# How do you respond to the interview question, "What is your greatest weakness?"



## usmbguest5318

Yesterday I had to do a phone interview of an experienced hire candidate who seeks to join our firm as a senior manager (one step below "entry level" partner).  The interview was going along well and I decided to as one of the easiest "tough" questions there are:  What's your greatest weakness?

Well, there's a first time for everything, I suppose.  Yesterday was the first time I've asked that question and received an answer that by itself determined my decision about whether to give my imprimatur for hiring the candidate.   

The man answered by in effect saying that he's been told that he can be difficult to work with.  Upon hearing that, I abruptly ended the interview, asking if he had any questions of me.  He didn't and that was that.  

I have no idea what led the candidate to think that giving the answer he did could possibly aid and abet his assertion that he'd be a good person for us to hire, but insofar as he gave it, he must have his reasons.  What I do know is that being hard to work with and lacking the judgment not to say that in an interview indicated the guy is too stupid and under seasoned for us to hire in any capacity.   I was so astounded that I emailed the people who did the preliminary "phone screen" and early stage interviews on the guy to inquire how his abject inanity and unfitness for our firm did not come through when they spoke with him.  I was and remain incredulous that the guy made it far enough through the interview process that he got to talk to me. 

(Normally, I don't any longer do interviews, but the guy specifically expressed an interest in being part of my practice unit, and I have final say on all manager-and-above experienced hires who aim to it.  It was rather serendipitous that I had to be part of the interview team considering him because the unique nature of my unit's work militates for "growing" people more so than finding them from outside the firm.)

The guy could have said any number of things.  Hell, he could have gone with one of the standard pat answers to that question, and I'd have at least counted his answer as neither strong nor weak, but as neutral.

So with that as background, how did you answer the question I posed when you have been asked it?


----------



## strollingbones

compassion


----------



## aaronleland

Those kind of interview questions are stupid because you're pretty much asking the interviewee to feed you a line of bullshit. Sounds to me like the guy you interviewed was trying to be honest.


----------



## evenflow1969

Xelor said:


> Yesterday I had to do a phone interview of an experienced hire candidate who seeks to join our firm as a senior manager (one step below "entry level" partner).  The interview was going along well and I decided to as one of the easiest "tough" questions there are:  What's your greatest weakness?
> 
> Well, there's a first time for everything, I suppose.  Yesterday was the first time I've asked that question and received an answer that by itself determined my decision about whether to give my imprimatur for hiring the candidate.
> 
> The man answered by in effect saying that he's been told that he can be difficult to work with.  Upon hearing that, I abruptly ended the interview, asking if he had any questions of me.  He didn't and that was that.
> 
> I have no idea what led the candidate to think that giving the answer he did could possibly aid and abet his assertion that he'd be a good person for us to hire, but insofar as he gave it, he must have his reasons.  What I do know is that being hard to work with and lacking the judgment not to say that in an interview indicated the guy is too stupid and under seasoned for us to hire in any capacity.   I was so astounded that I emailed the people who did the preliminary "phone screen" and early stage interviews on the guy to inquire how his abject inanity and unfitness for our firm did not come through when they spoke with him.  I was and remain incredulous that the guy made it far enough through the interview process that he got to talk to me.
> 
> (Normally, I don't any longer do interviews, but the guy specifically expressed an interest in being part of my practice unit, and I have final say on all manager-and-above experienced hires who aim to it.  It was rather serendipitous that I had to be part of the interview team considering him because the unique nature of my unit's work militates for "growing" people more so than finding them from outside the firm.)
> 
> The guy could have said any number of things.  Hell, he could have gone with one of the standard pat answers to that question, and I'd have at least counted his answer as neither strong nor weak, but as neutral.
> 
> So with that as background, how did you answer the question I posed when you have been asked it?


I absolutley dispise that question. You are begging to be lied to by asking it! The reality is that any one with half a brain would not tell some one their greatest weakness as it opens one up for exploitation. I almost feel as though they are trying to find out how good of a liar I am. Then I imagine, that if my lie was good enough and they will hire me and expect me to lie while working and fucking miserable I would be in a job that required lying all day. So I look for the most truethfull answer I can give them on the subject.  I answer with " I am not very good a taking compliments for a job well done as I feel that I should not even be here if it was not a job well done. I certainly prefer bonuses and raises over accolades." I would have to be in dire straights to take the job. Unless the situation was nothing like I expected from the question, I likely would not be there long. I would be continually looking for an employer that I felt was more interested in the truth than putting some one on the spot!

PS. I am hoping that an offer comes from some one who did not ask the question. Assuming similar pay I will take the job from the interviewer that did not ask that question first.


----------



## HereWeGoAgain

I was asked that question once and I answered with...I sometimes catch myself getting to detailed in my work and it slows my production.
   I was going to be making flight hardware for the shuttle program.

    I got the job.


----------



## aaronleland

_"What would you say your greatest weakness is?"

"I like to rape."

"Welcome to Chuck E' Cheese. You start tomorrow."_


----------



## evenflow1969

Xelor said:


> Yesterday I had to do a phone interview of an experienced hire candidate who seeks to join our firm as a senior manager (one step below "entry level" partner).  The interview was going along well and I decided to as one of the easiest "tough" questions there are:  What's your greatest weakness?
> 
> Well, there's a first time for everything, I suppose.  Yesterday was the first time I've asked that question and received an answer that by itself determined my decision about whether to give my imprimatur for hiring the candidate.
> 
> The man answered by in effect saying that he's been told that he can be difficult to work with.  Upon hearing that, I abruptly ended the interview, asking if he had any questions of me.  He didn't and that was that.
> 
> I have no idea what led the candidate to think that giving the answer he did could possibly aid and abet his assertion that he'd be a good person for us to hire, but insofar as he gave it, he must have his reasons.  What I do know is that being hard to work with and lacking the judgment not to say that in an interview indicated the guy is too stupid and under seasoned for us to hire in any capacity.   I was so astounded that I emailed the people who did the preliminary "phone screen" and early stage interviews on the guy to inquire how his abject inanity and unfitness for our firm did not come through when they spoke with him.  I was and remain incredulous that the guy made it far enough through the interview process that he got to talk to me.
> 
> (Normally, I don't any longer do interviews, but the guy specifically expressed an interest in being part of my practice unit, and I have final say on all manager-and-above experienced hires who aim to it.  It was rather serendipitous that I had to be part of the interview team considering him because the unique nature of my unit's work militates for "growing" people more so than finding them from outside the firm.)
> 
> The guy could have said any number of things.  Hell, he could have gone with one of the standard pat answers to that question, and I'd have at least counted his answer as neither strong nor weak, but as neutral.
> 
> So with that as background, how did you answer the question I posed when you have been asked it?


So how do you feel asking it?


----------



## usmbguest5318

evenflow1969 said:


> Xelor said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yesterday I had to do a phone interview of an experienced hire candidate who seeks to join our firm as a senior manager (one step below "entry level" partner).  The interview was going along well and I decided to as one of the easiest "tough" questions there are:  What's your greatest weakness?
> 
> Well, there's a first time for everything, I suppose.  Yesterday was the first time I've asked that question and received an answer that by itself determined my decision about whether to give my imprimatur for hiring the candidate.
> 
> The man answered by in effect saying that he's been told that he can be difficult to work with.  Upon hearing that, I abruptly ended the interview, asking if he had any questions of me.  He didn't and that was that.
> 
> I have no idea what led the candidate to think that giving the answer he did could possibly aid and abet his assertion that he'd be a good person for us to hire, but insofar as he gave it, he must have his reasons.  What I do know is that being hard to work with and lacking the judgment not to say that in an interview indicated the guy is too stupid and under seasoned for us to hire in any capacity.   I was so astounded that I emailed the people who did the preliminary "phone screen" and early stage interviews on the guy to inquire how his abject inanity and unfitness for our firm did not come through when they spoke with him.  I was and remain incredulous that the guy made it far enough through the interview process that he got to talk to me.
> 
> (Normally, I don't any longer do interviews, but the guy specifically expressed an interest in being part of my practice unit, and I have final say on all manager-and-above experienced hires who aim to it.  It was rather serendipitous that I had to be part of the interview team considering him because the unique nature of my unit's work militates for "growing" people more so than finding them from outside the firm.)
> 
> The guy could have said any number of things.  Hell, he could have gone with one of the standard pat answers to that question, and I'd have at least counted his answer as neither strong nor weak, but as neutral.
> 
> So with that as background, how did you answer the question I posed when you have been asked it?
> 
> 
> 
> I absolutley dispise that question. You are begging to be lied to by asking it! The reality is that any one with half a brain would not tell some one their greatest weakness as it opens one up for exploitation. I almost feel as though they are trying to find out how good of a liar I am. Then I imagine, that if my lie was good enough and they will hire me and expect me to lie while working and fucking miserable I would be in a job that required lying all day. So I look for the most truethfull answer I can give them on the subject.  I answer with " I am not very good a taking compliments for a job well done as I feel that I should not even be here if it was not a job well done. I certainly prefer bonuses and raises over accolades." I would have to be in dire straights to take the job. Unless the situation was nothing like I expected from the question, I likely would not be there long. I would be continually looking for an employer that I felt was more interested in the truth than putting some one on the spot!
> 
> PS. I am hoping that an offer comes from some one who did not ask the question. Assuming similar pay I will take the job from the interviewer that did not ask that question first.
Click to expand...




evenflow1969 said:


> The reality is that any one with half a brain would not tell some one their greatest weakness as it opens one up for exploitation. *I almost feel as though they are trying to find out how good of a liar I am*.


