101 Smart Questions to Ask on Your Interview (14 page)

“I think the way I’d like to leave this is that if we feel there’s the possibility of a good match for this position or for any other opening, we can get back in touch with you at this number. Does that make sense?”

There is another school of thought about the best way to conclude a screening conversation—the direct approach (which I personally favor). It could go something like this:

“Mike, I’ve listened carefully to what you’ve told me today, and I have to be honest with you—I don’t think we have a good match here. We’re going to have to take a pass this time around.”

What can you do to fight off either of these brush-offs?

In the first instance, the door has been left at least a little ajar. So a truly aggressive rejoinder is not called for. Nevertheless, you cannot allow the screener to hang up without finding some way to actually get
in
that door, to make him or her reconsider. Here’s one way to accomplish that:

“Mr. Billingsly, I appreciate how hectic your schedule is, but I think we would both benefit if you could spare me some time to meet in person. May I call your secretary to schedule a brief 15-minute meeting with you next week?”

If the interviewer is a soft touch, the very fact that you resisted his attempt to brush you off might make him relent. Even a tougher interviewer, though, would be impressed with the confident tone you struck (“we would both benefit”), the understanding you demonstrated (“hectic schedule”), and the modest request you made (“15 minutes”).

In the second instance, you have to be more aggressive because the interviewer is being more aggressive. Try something like the following:

“Mr. Herman, I’m surprised to hear you say that. I must have done a poor job communicating the credentials that make me perfect for this job and my enthusiasm for it. We obviously need to meet in person to discuss this more. Which would be better for you, Monday at 10 or Tuesday at 3?”

Did it ever occur to you that Herman’s aggressive brush-off could be a conscious strategy, an attempt to gauge how you will respond to such outright rejection? If you’re applying for a sales position, I would not be at all surprised if it were. And if you just rolled over and accepted his brush-off, then the interviewer would conclude you
couldn’t
handle rejection (a huge factor in sales) and
wouldn’t
be right for the job after all. Respond to an aggressive brush-off by being equally aggressive. The alternative is unappetizing—to hang up and move on to the next interview.

Many personnel professionals fall into a different category—human screens. For them, interviewing is not simply a once-a-quarter or once-a-month event, but rather a key part of their daily job descriptions. They meet and interview many people, and are more likely than a telephone screener to consider an exceptional applicant for more than one opening within the organization.

A primary objective of a human screen is to
develop a strong group of candidates for managers
(the third kind of interviewer)
to interview in person.
To do this, of course, they must fend off many applicants and callers, a daunting task, because the human screen or the department in which he works is often the only contact provided in employment advertisements.

Among the most common reasons for removal from a human screen’s “hot” list are: lack of the formal or informal qualifications outlined in the organization’s job description; sudden changes in hiring priorities and/or personnel requirements; poor performance during the in-person interview itself; or inaction due to uncertainty about your current status or contact information. That last reason is more common than you might imagine. Human screens are constantly swamped with phone calls, resumes, and unannounced visits from hopeful applicants. Despite their best efforts, they sometimes lose track of qualified people.

Human screens excel at separating the wheat from the chaff. Because they are exposed to a wide variety of candidates on a regular basis, they usually boast more face-to-face interviewing experience than other interviewers. They may be more likely to spot inconsistencies or outright lies on resumes, simply because they’ve seen so many over the years that they know when a candidate’s credentials for a given position don’t quite pass the “smell test.”

And while interviews with a telephone screener or the hiring manager may be rushed because of their hectic schedules, human screens are often able to spend a comparatively long amount of time with particularly qualified candidates.

However, these interviewers often do not have direct knowledge of the day-to-day requirements of the job to be filled. They have formal summaries, of course, but they often don’t possess the same firsthand familiarity with the skills, temperament, and outlook necessary for success on the job. Typically one step away from the action, they’re reliant on job postings and experience summaries (often composed by managers).

If those formal outlines are imperfectly written, and if human screens receive no direct input from supervisors on the kinds of people they’re seeking, you may be passed through the process even though you’re not particularly qualified (or eliminated even though you are).

Not surprisingly, human screens often react with a puzzled look if others ask them to offer their gut reaction to a particular candidate. Because they’re generally removed from the work itself, they often prefer quantifying their assessments of candidates in hard numbers: Either the candidate
does
have three years of appropriate experience, or she
doesn’t.
Either she
has
been trained in computer design, or she
hasn’t.
Of course, this analysis may overlook important interpersonal issues.

