview presentation advice

[Gavster]

My reflection was no one seems to know when to stop answering a question.

Holy hell is this correct, I remember doing some interviews a few years ago and listening to people ramble on. I'm the complete opposite, I often say less than is needed, and I think it's one of the reasons my videos do well on social media, because I condense a subject into a few lines, rather than rambling on about it.

[Alex88]

My reflection was no one seems to know when to stop answering a question.

Holy hell is this correct, I remember doing some interviews a few years ago and listening to people ramble on. I'm the complete opposite, I often say less than is needed, and I think it's one of the reasons my videos do well on social media, because I condense a subject into a few lines, rather than rambling on about it.

Works well considering the modern attention span

It is a good point, though. I'm trying to be less of a waffler; I tend to over explain a point instead of giving impactful statements.

[mik]

I make a point when interviewing to give a timeframe. "Could you run me through your CV initially - no more than 10 minutes please - just draw out the elements you feel are most relevant". If they are still talking after 15mins I've already started scribbling notes questioning their ability to communicate concisely......

[ZedLeg]

I miss interviewing people tbh, I always enjoyed the process when I was a manager.

Avoid those dumb “tell us your worst habit” type questions and keep it to the position and relevant things from their cv.

The interview for my current job was a bit annoying.

First interview with my head of dept and an aptitude test I’m sure no one looked at. Second interview was with a director and we just talked about how risky VC investment is. Could’ve just done the first interview but the directors like to meet new hires for some reason.

[dinny_g]

I had a 3 or 4 hours interview process for my current role (Programme Manager) and my CV, my experience, my current employer etc were not discussed at all. I guess a combination of agency vetting and the references would weed out the bull shitters

First part was a presentation. I wasn't given advance notice so I had 30 minutes to prepare the slides and deliver it ("If successful, what are the most important things for me to focus on in the first 3 months of employment and what would success look like after 12 months")

Second part was a Role Play scenario, again without preparation. I had to assume the role of a Business Manager who needs to mediate between two subordinates who are arguing. CIO and Head of HR played the roles of subordinates

Third part was sort of a quick fire questions and answers but questions like "Have you ever had your integrity challenged in a profession capacity and how did you deal with it?" or "What is your stake holder management approach" ?

I left without a single clue if I had done well or not but after a year here doing the job, it's pretty clear what they were looking for and how the Interview approach would sort the wheat from the chaff

[Rich B]

i wouldn’t do well in a corporate environment interview. The last 2 people i’ve hired (one of which was 6 figure salary senior guy) have had their 2nd interview at the pub.

It’s a fairly small industry, and i tend to get people who’ve done the role for a competitor and I get a good idea of what they’ve done and their capabilities during the first interview.

Then the important thing is how they get on with people (we’re costing and presenting in pitch type settings, so no point in hiring someone who is great at the numbers but crap in front of a client.) If they can hold a conversation and be interesting in a pub with a few other members of the team, then chances are they can do it in front of a client too.

[Sundayjumper]

...no point in hiring someone who is great at the numbers but crap in front of a client

You wouldn't hire me - and this is exactly why I work in the Civil Service rather than the real world

[DeskJockey]

Interviewing is an art that few master. Designing an approach specific to the role seems to work best, in my experience.

When I've interviewed for technical roles (whether as the interviewer or the interviewee) it has been structured and with a requirement to demonstrate proficiency and thinking.

The last role but one had a very loose remit, so the interview was more about understanding if there was alignment on principles, thinking, approaches, and people skills. We discussed art deco architecture among other things (cyber security role), and it was brilliant. Walked away with a clear understanding that the role would develop as needed, and that the hiring manager and I would get along well.

[Beany]

Interviewing is an art that few master. Designing an approach specific to the role seems to work best, in my experience.

When I've interviewed for technical roles (whether as the interviewer or the interviewee) it has been structured and with a requirement to demonstrate proficiency and thinking.

The last role but one had a very loose remit, so the interview was more about understanding if there was alignment on principles, thinking, approaches, and people skills. We discussed art deco architecture among other things (cyber security role), and it was brilliant. Walked away with a clear understanding that the role would develop as needed, and that the hiring manager and I would get along well.