No fair interviewer asks that question for that reason.


----------



## yiostheoy

Xelor said:


> Yesterday I had to do a phone interview of an experienced hire candidate who seeks to join our firm as a senior manager (one step below "entry level" partner).  The interview was going along well and I decided to as one of the easiest "tough" questions there are:  What's your greatest weakness?
> 
> Well, there's a first time for everything, I suppose.  Yesterday was the first time I've asked that question and received an answer that by itself determined my decision about whether to give my imprimatur for hiring the candidate.
> 
> The man answered by in effect saying that he's been told that he can be difficult to work with.  Upon hearing that, I abruptly ended the interview, asking if he had any questions of me.  He didn't and that was that.
> 
> I have no idea what led the candidate to think that giving the answer he did could possibly aid and abet his assertion that he'd be a good person for us to hire, but insofar as he gave it, he must have his reasons.  What I do know is that being hard to work with and lacking the judgment not to say that in an interview indicated the guy is too stupid and under seasoned for us to hire in any capacity.   I was so astounded that I emailed the people who did the preliminary "phone screen" and early stage interviews on the guy to inquire how his abject inanity and unfitness for our firm did not come through when they spoke with him.  I was and remain incredulous that the guy made it far enough through the interview process that he got to talk to me.
> 
> (Normally, I don't any longer do interviews, but the guy specifically expressed an interest in being part of my practice unit, and I have final say on all manager-and-above experienced hires who aim to it.  It was rather serendipitous that I had to be part of the interview team considering him because the unique nature of my unit's work militates for "growing" people more so than finding them from outside the firm.)
> 
> The guy could have said any number of things.  Hell, he could have gone with one of the standard pat answers to that question, and I'd have at least counted his answer as neither strong nor weak, but as neutral.
> 
> So with that as background, how did you answer the question I posed when you have been asked it?


I tell them that I tend to be an over-achiever and with this comes certain weaknesses that laid back slackers do not ever have.


----------



## usmbguest5318

HereWeGoAgain said:


> I was asked that question once and I answered with...I sometimes catch myself getting to detailed in my work and it slows my production.
> I was going to be making flight hardware for the shuttle program.
> 
> I got the job.





HereWeGoAgain said:


> I sometimes catch myself getting to detailed in my work and it slows my production.


That's essentially one of the pat answers one expects to receive upon asking that question.  If it or something like it is what I get in response, giving that sort of answer neither helps nor hinders the candidate's position with me.


----------



## yiostheoy

Xelor said:


> HereWeGoAgain said:
> 
> 
> 
> I was asked that question once and I answered with...I sometimes catch myself getting to detailed in my work and it slows my production.
> I was going to be making flight hardware for the shuttle program.
> 
> I got the job.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> HereWeGoAgain said:
> 
> 
> 
> I sometimes catch myself getting to detailed in my work and it slows my production.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That's essentially one of the pat answers one expects to receive upon asking that question.  If it or something like it is what I get in response, giving that sort of answer neither helps nor hinders the candidate's position with me.
Click to expand...

You have to turn the question around and hit them back with it in a different form.

This is a part of rhetorical sophistry.

They are playing the game with you so you need to play it back on them.


----------



## RodISHI

Xelor said:


> Yesterday I had to do a phone interview of an experienced hire candidate who seeks to join our firm as a senior manager (one step below "entry level" partner).  The interview was going along well and I decided to as one of the easiest "tough" questions there are:  What's your greatest weakness?
> 
> Well, there's a first time for everything, I suppose.  Yesterday was the first time I've asked that question and received an answer that by itself determined my decision about whether to give my imprimatur for hiring the candidate.
> 
> The man answered by in effect saying that he's been told that he can be difficult to work with.  Upon hearing that, I abruptly ended the interview, asking if he had any questions of me.  He didn't and that was that.
> 
> I have no idea what led the candidate to think that giving the answer he did could possibly aid and abet his assertion that he'd be a good person for us to hire, but insofar as he gave it, he must have his reasons.  What I do know is that being hard to work with and lacking the judgment not to say that in an interview indicated the guy is too stupid and under seasoned for us to hire in any capacity.   I was so astounded that I emailed the people who did the preliminary "phone screen" and early stage interviews on the guy to inquire how his abject inanity and unfitness for our firm did not come through when they spoke with him.  I was and remain incredulous that the guy made it far enough through the interview process that he got to talk to me.
> 
> (Normally, I don't any longer do interviews, but the guy specifically expressed an interest in being part of my practice unit, and I have final say on all manager-and-above experienced hires who aim to it.  It was rather serendipitous that I had to be part of the interview team considering him because the unique nature of my unit's work militates for "growing" people more so than finding them from outside the firm.)
> 
> The guy could have said any number of things.  Hell, he could have gone with one of the standard pat answers to that question, and I'd have at least counted his answer as neither strong nor weak, but as neutral.
> 
> So with that as background, how did you answer the question I posed when you have been asked it?


What if he had told you he was a perfectionist?


----------



## Indeependent

Why not simply take 10-15 minutes of a simulated run through of a project?
The “Weak” question means you don’t want to hire the candi.


----------



## usmbguest5318

evenflow1969 said:


> Xelor said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yesterday I had to do a phone interview of an experienced hire candidate who seeks to join our firm as a senior manager (one step below "entry level" partner).  The interview was going along well and I decided to as one of the easiest "tough" questions there are:  What's your greatest weakness?
> 
> Well, there's a first time for everything, I suppose.  Yesterday was the first time I've asked that question and received an answer that by itself determined my decision about whether to give my imprimatur for hiring the candidate.
> 
> The man answered by in effect saying that he's been told that he can be difficult to work with.  Upon hearing that, I abruptly ended the interview, asking if he had any questions of me.  He didn't and that was that.
> 
> I have no idea what led the candidate to think that giving the answer he did could possibly aid and abet his assertion that he'd be a good person for us to hire, but insofar as he gave it, he must have his reasons.  What I do know is that being hard to work with and lacking the judgment not to say that in an interview indicated the guy is too stupid and under seasoned for us to hire in any capacity.   I was so astounded that I emailed the people who did the preliminary "phone screen" and early stage interviews on the guy to inquire how his abject inanity and unfitness for our firm did not come through when they spoke with him.  I was and remain incredulous that the guy made it far enough through the interview process that he got to talk to me.
> 
> (Normally, I don't any longer do interviews, but the guy specifically expressed an interest in being part of my practice unit, and I have final say on all manager-and-above experienced hires who aim to it.  It was rather serendipitous that I had to be part of the interview team considering him because the unique nature of my unit's work militates for "growing" people more so than finding them from outside the firm.)
> 
> The guy could have said any number of things.  Hell, he could have gone with one of the standard pat answers to that question, and I'd have at least counted his answer as neither strong nor weak, but as neutral.
> 
> So with that as background, how did you answer the question I posed when you have been asked it?
> 
> 
> 
> So how do you feel asking it?
Click to expand...

I don't feel anything asking it.  It's just a question.  At most, I think of it as an "give away" question of sorts that typical interviewees will answer such that their answer has no impact on their chances of receiving an offer and that outstanding candidates will convert into an opportunity to very favorably affect their odds of receiving an offer and avail themselves of the opportunity.  I feel that way because "everyone" knows there is a fair chance they'll be asked that question, so one must be a "big ol' hot mess" to answer it in a way that actually hurts one's position.