Don’t Believe Everything You Read

And don’t believe everything company representatives tell you. Just as employees have been known to “forget” a job when writing their resume and slightly exaggerate their responsibilities, employers have been known to tell attractive candidates what
they
want to hear.
“Need your space and independence? Like to work in a freewheeling, open kind of atmosphere? Hey, that’s us!”
Except, unfortunately, for the one Neanderthal who just happens to be . . . your prospective boss.

It happened to my wife. At one time we both wound up working for the same magazine publishing company, though we experienced totally different corporate cultures.

One reason was because I was in corporate headquarters (New York), and she was based in an outpost (Chicago). I had 400 people around me, including all the major executives and the two owners.

She had seven other salespeople and a secretary around her. Whatever answers she got about the corporate culture would have borne little resemblance to the reality she lived.

She also had one of the above “Neanderthal” bosses, who, again, bore no resemblance to anyone else I ever worked with or for at that company. As a result, while I was in an environment that allowed me a lot of freedom and the ability to pretty much set my own priorities and schedule, she was virtually a prisoner of the time sheet and the object of frequent bullying rants.

Companies sometimes consciously misstate job requirements in their advertisements so as to attract, they believe, the higher end of the applicant pool.

If their gut feeling is that the job requires two years of experience, they may say three are required, expecting a higher grade of queries. They may also believe that the few people who do contact them with only two years of experience are likely to be more motivated than the average applicant.

This is called an “enhanced excluder,” a means of setting the bar
slightly
higher than they need to, knowing they can always ignore the standards they’ve set for the right candidate. Some companies use this method almost as a preinterviewing technique, a way to see which applicants try to get around the announced requirements . . . and how compelling a case they can make for themselves.

If candidates absolutely, positively
have
to have particular technical expertise, that requirement should be prominently and specifically featured in the advertisement. This sounds self-evident, but you’d be surprised at the number of hiring managers I’ve spoken to who
don’t
specify particular skills they’re seeking . . . and then complain about the experience levels of the candidates they interview. Ambiguous statements like “good computer skills” don’t help an employer attract the skilled people it’s seeking. And they certainly don’t help
you
figure out whether you’re qualified for the position!

An Organized List of Questions

Here is a comprehensive list of questions to ask about the company, department, and/or job. Some may have already been answered through your research; some may be pertinent for the Human Resources screener; some may be more pertinent for the hiring manager. In any case, add them to your list of smart questions!

Questions About the Company

Who owns the company?

What are your leading products or services? What products or services are you planning to introduce in the near future?

What are your key markets? Are they growing?

Will you be entering any new markets in the next couple of years? Which ones and via what types of distribution channels?

What growth rate are you currently anticipating? Will this be accomplished internally or through acquisitions?

How many employees work for the organization? In how many offices? In this office?

Are you currently planning any acquisitions?

What has been your layoff history in the last five years? Do you anticipate any cutbacks in the near future and, if you do, how will they impact my department or position?

What major problems or challenges have you recently faced? How were they addressed? What results do you expect?

What is your share of each of your markets?

Which other companies serving those markets pose a serious threat?

What is your hiring philosophy?

What are your plans and prospects for growth and expansion?

What are your goals in the next few years?

What is your ranking within the industry? Does this represent a change from where it was a year or a few years ago?

Please tell me about your own tenure with this company. What do
you
like best about this company? Why?

Questions About the Department

Could you explain the organizational structure of the department and its primary functions and responsibilities? To whom will I be reporting? To whom does he or she report?

With which other departments would I work most closely?

How many people work exclusively in this department?

What problems is this department facing? What are its current goals and objectives?

Questions About the Job

Is a written job description available?

What kind of training should I expect and for how long?

Please tell me more about your training programs. Do you offer reimbursement for job-related education? Time off?

How many people will be reporting to me?

Is relocation an option, a possibility, or a requirement?

How did this job become available? Was the previous person promoted? What is his or her new title? Was the previous person fired? Why?

Would I be able to speak with the person who held this job previously?

Could you describe a typical day in this position?

How long has this position been available?

Is there no one from within the organization who is qualified for this position?

Where will I be working? May I see my office/cubicle?

How advanced/current is the hardware and software I will be expected to use?

How much day-to-day autonomy will I have?

Does this job usually lead to other positions in the company? Which ones?

Please tell me a little bit about the people with whom I’ll be working most closely.