We're kinda similar. Although for the role I hired for recently, I could tell from their CV whether they had the background for it, and some mildly probing questions about their work history usually answered if they were a bullshitter or not (my CV sweep must have been good as none of them were)

At that stage I'm pretty sure they could do the job given half a chance, so it just turns into an industry gossipfest. I (and my team, and the management team etc) am mostly looking for someone personable, sharp and flexible who doesn't mind working within ISO frameworks etc (so no cowboys - but I'll hire a cowboy looking to work somewhere more structured....) and as I've just happily signed off my recent hire from his probation yesterday, I think me and the MD did pretty well with that one

[V8Granite]

i wouldn’t do well in a corporate environment interview. The last 2 people i’ve hired (one of which was 6 figure salary senior guy) have had their 2nd interview at the pub.

It’s a fairly small industry, and i tend to get people who’ve done the role for a competitor and I get a good idea of what they’ve done and their capabilities during the first interview.

Then the important thing is how they get on with people (we’re costing and presenting in pitch type settings, so no point in hiring someone who is great at the numbers but crap in front of a client.) If they can hold a conversation and be interesting in a pub with a few other members of the team, then chances are they can do it in front of a client too.

This is how it’s done.

I’m so glad the office style of interview isn’t in my world. I’d manage 2 minutes, call them a wordy cunt and walk out

Dave!

[ZedLeg]

I don’t know, from the way Rich talks I’m amazed he gets any work done between pub time

[jamcg]

the company is clearly doing something right as they've grown hugely in the past 12 months.

Ceramic tile distributors (ctd) opened loads of new stores up and down the country in the previous 18 months or so. They went bankrupt, been bought out but downsized to its original structure from a few years ago.

Mereway kitchens got passed about getting bought and sold over the last few years. They went under earlier in the year, and was bought up by mereway bathrooms, who used their newly acquired business to introduce whole new ranges and pricing structure, exciting times for us sad fucks that fit bathrooms the workers went in the other month to be told to go home as the business had gone under

Growth is good, but if you’ve got funny feelings about management how long would it sustain it

[Rich B]

I don’t know, from the way Rich talks I’m amazed he gets any work done between pub time

Its a good place to talk about stuff!

[Jimexpl]

I don’t know, from the way Rich talks I’m amazed he gets any work done between pub time

Its a good place to talk about stuff!

Our last junior engineer hire was the person serving my business partner in the pub! He's eight months in now and doing fine.

[Explosive Newt]

My reflection was no one seems to know when to stop answering a question.

Holy hell is this correct, I remember doing some interviews a few years ago and listening to people ramble on. I'm the complete opposite, I often say less than is needed, and I think it's one of the reasons my videos do well on social media, because I condense a subject into a few lines, rather than rambling on about it.

When we interview we ask lots of technical / science interpretation questions. A graph or a figure, "How would you explain these data?" then followup questions to test their reasoning.
The main pitfalls were that people would not look at all the data presented and offer explanations of some rather than all of it or offer explanations thtat did not stand up to logical scrutiny. In general, the weaker candidates would fire off a series of half-formed ideas and keep going until stopped rather than waiting, thinking and saying something sensible (and then stopping).

[Explosive Newt]

Interviewing is an art that few master. Designing an approach specific to the role seems to work best, in my experience.

When I've interviewed for technical roles (whether as the interviewer or the interviewee) it has been structured and with a requirement to demonstrate proficiency and thinking.

The last role but one had a very loose remit, so the interview was more about understanding if there was alignment on principles, thinking, approaches, and people skills. We discussed art deco architecture among other things (cyber security role), and it was brilliant. Walked away with a clear understanding that the role would develop as needed, and that the hiring manager and I would get along well.

I would love to interview like that and I do agree with you, but standardisation means that the 'cosy chat' style of interview very much only occurs at the higher end. Having to ask a uniform set of questions means that you don't get much opportunity to be discursive.

[DeskJockey]

Interviewing is an art that few master. Designing an approach specific to the role seems to work best, in my experience.

When I've interviewed for technical roles (whether as the interviewer or the interviewee) it has been structured and with a requirement to demonstrate proficiency and thinking.

The last role but one had a very loose remit, so the interview was more about understanding if there was alignment on principles, thinking, approaches, and people skills. We discussed art deco architecture among other things (cyber security role), and it was brilliant. Walked away with a clear understanding that the role would develop as needed, and that the hiring manager and I would get along well.

I would love to interview like that and I do agree with you, but standardisation means that the 'cosy chat' style of interview very much only occurs at the higher end. Having to ask a uniform set of questions means that you don't get much opportunity to be discursive.

Your field is rather more specialised though. But for senior roles with a remit beyond the "mechanics" of the job you could try a hybrid?

[dinny_g]

Having to ask a uniform set of questions means

Means you can demonstrate openness and fairness to all candidates which is important in this day and age.