----------



## HereWeGoAgain

Xelor said:


> HereWeGoAgain said:
> 
> 
> 
> I was asked that question once and I answered with...I sometimes catch myself getting to detailed in my work and it slows my production.
> I was going to be making flight hardware for the shuttle program.
> 
> I got the job.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> HereWeGoAgain said:
> 
> 
> 
> I sometimes catch myself getting to detailed in my work and it slows my production.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That's essentially one of the pat answers one expects to receive upon asking that question.  If it or something like it is what I get in response, giving that sort of answer neither helps nor hinders the candidate's position with me.
Click to expand...


  In this case it helped.
They didnt care if you took your time as long as it was right.
  NASA was famous for kicking back work for something as trivial as a bevel that had no real function being off a few thousands.


----------



## alang1216

aaronleland said:


> _"What would you say your greatest weakness is?"
> 
> "I like to rape."
> 
> "Welcome to Chuck E' Cheese. You start tomorrow."_


_"What would you say your greatest weakness is?"

"Honesty."

"I don't think honesty is a weakness."

"I don't give a fuck what you think."

(sorry)_


----------



## aaronleland

HereWeGoAgain said:


> Xelor said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> HereWeGoAgain said:
> 
> 
> 
> I was asked that question once and I answered with...I sometimes catch myself getting to detailed in my work and it slows my production.
> I was going to be making flight hardware for the shuttle program.
> 
> I got the job.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> HereWeGoAgain said:
> 
> 
> 
> I sometimes catch myself getting to detailed in my work and it slows my production.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That's essentially one of the pat answers one expects to receive upon asking that question.  If it or something like it is what I get in response, giving that sort of answer neither helps nor hinders the candidate's position with me.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> In this case it helped.
> They didnt care if you took your time as long as it was right.
> NASA was famous for kicking back work for something as trivial as a bevel that had no real function being off a few thousands.
Click to expand...


Yeah, but didn't you work on the Challenger?


----------



## usmbguest5318

Xelor said:


> HereWeGoAgain said:
> 
> 
> 
> I was asked that question once and I answered with...I sometimes catch myself getting to detailed in my work and it slows my production.
> I was going to be making flight hardware for the shuttle program.
> 
> I got the job.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> HereWeGoAgain said:
> 
> 
> 
> I sometimes catch myself getting to detailed in my work and it slows my production.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That's essentially one of the pat answers one expects to receive upon asking that question.  If it or something like it is what I get in response, giving that sort of answer neither helps nor hinders the candidate's position with me.
Click to expand...




yiostheoy said:


> You have to turn the question around and hit them back with it in a different form.
> 
> This is a part of rhetorical sophistry.
> 
> They are playing the game with you so you need to play it back on them.


Well, an interviewee may try that with me, but doing so is one of the ways to lessen the odds that I approve their receiving an offer.  When I'm the interviewer, I'm not the one being tested, as it were.  Candidates are well advised to keep that in mind at all times during their interview process.  I suspect in thinking that way about the situation that I'm not rare among principals, most especially not among very senior principals (people in the top three tiers of a firm's management).


----------



## usmbguest5318

RodISHI said:


> Xelor said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yesterday I had to do a phone interview of an experienced hire candidate who seeks to join our firm as a senior manager (one step below "entry level" partner).  The interview was going along well and I decided to as one of the easiest "tough" questions there are:  What's your greatest weakness?
> 
> Well, there's a first time for everything, I suppose.  Yesterday was the first time I've asked that question and received an answer that by itself determined my decision about whether to give my imprimatur for hiring the candidate.
> 
> The man answered by in effect saying that he's been told that he can be difficult to work with.  Upon hearing that, I abruptly ended the interview, asking if he had any questions of me.  He didn't and that was that.
> 
> I have no idea what led the candidate to think that giving the answer he did could possibly aid and abet his assertion that he'd be a good person for us to hire, but insofar as he gave it, he must have his reasons.  What I do know is that being hard to work with and lacking the judgment not to say that in an interview indicated the guy is too stupid and under seasoned for us to hire in any capacity.   I was so astounded that I emailed the people who did the preliminary "phone screen" and early stage interviews on the guy to inquire how his abject inanity and unfitness for our firm did not come through when they spoke with him.  I was and remain incredulous that the guy made it far enough through the interview process that he got to talk to me.
> 
> (Normally, I don't any longer do interviews, but the guy specifically expressed an interest in being part of my practice unit, and I have final say on all manager-and-above experienced hires who aim to it.  It was rather serendipitous that I had to be part of the interview team considering him because the unique nature of my unit's work militates for "growing" people more so than finding them from outside the firm.)
> 
> The guy could have said any number of things.  Hell, he could have gone with one of the standard pat answers to that question, and I'd have at least counted his answer as neither strong nor weak, but as neutral.
> 
> So with that as background, how did you answer the question I posed when you have been asked it?
> 
> 
> 
> What if he had told you he was a perfectionist?
Click to expand...

I'd construe that as a one of the many pat answers to the question.


----------



## HereWeGoAgain

aaronleland said:


> HereWeGoAgain said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Xelor said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> HereWeGoAgain said:
> 
> 
> 
> I was asked that question once and I answered with...I sometimes catch myself getting to detailed in my work and it slows my production.
> I was going to be making flight hardware for the shuttle program.
> 
> I got the job.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> HereWeGoAgain said:
> 
> 
> 
> I sometimes catch myself getting to detailed in my work and it slows my production.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That's essentially one of the pat answers one expects to receive upon asking that question.  If it or something like it is what I get in response, giving that sort of answer neither helps nor hinders the candidate's position with me.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> In this case it helped.
> They didnt care if you took your time as long as it was right.
> NASA was famous for kicking back work for something as trivial as a bevel that had no real function being off a few thousands.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yeah, but didn't you work on the Challenger?
Click to expand...


  I had nothing to do with the O-rings....lol


----------



## RodISHI

Xelor said:


> RodISHI said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Xelor said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yesterday I had to do a phone interview of an experienced hire candidate who seeks to join our firm as a senior manager (one step below "entry level" partner).  The interview was going along well and I decided to as one of the easiest "tough" questions there are:  What's your greatest weakness?
> 
> Well, there's a first time for everything, I suppose.  Yesterday was the first time I've asked that question and received an answer that by itself determined my decision about whether to give my imprimatur for hiring the candidate.
> 
> The man answered by in effect saying that he's been told that he can be difficult to work with.  Upon hearing that, I abruptly ended the interview, asking if he had any questions of me.  He didn't and that was that.
> 
> I have no idea what led the candidate to think that giving the answer he did could possibly aid and abet his assertion that he'd be a good person for us to hire, but insofar as he gave it, he must have his reasons.  What I do know is that being hard to work with and lacking the judgment not to say that in an interview indicated the guy is too stupid and under seasoned for us to hire in any capacity.   I was so astounded that I emailed the people who did the preliminary "phone screen" and early stage interviews on the guy to inquire how his abject inanity and unfitness for our firm did not come through when they spoke with him.  I was and remain incredulous that the guy made it far enough through the interview process that he got to talk to me.
> 
> (Normally, I don't any longer do interviews, but the guy specifically expressed an interest in being part of my practice unit, and I have final say on all manager-and-above experienced hires who aim to it.  It was rather serendipitous that I had to be part of the interview team considering him because the unique nature of my unit's work militates for "growing" people more so than finding them from outside the firm.)
> 
> The guy could have said any number of things.  Hell, he could have gone with one of the standard pat answers to that question, and I'd have at least counted his answer as neither strong nor weak, but as neutral.
> 
> So with that as background, how did you answer the question I posed when you have been asked it?
> 
> 
> 
> What if he had told you he was a perfectionist?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I'd construe that as a one of the many pat answers to the question.
Click to expand...

I probably would have questioned him/her further, "I am a perfectionist, therefore hard to get along with at times"


----------



## HereWeGoAgain

aaronleland said:


> HereWeGoAgain said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Xelor said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> HereWeGoAgain said:
> 
> 
> 
> I was asked that question once and I answered with...I sometimes catch myself getting to detailed in my work and it slows my production.
> I was going to be making flight hardware for the shuttle program.
> 
> I got the job.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> HereWeGoAgain said:
> 
> 
> 
> I sometimes catch myself getting to detailed in my work and it slows my production.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That's essentially one of the pat answers one expects to receive upon asking that question.  If it or something like it is what I get in response, giving that sort of answer neither helps nor hinders the candidate's position with me.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> In this case it helped.
> They didnt care if you took your time as long as it was right.
> NASA was famous for kicking back work for something as trivial as a bevel that had no real function being off a few thousands.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yeah, but didn't you work on the Challenger?
Click to expand...


  ....oh,the parts were made correctly and to print,you weren't going to slip something by their inspectors thats for damn sure.
  They actually worked in inspection at our shop....and God did we hate those bastards.


