Why do the companies ask soooo many behavioral questions for interview (application, owner)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I think the candidates should start asking behavior questions of the interviewer when they ask if you have any questions for them. "Tell me about a time when you had an employee work on your team that had a higher level degree than you and how you handle that? "Tell me about a time when your boss was unhappy with your performance - did you take ownership of that or throw you subordinates under the bus?"
I think the candidates should start asking behavior questions of the interviewer when they ask if you have any questions for them. "Tell me about a time when you had an employee work on your team that had a higher level degree than you and how you handle that? "Tell me about a time when your boss was unhappy with your performance - did you take ownership of that or throw you subordinates under the bus?"
It shouldn't be, if after all we are all trying to see if we have a good personality fit here. My point is, they would take it as condescending and so do we.
This "fit with the employees" is one that baffles me. Maybe I've been employed at a steady job too long BUT never had a "peer interview" in all of my job interviews in the past. That is a fairly recent phenomenon. As far as the behavioral questions like "Tell us of a time where you have had to meet a deadline and you didn't think you could. What did you do"? Yes I have had my share of those. And I dug back into my memory and answered them as honestly as I could. Always past or was told I passed. But peer interviews total are another thing. One employer asked me "Wouldn't you want to have some input for your future co-worker"? I replied, honestly, "No, I don't trust myself. I have experienced on the job people (myself being one) initially starting and not being well liked, preferred but as time went along they and the "team" grew together and they became a valuable asset". Had they been screened out in a peer interview they never would have had the chance to prove themselves. And then there is the old, "We know this person" in the small town scenario. You get two candidates that are about equal, one maybe a little better than the other, but the "team" chooses candidate A over candidate B although B is a little better qualified, because they know A from the community, privately, etc, etc. B can't even compete even though B may be a better candidate overall. You can't tell me that this doesn't happen or have the potential to happen. Or candidates select A over B because A is their sex or age range and B is not, even though B may be a better candidate. Yes, H.R. and management types, this I am sure happens and it is excused by saying, "Well the employees should have a say so, we have to keep them happy".
America has an "election" culture so people like good talkers. As long as they make up good stories, they gain trust.\
While in Japan/China, good talkers are judged negatively so their interview questions may be much more technical.
That is unfortunately true. Many people just don't focus on substance. They are like the dorf that walks onto the car lot and buys the pretty red car with spoilers because they like the way it looks and then complain later when its get 16 mpg or falls apart after 3 years.
Also a lot of people are self absorbed. Who do I want to hang out with at work rather than who is going to do the best job for the company.
I have my degrees, publications, and jobs, which pretty much proves I can solve problems and meet deadlines.
Except that those items/prior jobs don't necessarily tell an employer such. Your degrees could've been earned despite turning in late assignments/irregularly showing up to class. Your publications may have been completed in a non-competitive setting or in a non-stressful environment, which doesn't tell an employer much about how you perform under stress. Also, you may only be mediocre at your current/previous jobs or are otherwise not challenged. For those reasons, the behavioral interview questions are very useful. Not to mention, they also show an employer how well you communicate orally, which may matter a great deal depending on the job you're applying for.
The questions that get asked at more and more companies these days are designed to find good fits for the company and its culture. Just being able to do the job and meet deadlines is not good enough for employers these days, they can not afford to make mistakes.
These questions are usually designed by psychologists, they are not random and they are highly effective. I didn't believe in behavioral tests or questions when my firm first started using them, but in the 10+ years we have been using them I've found them to be highly accurate in predicting performance and identifying areas of weakness in potential hires.
Don't like the modern world, create your own consulting practice.
Except that those items/prior jobs don't necessarily tell an employer such. Your degrees could've been earned despite turning in late assignments/irregularly showing up to class. Your publications may have been completed in a non-competitive setting or in a non-stressful environment, which doesn't tell an employer much about how you perform under stress. Also, you may only be mediocre at your current/previous jobs or are otherwise not challenged. For those reasons, the behavioral interview questions are very useful. Not to mention, they also show an employer how well you communicate orally, which may matter a great deal depending on the job you're applying for.
Publications are peer-reviewed. People in that field also know the prestige of certain journals or conferences. What is more, they can read them! Most decent conferences in IT field have an acceptance rate lower than 20%.
Graduate school (for engineering majors ) can be without stress? Go try one.
Yes, we need to know the real performance of a future employee, so we should ask DETAILED TECHNICAL QUESTIONS RELATED TO HIS PREVIOUS PROJECTS.
Publications are peer-reviewed. People in that field also know the prestige of certain journals or conferences. What is more, they can read them! Most decent conferences in IT field have an acceptance rate lower than 20%.
Graduate school (for engineering majors ) can be without stress? Go try one.
Yes, we need to know the real performance of a future employee, so we should ask DETAILED TECHNICAL QUESTIONS RELATED TO HIS PREVIOUS PROJECTS.
You keep missing the point even though it has been explained multiple times. They don't need to ask the detailed technical questions because as you say, prior experience and publications demonstrate that. What they do need to determine is if you as a person is a good fit for that environment. That is based on personality and behavior and that is why they ask questions that try to get to those aspects of a person, not just whether they can handle the technical components of the job.
Publications are peer-reviewed. People in that field also know the prestige of certain journals or conferences. What is more, they can read them! Most decent conferences in IT field have an acceptance rate lower than 20%.
Graduate school (for engineering majors ) can be without stress? Go try one.
Yes, we need to know the real performance of a future employee, so we should ask DETAILED TECHNICAL QUESTIONS RELATED TO HIS PREVIOUS PROJECTS.
But the peer review process for all publications are not equal/or the same rigor (saying that "I'm published" doesn't necessarily say much without knowing more). Saying I'm published also doesn't mean that you're presented/been accepted to a "decent" conference. I'm not discounting what a solid publication can show, but that's not something that I get from the statement claiming that "I'm published." As you're mentioning, names/conferences/prestige all matter.
As for engineering work at a graduate school level, I'm not going to claim that they are the most stressful environments or stress free. But you're not required to be a workaholic to graduate; thus, a degree doesn't tell me much on its own.
You could have qualified certain things/gone into more detail, but I was simply responding to your rather general remarks about accomplishments to point out that they do not, on their own, show what was claimed.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