----------



## yiostheoy

The most important things about an interview is (1) to smile a lot and (2) don't worry be happy -- have confidence.

That's what sells.

Other potential responses to "what is your weakness?" --

- I work to hard

- I put in long hours

- Other people get jealous of my work

Etc.


----------



## usmbguest5318

Indeependent said:


> Why not simply take 10-15 minutes of a simulated run through of a project?
> The “Weak” question means you don’t want to hire the candi.


His interview with me, when it started, was but a formality for (1) four of the five other partners on the interview team had emailed saying they recommend we hire the guy and (2) I am on vacation and I was sitting at a pool overlooking the Caribbean when I did the call to interview him.  I was of the mind that insofar as four partners thought the guy is "high quality," barring his really screwing up with me, his being hired was a "done deal," as they say.  

Those factors combined to make me amenable to hiring the guy.  The fact of the matter is that at the outset of the call, the guy was all but hired.  I even was satisfied with him and his qualifications until he answered that question as he did.  Indeed, but for his by another partner being asked what he wanted to do in the firm, and his answer aligned with what my unit does, he wouldn't have been forwarded to me and would have been hired.  

I was already away and on vacation when I learned I'd have to talk to him, and the only reason for the urgency was that he'd to someone else stated he'd like to start ASAP because his wife had taken a new job for which his family had moved and his job wasn't portable.  We "fast tracked" his interview process out of respect for his situation and to show from the get-go that we, as much as possible, try to do right by our people, and people in general.  Indeed, I'd have been furious were I to have found upon returning from vacation that we'd known of his needs and qualifications yet made no effort to show respect for them when nothing more than moving along with alacrity -- namely asking me to spend an hour or so chatting on the phone with the guy -- was all that was needed to do so.


----------



## evenflow1969

Xelor said:


> Xelor said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> HereWeGoAgain said:
> 
> 
> 
> I was asked that question once and I answered with...I sometimes catch myself getting to detailed in my work and it slows my production.
> I was going to be making flight hardware for the shuttle program.
> 
> I got the job.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> HereWeGoAgain said:
> 
> 
> 
> I sometimes catch myself getting to detailed in my work and it slows my production.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That's essentially one of the pat answers one expects to receive upon asking that question.  If it or something like it is what I get in response, giving that sort of answer neither helps nor hinders the candidate's position with me.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> yiostheoy said:
> 
> 
> 
> You have to turn the question around and hit them back with it in a different form.
> 
> This is a part of rhetorical sophistry.
> 
> They are playing the game with you so you need to play it back on them.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Well, an interviewee may try that with me, but doing so is one of the ways to lessen the odds that I approve their receiving an offer.  When I'm the interviewer, I'm not the one being tested, as it were.  Candidates are well advised to keep that in mind at all times during their interview process.  I suspect in thinking that way about the situation that I'm not rare among principals, most especially not among very senior principals (people in the top three tiers of a firm's management).
Click to expand...

See that is where you are wrong. If you are looking at the best candidates they likey have options. You had better belive they are trying to figure out who they are going to work for in that interview. Money is not realy a thing for me any more. My house and cars are paid for, I owe nobody any thing. I could go years with out a pay check. Although mon ey is no longer the biggest concern or even realy a concern, feeling productive is a big concern. I am self employed and do well at it. How ever I am getting to old to be the butcher, the baker and the candle stick maker. I would like to concentrate on one thing and do it well. I find a place that wants to offer real value to their customers and operates with integrity I would likely be there till I die and because I like to succeed above all else, I will do one hell of a job. I will not even entertain the idea of a job that does not offer value and integrity to it's customers. You are scaring away some good applicants with that attitude. If you want applicants that have no where else to go, keep that attitude. If you want applicants that are in demand you may want to sell what you have to offer. If you are high up in the firm you are not likely looking for the average Joe in your interviews. If these are positions of senior management I would think you are looking for exceptional people. These kind of people typically have options.


----------



## usmbguest5318

evenflow1969 said:


> Xelor said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Xelor said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> HereWeGoAgain said:
> 
> 
> 
> I was asked that question once and I answered with...I sometimes catch myself getting to detailed in my work and it slows my production.
> I was going to be making flight hardware for the shuttle program.
> 
> I got the job.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> HereWeGoAgain said:
> 
> 
> 
> I sometimes catch myself getting to detailed in my work and it slows my production.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That's essentially one of the pat answers one expects to receive upon asking that question.  If it or something like it is what I get in response, giving that sort of answer neither helps nor hinders the candidate's position with me.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> yiostheoy said:
> 
> 
> 
> You have to turn the question around and hit them back with it in a different form.
> 
> This is a part of rhetorical sophistry.
> 
> They are playing the game with you so you need to play it back on them.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Well, an interviewee may try that with me, but doing so is one of the ways to lessen the odds that I approve their receiving an offer.  When I'm the interviewer, I'm not the one being tested, as it were.  Candidates are well advised to keep that in mind at all times during their interview process.  I suspect in thinking that way about the situation that I'm not rare among principals, most especially not among very senior principals (people in the top three tiers of a firm's management).
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> See that is where you are wrong. If you are looking at the best candidates they likey have options. You had better belive they are trying to figure out who they are going to work for in that interview. Money is not realy a thing for me any more. My house and cars are paid for, I owe nobody any thing. I could go years with out a pay check. Although mon ey is no longer the biggest concern or even realy a concern, feeling productive is a big concern. I am self employed and do well at it. How ever I am getting to old to be the butcher, the baker and the candle stick maker. I would like to concentrate on one thing and do it well. I find a place that wants to offer real value to their customers and operates with integrity I would likely be there till I die and because I like to succeed above all else, I will do one hell of a job. I will not even entertain the idea of a job that does not offer value and integrity to it's customers. You are scaring away some good applicants with that attitude. If you want applicants that have no where else to go, keep that attitude. If you want applicants that are in demand you may want to sell what you have to offer. If you are high up in the firm you are not likely looking for the average Joe in your interviews. If these are positions of senior management I would think you are looking for exceptional people. These kind of people typically have options.
Click to expand...




evenflow1969 said:


> See that is where you are wrong.



TY, but I'm sure I know better than you what is the right way to handle anything and everything having to do with the interview process at my firm.  I don't know what makes you think you can be so presumptuous as to tell me that I'm wrong about such a thing.



evenflow1969 said:


> If you are looking at the best candidates they likey have options.


If that's the case, s/he'd do well to work elsewhere because pulling a stunt like that with me or my colleagues makes it clear to us that our firm is not a good fit for them; thus s/he not a good fit for us.


----------



## Votto

Xelor said:


> Yesterday I had to do a phone interview of an experienced hire candidate who seeks to join our firm as a senior manager (one step below "entry level" partner).  The interview was going along well and I decided to as one of the easiest "tough" questions there are:  What's your greatest weakness?
> 
> Well, there's a first time for everything, I suppose.  Yesterday was the first time I've asked that question and received an answer that by itself determined my decision about whether to give my imprimatur for hiring the candidate.
> 
> The man answered by in effect saying that he's been told that he can be difficult to work with.  Upon hearing that, I abruptly ended the interview, asking if he had any questions of me.  He didn't and that was that.
> 
> I have no idea what led the candidate to think that giving the answer he did could possibly aid and abet his assertion that he'd be a good person for us to hire, but insofar as he gave it, he must have his reasons.  What I do know is that being hard to work with and lacking the judgment not to say that in an interview indicated the guy is too stupid and under seasoned for us to hire in any capacity.   I was so astounded that I emailed the people who did the preliminary "phone screen" and early stage interviews on the guy to inquire how his abject inanity and unfitness for our firm did not come through when they spoke with him.  I was and remain incredulous that the guy made it far enough through the interview process that he got to talk to me.
> 
> (Normally, I don't any longer do interviews, but the guy specifically expressed an interest in being part of my practice unit, and I have final say on all manager-and-above experienced hires who aim to it.  It was rather serendipitous that I had to be part of the interview team considering him because the unique nature of my unit's work militates for "growing" people more so than finding them from outside the firm.)
> 
> The guy could have said any number of things.  Hell, he could have gone with one of the standard pat answers to that question, and I'd have at least counted his answer as neither strong nor weak, but as neutral.
> 
> So with that as background, how did you answer the question I posed when you have been asked it?



My greatest weakness?

Probably my humility.


----------



## usmbguest5318

yiostheoy said:


> The most important things about an interview is (1) to smile a lot and (2) don't worry be happy -- have confidence.
> 
> That's what sells.
> 
> Other potential responses to "what is your weakness?" --
> 
> - I work to hard
> 
> - I put in long hours
> 
> - Other people get jealous of my work
> 
> Etc.


Yes, those are yet other pat answers one typically will hear.


----------



## koshergrl

I pick something that doesn't send up alarm bells. 

"My greatest weakness is pastry."


----------



## koshergrl

Xelor said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why not simply take 10-15 minutes of a simulated run through of a project?
> The “Weak” question means you don’t want to hire the candi.
> 
> 
> 
> His interview with me, when it started, was but a formality for (1) four of the five other partners on the interview team had emailed saying they recommend we hire the guy and (2) I am on vacation and I was sitting at a pool overlooking the Caribbean when I did the call to interview him.  I was of the mind that insofar as four partners thought the guy is "high quality," barring his really screwing up with me, his being hired was a "done deal," as they say.
> 
> Those factors combined to make me amenable to hiring the guy.  The fact of the matter is that at the outset of the call, the guy was all but hired.  I even was satisfied with him and his qualifications until he answered that question as he did.  Indeed, but for his by another partner being asked what he wanted to do in the firm, and his answer aligned with what my unit does, he wouldn't have been forwarded to me and would have been hired.
> 
> I was already away and on vacation when I learned I'd have to talk to him, and the only reason for the urgency was that he'd to someone else stated he'd like to start ASAP because his wife had taken a new job for which his family had moved and his job wasn't portable.  We "fast tracked" his interview process out of respect for his situation and to show from the get-go that we, as much as possible, try to do right by our people, and people in general.  Indeed, I'd have been furious were I to have found upon returning from vacation that we'd known of his needs and qualifications yet made no effort to show respect for them when nothing more than moving along with alacrity -- namely asking me to spend an hour or so chatting on the phone with the guy -- was all that was needed to do so.
Click to expand...


Wow. You sound like such an ass.


----------



## Admiral Rockwell Tory

yiostheoy said:


> The most important things about an interview is (1) to smile a lot and (2) don't worry be happy -- have confidence.
> 
> That's what sells.
> 
> Other potential responses to "what is your weakness?" --
> 
> - *I work to hard*
> 
> - I put in long hours
> 
> - Other people get jealous of my work
> 
> Etc.



You could have said, "I get confused on when to use to, two , or too!"


----------



## koshergrl

evenflow1969 said:


> Xelor said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Xelor said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> HereWeGoAgain said:
> 
> 
> 
> I was asked that question once and I answered with...I sometimes catch myself getting to detailed in my work and it slows my production.
> I was going to be making flight hardware for the shuttle program.
> 
> I got the job.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> HereWeGoAgain said:
> 
> 
> 
> I sometimes catch myself getting to detailed in my work and it slows my production.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That's essentially one of the pat answers one expects to receive upon asking that question.  If it or something like it is what I get in response, giving that sort of answer neither helps nor hinders the candidate's position with me.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> yiostheoy said:
> 
> 
> 
> You have to turn the question around and hit them back with it in a different form.
> 
> This is a part of rhetorical sophistry.
> 
> They are playing the game with you so you need to play it back on them.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Well, an interviewee may try that with me, but doing so is one of the ways to lessen the odds that I approve their receiving an offer.  When I'm the interviewer, I'm not the one being tested, as it were.  Candidates are well advised to keep that in mind at all times during their interview process.  I suspect in thinking that way about the situation that I'm not rare among principals, most especially not among very senior principals (people in the top three tiers of a firm's management).
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> See that is where you are wrong. If you are looking at the best candidates they likey have options. You had better belive they are trying to figure out who they are going to work for in that interview. Money is not realy a thing for me any more. My house and cars are paid for, I owe nobody any thing. I could go years with out a pay check. Although mon ey is no longer the biggest concern or even realy a concern, feeling productive is a big concern. I am self employed and do well at it. How ever I am getting to old to be the butcher, the baker and the candle stick maker. I would like to concentrate on one thing and do it well. I find a place that wants to offer real value to their customers and operates with integrity I would likely be there till I die and because I like to succeed above all else, I will do one hell of a job. I will not even entertain the idea of a job that does not offer value and integrity to it's customers. You are scaring away some good applicants with that attitude. If you want applicants that have no where else to go, keep that attitude. If you want applicants that are in demand you may want to sell what you have to offer. If you are high up in the firm you are not likely looking for the average Joe in your interviews. If these are positions of senior management I would think you are looking for exceptional people. These kind of people typically have options.
Click to expand...

I am sure that anybody with any integrity finds xelor hard to stomach. You will never convince him of that, however. And he doesn't want exceptional. He just wants someone to make him look good/not expose him..if he is even in a position to hire. If he is, he's looking for a toady/scapegoat.


----------



## koshergrl

Admiral Rockwell Tory said:


> yiostheoy said:
> 
> 
> 
> The most important things about an interview is (1) to smile a lot and (2) don't worry be happy -- have confidence.
> 
> That's what sells.
> 
> Other potential responses to "what is your weakness?" --
> 
> - *I work to hard*
> 
> - I put in long hours
> 
> - Other people get jealous of my work
> 
> Etc.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You could have said, "I get confused on when to use to, two , or too!"
Click to expand...

"I can't spell MAYONNAISE!"


----------



## Indeependent

koshergrl said:


> evenflow1969 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Xelor said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Xelor said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> HereWeGoAgain said:
> 
> 
> 
> I was asked that question once and I answered with...I sometimes catch myself getting to detailed in my work and it slows my production.
> I was going to be making flight hardware for the shuttle program.
> 
> I got the job.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> HereWeGoAgain said:
> 
> 
> 
> I sometimes catch myself getting to detailed in my work and it slows my production.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That's essentially one of the pat answers one expects to receive upon asking that question.  If it or something like it is what I get in response, giving that sort of answer neither helps nor hinders the candidate's position with me.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> yiostheoy said:
> 
> 
> 
> You have to turn the question around and hit them back with it in a different form.
> 
> This is a part of rhetorical sophistry.
> 
> They are playing the game with you so you need to play it back on them.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Well, an interviewee may try that with me, but doing so is one of the ways to lessen the odds that I approve their receiving an offer.  When I'm the interviewer, I'm not the one being tested, as it were.  Candidates are well advised to keep that in mind at all times during their interview process.  I suspect in thinking that way about the situation that I'm not rare among principals, most especially not among very senior principals (people in the top three tiers of a firm's management).
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> See that is where you are wrong. If you are looking at the best candidates they likey have options. You had better belive they are trying to figure out who they are going to work for in that interview. Money is not realy a thing for me any more. My house and cars are paid for, I owe nobody any thing. I could go years with out a pay check. Although mon ey is no longer the biggest concern or even realy a concern, feeling productive is a big concern. I am self employed and do well at it. How ever I am getting to old to be the butcher, the baker and the candle stick maker. I would like to concentrate on one thing and do it well. I find a place that wants to offer real value to their customers and operates with integrity I would likely be there till I die and because I like to succeed above all else, I will do one hell of a job. I will not even entertain the idea of a job that does not offer value and integrity to it's customers. You are scaring away some good applicants with that attitude. If you want applicants that have no where else to go, keep that attitude. If you want applicants that are in demand you may want to sell what you have to offer. If you are high up in the firm you are not likely looking for the average Joe in your interviews. If these are positions of senior management I would think you are looking for exceptional people. These kind of people typically have options.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I am sure that anybody with any integrity finds xelor hard to stomach. You will never convince him of that, however. And he doesn't want exceptional. He just wants someone to make him look good/not expose him..if he is even in a position to hire. If he is, he's looking for a toady/scapegoat.
Click to expand...

Very snotty playing with someone’s life like that.


----------



## OldLady

Xelor said:


> Yesterday I had to do a phone interview of an experienced hire candidate who seeks to join our firm as a senior manager (one step below "entry level" partner).  The interview was going along well and I decided to as one of the easiest "tough" questions there are:  What's your greatest weakness?
> 
> Well, there's a first time for everything, I suppose.  Yesterday was the first time I've asked that question and received an answer that by itself determined my decision about whether to give my imprimatur for hiring the candidate.
> 
> The man answered by in effect saying that he's been told that he can be difficult to work with.  Upon hearing that, I abruptly ended the interview, asking if he had any questions of me.  He didn't and that was that.
> 
> I have no idea what led the candidate to think that giving the answer he did could possibly aid and abet his assertion that he'd be a good person for us to hire, but insofar as he gave it, he must have his reasons.  What I do know is that being hard to work with and lacking the judgment not to say that in an interview indicated the guy is too stupid and under seasoned for us to hire in any capacity.   I was so astounded that I emailed the people who did the preliminary "phone screen" and early stage interviews on the guy to inquire how his abject inanity and unfitness for our firm did not come through when they spoke with him.  I was and remain incredulous that the guy made it far enough through the interview process that he got to talk to me.
> 
> (Normally, I don't any longer do interviews, but the guy specifically expressed an interest in being part of my practice unit, and I have final say on all manager-and-above experienced hires who aim to it.  It was rather serendipitous that I had to be part of the interview team considering him because the unique nature of my unit's work militates for "growing" people more so than finding them from outside the firm.)
> 
> The guy could have said any number of things.  Hell, he could have gone with one of the standard pat answers to that question, and I'd have at least counted his answer as neither strong nor weak, but as neutral.
> 
> So with that as background, how did you answer the question I posed when you have been asked it?


Honesty isn't a big value in your book?  You asked, you got an answer.
What ARE the standard pat answers?  I hate those damned interview questions, and I don't remember what I said.  I don't think I got asked all that horseshit stuff for this job.  We talked about education and experience, etc.


----------



## koshergrl

Indeependent said:


> koshergrl said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> evenflow1969 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Xelor said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Xelor said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> HereWeGoAgain said:
> 
> 
> 
> I was asked that question once and I answered with...I sometimes catch myself getting to detailed in my work and it slows my production.
> I was going to be making flight hardware for the shuttle program.
> 
> I got the job.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> HereWeGoAgain said:
> 
> 
> 
> I sometimes catch myself getting to detailed in my work and it slows my production.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That's essentially one of the pat answers one expects to receive upon asking that question.  If it or something like it is what I get in response, giving that sort of answer neither helps nor hinders the candidate's position with me.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> yiostheoy said:
> 
> 
> 
> You have to turn the question around and hit them back with it in a different form.
> 
> This is a part of rhetorical sophistry.
> 
> They are playing the game with you so you need to play it back on them.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Well, an interviewee may try that with me, but doing so is one of the ways to lessen the odds that I approve their receiving an offer.  When I'm the interviewer, I'm not the one being tested, as it were.  Candidates are well advised to keep that in mind at all times during their interview process.  I suspect in thinking that way about the situation that I'm not rare among principals, most especially not among very senior principals (people in the top three tiers of a firm's management).
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> See that is where you are wrong. If you are looking at the best candidates they likey have options. You had better belive they are trying to figure out who they are going to work for in that interview. Money is not realy a thing for me any more. My house and cars are paid for, I owe nobody any thing. I could go years with out a pay check. Although mon ey is no longer the biggest concern or even realy a concern, feeling productive is a big concern. I am self employed and do well at it. How ever I am getting to old to be the butcher, the baker and the candle stick maker. I would like to concentrate on one thing and do it well. I find a place that wants to offer real value to their customers and operates with integrity I would likely be there till I die and because I like to succeed above all else, I will do one hell of a job. I will not even entertain the idea of a job that does not offer value and integrity to it's customers. You are scaring away some good applicants with that attitude. If you want applicants that have no where else to go, keep that attitude. If you want applicants that are in demand you may want to sell what you have to offer. If you are high up in the firm you are not likely looking for the average Joe in your interviews. If these are positions of senior management I would think you are looking for exceptional people. These kind of people typically have options.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I am sure that anybody with any integrity finds xelor hard to stomach. You will never convince him of that, however. And he doesn't want exceptional. He just wants someone to make him look good/not expose him..if he is even in a position to hire. If he is, he's looking for a toady/scapegoat.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Very snotty playing with someone’s life like that.
Click to expand...


Nothing more vile than a self serving scumbag who gets a little bit of power.


----------



## Indeependent

koshergrl said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> koshergrl said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> evenflow1969 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Xelor said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Xelor said:
> 
> 
> 
> That's essentially one of the pat answers one expects to receive upon asking that question.  If it or something like it is what I get in response, giving that sort of answer neither helps nor hinders the candidate's position with me.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> yiostheoy said:
> 
> 
> 
> You have to turn the question around and hit them back with it in a different form.
> 
> This is a part of rhetorical sophistry.
> 
> They are playing the game with you so you need to play it back on them.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Well, an interviewee may try that with me, but doing so is one of the ways to lessen the odds that I approve their receiving an offer.  When I'm the interviewer, I'm not the one being tested, as it were.  Candidates are well advised to keep that in mind at all times during their interview process.  I suspect in thinking that way about the situation that I'm not rare among principals, most especially not among very senior principals (people in the top three tiers of a firm's management).
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> See that is where you are wrong. If you are looking at the best candidates they likey have options. You had better belive they are trying to figure out who they are going to work for in that interview. Money is not realy a thing for me any more. My house and cars are paid for, I owe nobody any thing. I could go years with out a pay check. Although mon ey is no longer the biggest concern or even realy a concern, feeling productive is a big concern. I am self employed and do well at it. How ever I am getting to old to be the butcher, the baker and the candle stick maker. I would like to concentrate on one thing and do it well. I find a place that wants to offer real value to their customers and operates with integrity I would likely be there till I die and because I like to succeed above all else, I will do one hell of a job. I will not even entertain the idea of a job that does not offer value and integrity to it's customers. You are scaring away some good applicants with that attitude. If you want applicants that have no where else to go, keep that attitude. If you want applicants that are in demand you may want to sell what you have to offer. If you are high up in the firm you are not likely looking for the average Joe in your interviews. If these are positions of senior management I would think you are looking for exceptional people. These kind of people typically have options.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I am sure that anybody with any integrity finds xelor hard to stomach. You will never convince him of that, however. And he doesn't want exceptional. He just wants someone to make him look good/not expose him..if he is even in a position to hire. If he is, he's looking for a toady/scapegoat.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Very snotty playing with someone’s life like that.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Nothing more vile than a self serving scumbag who gets a little bit of power.
Click to expand...

His point of view is *his* point of view.


----------



## evenflow1969

Xelor said:


> evenflow1969 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Xelor said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Xelor said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> HereWeGoAgain said:
> 
> 
> 
> I was asked that question once and I answered with...I sometimes catch myself getting to detailed in my work and it slows my production.
> I was going to be making flight hardware for the shuttle program.
> 
> I got the job.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> HereWeGoAgain said:
> 
> 
> 
> I sometimes catch myself getting to detailed in my work and it slows my production.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That's essentially one of the pat answers one expects to receive upon asking that question.  If it or something like it is what I get in response, giving that sort of answer neither helps nor hinders the candidate's position with me.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> yiostheoy said:
> 
> 
> 
> You have to turn the question around and hit them back with it in a different form.
> 
> This is a part of rhetorical sophistry.
> 
> They are playing the game with you so you need to play it back on them.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Well, an interviewee may try that with me, but doing so is one of the ways to lessen the odds that I approve their receiving an offer.  When I'm the interviewer, I'm not the one being tested, as it were.  Candidates are well advised to keep that in mind at all times during their interview process.  I suspect in thinking that way about the situation that I'm not rare among principals, most especially not among very senior principals (people in the top three tiers of a firm's management).
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> See that is where you are wrong. If you are looking at the best candidates they likey have options. You had better belive they are trying to figure out who they are going to work for in that interview. Money is not realy a thing for me any more. My house and cars are paid for, I owe nobody any thing. I could go years with out a pay check. Although mon ey is no longer the biggest concern or even realy a concern, feeling productive is a big concern. I am self employed and do well at it. How ever I am getting to old to be the butcher, the baker and the candle stick maker. I would like to concentrate on one thing and do it well. I find a place that wants to offer real value to their customers and operates with integrity I would likely be there till I die and because I like to succeed above all else, I will do one hell of a job. I will not even entertain the idea of a job that does not offer value and integrity to it's customers. You are scaring away some good applicants with that attitude. If you want applicants that have no where else to go, keep that attitude. If you want applicants that are in demand you may want to sell what you have to offer. If you are high up in the firm you are not likely looking for the average Joe in your interviews. If these are positions of senior management I would think you are looking for exceptional people. These kind of people typically have options.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> evenflow1969 said:
> 
> 
> 
> See that is where you are wrong.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> TY, but I'm sure I know better than you what is the right way to handle anything and everything having to do with the interview process at my firm.  I don't know what makes you think you can be so presumptuous as to tell me that I'm wrong about such a thing.
> 
> 
> 
> evenflow1969 said:
> 
> 
> 
> If you are looking at the best candidates they likey have options.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> If that's the case, s/he'd do well to work elsewhere because pulling a stunt like that with me or my colleagues makes it clear to us that our firm is not a good fit for them; thus s/he not a good fit for us.
Click to expand...

Ya, you Know better! Great answer! Expected from some one who is of senior management. Obvously there is nothing left for you to learn or improve on. Here is what you forget. I did not just interview for you. I am not asking you for a job. I would not take it any way. I do not need to impress you. You put a thread on a political site where people argue all day. Did you think your senior management position prohibits some one from disagreeing with you? If I am not on your pay roll. You want to tell me how it goes you are going to need a better argument than " I think I know better". Do you want to poke a hole in my logic as explained. You can take the I am me so I know better and shove it up your  fucking ass. If you are so far superior argue the logic!


----------



## Admiral Rockwell Tory

I had a job interview yesterday, and I was happy that there were none of those stupid generic questions I get all of the time.  I consider those questions to be time wasting and laziness on the part of the interviewer.

My interview actually involved my experience and how that matched up with the duties needed to perform the job.  It was actually an enjoyable interview.


----------



## koshergrl

OldLady said:


> Xelor said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yesterday I had to do a phone interview of an experienced hire candidate who seeks to join our firm as a senior manager (one step below "entry level" partner).  The interview was going along well and I decided to as one of the easiest "tough" questions there are:  What's your greatest weakness?
> 
> Well, there's a first time for everything, I suppose.  Yesterday was the first time I've asked that question and received an answer that by itself determined my decision about whether to give my imprimatur for hiring the candidate.
> 
> The man answered by in effect saying that he's been told that he can be difficult to work with.  Upon hearing that, I abruptly ended the interview, asking if he had any questions of me.  He didn't and that was that.
> 
> I have no idea what led the candidate to think that giving the answer he did could possibly aid and abet his assertion that he'd be a good person for us to hire, but insofar as he gave it, he must have his reasons.  What I do know is that being hard to work with and lacking the judgment not to say that in an interview indicated the guy is too stupid and under seasoned for us to hire in any capacity.   I was so astounded that I emailed the people who did the preliminary "phone screen" and early stage interviews on the guy to inquire how his abject inanity and unfitness for our firm did not come through when they spoke with him.  I was and remain incredulous that the guy made it far enough through the interview process that he got to talk to me.
> 
> (Normally, I don't any longer do interviews, but the guy specifically expressed an interest in being part of my practice unit, and I have final say on all manager-and-above experienced hires who aim to it.  It was rather serendipitous that I had to be part of the interview team considering him because the unique nature of my unit's work militates for "growing" people more so than finding them from outside the firm.)
> 
> The guy could have said any number of things.  Hell, he could have gone with one of the standard pat answers to that question, and I'd have at least counted his answer as neither strong nor weak, but as neutral.
> 
> So with that as background, how did you answer the question I posed when you have been asked it?
> 
> 
> 
> Honesty isn't a big value in your book?  You asked, you got an answer.
> What ARE the standard pat answers?  I hate those damned interview questions, and I don't remember what I said.  I don't think I got asked all that horseshit stuff for this job.  We talked about education and experience, etc.
Click to expand...


No, honesty isn't a value to him.


----------



## Indeependent

koshergrl said:


> OldLady said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Xelor said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yesterday I had to do a phone interview of an experienced hire candidate who seeks to join our firm as a senior manager (one step below "entry level" partner).  The interview was going along well and I decided to as one of the easiest "tough" questions there are:  What's your greatest weakness?
> 
> Well, there's a first time for everything, I suppose.  Yesterday was the first time I've asked that question and received an answer that by itself determined my decision about whether to give my imprimatur for hiring the candidate.
> 
> The man answered by in effect saying that he's been told that he can be difficult to work with.  Upon hearing that, I abruptly ended the interview, asking if he had any questions of me.  He didn't and that was that.
> 
> I have no idea what led the candidate to think that giving the answer he did could possibly aid and abet his assertion that he'd be a good person for us to hire, but insofar as he gave it, he must have his reasons.  What I do know is that being hard to work with and lacking the judgment not to say that in an interview indicated the guy is too stupid and under seasoned for us to hire in any capacity.   I was so astounded that I emailed the people who did the preliminary "phone screen" and early stage interviews on the guy to inquire how his abject inanity and unfitness for our firm did not come through when they spoke with him.  I was and remain incredulous that the guy made it far enough through the interview process that he got to talk to me.
> 
> (Normally, I don't any longer do interviews, but the guy specifically expressed an interest in being part of my practice unit, and I have final say on all manager-and-above experienced hires who aim to it.  It was rather serendipitous that I had to be part of the interview team considering him because the unique nature of my unit's work militates for "growing" people more so than finding them from outside the firm.)
> 
> The guy could have said any number of things.  Hell, he could have gone with one of the standard pat answers to that question, and I'd have at least counted his answer as neither strong nor weak, but as neutral.
> 
> So with that as background, how did you answer the question I posed when you have been asked it?
> 
> 
> 
> Honesty isn't a big value in your book?  You asked, you got an answer.
> What ARE the standard pat answers?  I hate those damned interview questions, and I don't remember what I said.  I don't think I got asked all that horseshit stuff for this job.  We talked about education and experience, etc.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No, honesty isn't a value to him.
Click to expand...

Snotesty is a value to him.


----------



## koshergrl

Admiral Rockwell Tory said:


> I had a job interview yesterday, and I was happy that there were none of those stupid generic questions I get all of the time.  I consider those questions to be time wasting and laziness on the part of the interviewer.
> 
> My interview actually involved my experience and how that matched up with the duties needed to perform the job.  It was actually an enjoyable interview.



Decent people don't play games with interviewees, and then wax smug about it. We know that much.


----------



## koshergrl

Indeependent said:


> koshergrl said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> OldLady said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Xelor said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yesterday I had to do a phone interview of an experienced hire candidate who seeks to join our firm as a senior manager (one step below "entry level" partner).  The interview was going along well and I decided to as one of the easiest "tough" questions there are:  What's your greatest weakness?
> 
> Well, there's a first time for everything, I suppose.  Yesterday was the first time I've asked that question and received an answer that by itself determined my decision about whether to give my imprimatur for hiring the candidate.
> 
> The man answered by in effect saying that he's been told that he can be difficult to work with.  Upon hearing that, I abruptly ended the interview, asking if he had any questions of me.  He didn't and that was that.
> 
> I have no idea what led the candidate to think that giving the answer he did could possibly aid and abet his assertion that he'd be a good person for us to hire, but insofar as he gave it, he must have his reasons.  What I do know is that being hard to work with and lacking the judgment not to say that in an interview indicated the guy is too stupid and under seasoned for us to hire in any capacity.   I was so astounded that I emailed the people who did the preliminary "phone screen" and early stage interviews on the guy to inquire how his abject inanity and unfitness for our firm did not come through when they spoke with him.  I was and remain incredulous that the guy made it far enough through the interview process that he got to talk to me.
> 
> (Normally, I don't any longer do interviews, but the guy specifically expressed an interest in being part of my practice unit, and I have final say on all manager-and-above experienced hires who aim to it.  It was rather serendipitous that I had to be part of the interview team considering him because the unique nature of my unit's work militates for "growing" people more so than finding them from outside the firm.)
> 
> The guy could have said any number of things.  Hell, he could have gone with one of the standard pat answers to that question, and I'd have at least counted his answer as neither strong nor weak, but as neutral.
> 
> So with that as background, how did you answer the question I posed when you have been asked it?
> 
> 
> 
> Honesty isn't a big value in your book?  You asked, you got an answer.
> What ARE the standard pat answers?  I hate those damned interview questions, and I don't remember what I said.  I don't think I got asked all that horseshit stuff for this job.  We talked about education and experience, etc.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No, honesty isn't a value to him.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Snotesty is a value to him.
Click to expand...

Crooks don't want honest..or terribly intelligent... people working for them, generally speaking.


----------



## Indeependent

koshergrl said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> koshergrl said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> OldLady said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Xelor said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yesterday I had to do a phone interview of an experienced hire candidate who seeks to join our firm as a senior manager (one step below "entry level" partner).  The interview was going along well and I decided to as one of the easiest "tough" questions there are:  What's your greatest weakness?
> 
> Well, there's a first time for everything, I suppose.  Yesterday was the first time I've asked that question and received an answer that by itself determined my decision about whether to give my imprimatur for hiring the candidate.
> 
> The man answered by in effect saying that he's been told that he can be difficult to work with.  Upon hearing that, I abruptly ended the interview, asking if he had any questions of me.  He didn't and that was that.
> 
> I have no idea what led the candidate to think that giving the answer he did could possibly aid and abet his assertion that he'd be a good person for us to hire, but insofar as he gave it, he must have his reasons.  What I do know is that being hard to work with and lacking the judgment not to say that in an interview indicated the guy is too stupid and under seasoned for us to hire in any capacity.   I was so astounded that I emailed the people who did the preliminary "phone screen" and early stage interviews on the guy to inquire how his abject inanity and unfitness for our firm did not come through when they spoke with him.  I was and remain incredulous that the guy made it far enough through the interview process that he got to talk to me.
> 
> (Normally, I don't any longer do interviews, but the guy specifically expressed an interest in being part of my practice unit, and I have final say on all manager-and-above experienced hires who aim to it.  It was rather serendipitous that I had to be part of the interview team considering him because the unique nature of my unit's work militates for "growing" people more so than finding them from outside the firm.)
> 
> The guy could have said any number of things.  Hell, he could have gone with one of the standard pat answers to that question, and I'd have at least counted his answer as neither strong nor weak, but as neutral.
> 
> So with that as background, how did you answer the question I posed when you have been asked it?
> 
> 
> 
> Honesty isn't a big value in your book?  You asked, you got an answer.
> What ARE the standard pat answers?  I hate those damned interview questions, and I don't remember what I said.  I don't think I got asked all that horseshit stuff for this job.  We talked about education and experience, etc.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No, honesty isn't a value to him.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Snotesty is a value to him.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Crooks don't want honest..or terribly intelligent... people working for them, generally speaking.
Click to expand...

He has to maintain his lifestyle by suppressing the up and comers and he has long speeches to justify his bullshit.


----------



## koshergrl

Indeependent said:


> koshergrl said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> koshergrl said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> OldLady said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Xelor said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yesterday I had to do a phone interview of an experienced hire candidate who seeks to join our firm as a senior manager (one step below "entry level" partner).  The interview was going along well and I decided to as one of the easiest "tough" questions there are:  What's your greatest weakness?
> 
> Well, there's a first time for everything, I suppose.  Yesterday was the first time I've asked that question and received an answer that by itself determined my decision about whether to give my imprimatur for hiring the candidate.
> 
> The man answered by in effect saying that he's been told that he can be difficult to work with.  Upon hearing that, I abruptly ended the interview, asking if he had any questions of me.  He didn't and that was that.
> 
> I have no idea what led the candidate to think that giving the answer he did could possibly aid and abet his assertion that he'd be a good person for us to hire, but insofar as he gave it, he must have his reasons.  What I do know is that being hard to work with and lacking the judgment not to say that in an interview indicated the guy is too stupid and under seasoned for us to hire in any capacity.   I was so astounded that I emailed the people who did the preliminary "phone screen" and early stage interviews on the guy to inquire how his abject inanity and unfitness for our firm did not come through when they spoke with him.  I was and remain incredulous that the guy made it far enough through the interview process that he got to talk to me.
> 
> (Normally, I don't any longer do interviews, but the guy specifically expressed an interest in being part of my practice unit, and I have final say on all manager-and-above experienced hires who aim to it.  It was rather serendipitous that I had to be part of the interview team considering him because the unique nature of my unit's work militates for "growing" people more so than finding them from outside the firm.)
> 
> The guy could have said any number of things.  Hell, he could have gone with one of the standard pat answers to that question, and I'd have at least counted his answer as neither strong nor weak, but as neutral.
> 
> So with that as background, how did you answer the question I posed when you have been asked it?
> 
> 
> 
> Honesty isn't a big value in your book?  You asked, you got an answer.
> What ARE the standard pat answers?  I hate those damned interview questions, and I don't remember what I said.  I don't think I got asked all that horseshit stuff for this job.  We talked about education and experience, etc.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No, honesty isn't a value to him.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Snotesty is a value to him.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Crooks don't want honest..or terribly intelligent... people working for them, generally speaking.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> He has to maintain his lifestyle by suppressing the up and comers and he has long speeches to justify his bullshit.
Click to expand...

Like a white collar and slightly intelligent gaybiker.


----------



## Indeependent

koshergrl said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> koshergrl said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> koshergrl said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> OldLady said:
> 
> 
> 
> Honesty isn't a big value in your book?  You asked, you got an answer.
> What ARE the standard pat answers?  I hate those damned interview questions, and I don't remember what I said.  I don't think I got asked all that horseshit stuff for this job.  We talked about education and experience, etc.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No, honesty isn't a value to him.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Snotesty is a value to him.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Crooks don't want honest..or terribly intelligent... people working for them, generally speaking.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> He has to maintain his lifestyle by suppressing the up and comers and he has long speeches to justify his bullshit.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Like a white collar and slightly intelligent gaybiker.
Click to expand...

Now delete that image from my head.


----------



## OldLady

Maybe he's kinda buzzed from all the pool drinks with the umbrella in.
And he was probably annoyed as hell to have to interview ANYONE on his vacation for whatever reason.
That can set up a lot of bad vibes, and the poor guy so sure he had the job.....tough toenails.  Whoever that guy is, all I can say is, you probably didn't want to work for Xelor anyway.  He is quite the character.


----------



## usmbguest5318

FWIW, I've been asked that question only once in my career, and that was some thirty-plus years ago.  My answer went roughly as follows:

I'm somewhat vexed about how to answer that question.  I'm certainly not going to sit here and give you a reason not to give me an offer by telling you something odious about myself or divulging my deepest and darkest personal struggle, yet I don't care to lie to you either by saying I have no weaknesses for every human does have some.

I believe I've my interactions with you and your colleagues have not uncovered any material weaknesses in my character or qualifications for the consulting position I seek or for my long term prospects for developing and demonstrating the skills and temperament it'll take to eventually become a partner in the firm.  Thus what I'll say in response to that question is that I am aware of my strengths and weaknesses and on balance, I think I've shown that my strengths will make me a very strong member of your firm's team.    I can say too that I'm aware of my weaknesses and that I avail myself of every opportunity to attenuate them and that I am very careful not to let them compromise my work or my relationships.​Now I don't know if that answer got me the offer, but at the new hire training I attended after accepting the firm's offer, I bumped into the partner to whom I gave that answer and he remarked that it was far and away the best solution he'd ever heard for the dilemma posed by the "what is your greatest weakness" question.  He said that as far as he was concerned, it sealed the deal for him.

What I took away from that experience is that in my professional career as it had been in my academic career before, saying things that sharing my carefully considered thoughts and sharing those that aren't the pablum folks may often hear from others put into whatever the hell I may say was going to be one of the keys to my success.  Quite frankly, when I formed my answer to the question, what was in my mind was my parent's admonishment to say nothing when I had nothing nice to say.  I figured that axiom might as well apply to myself when asked to divulge a negative quality about myself.  After all,  if I can't be nice, or at least fair and neutral, to myself, then to whom will I be?


----------



## Indeependent

Xelor said:


> FWIW, I've been asked that question only once in my career, and that was some thirty-plus years ago.  My answer went roughly as follows:
> 
> I'm somewhat vexed about how to answer that question.  I'm certainly not going to sit here and give you a reason not to give me an offer by telling you something odious about myself or divulging my deepest and darkest personal struggle, yet I don't care to lie to you either by saying I have no weaknesses for every human does have some.
> 
> I believe I've my interactions with you and your colleagues have not uncovered any material weaknesses in my character or qualifications for the consulting position I seek or for my long term prospects for developing and demonstrating the skills and temperament it'll take to eventually become a partner in the firm.  Thus what I'll say in response to that question is that I am aware of my strengths and weaknesses and on balance, I think I've shown that my strengths will make me a very strong member of your firm's team.    I can say too that I'm aware of my weaknesses and that I avail myself of every opportunity to attenuate them and that I am very careful not to let them compromise my work or my relationships.​Now I don't know if that answer got me the offer, but at the new hire training I attended after accepting the firm's offer, I bumped into the partner to whom I gave that answer and he remarked that it was far and away the best solution he'd ever heard for the dilemma posed by the "what is your greatest weakness" question.  He said that as far as he was concerned, it sealed the deal for him.
> 
> What I took away from that experience is that in my professional career as it had been in my academic career before, saying things that sharing my carefully considered thoughts and sharing those that aren't the pablum folks may often hear from others put into whatever the hell I may say was going to be one of the keys to my success.  Quite frankly, when I formed my answer to the question, what was in my mind was my parent's admonishment to say nothing when I had nothing nice to say.  I figured that axiom might as well apply to myself when asked to divulge a negative quality about myself.  After all,  if I can't be nice, or at least fair and neutral, to myself, then to whom will I be?


Is your Native American name Long Winded?


----------



## usmbguest5318

OldLady said:


> Maybe he's kinda buzzed from all the pool drinks with the umbrella in.
> And he was probably annoyed as hell to have to interview ANYONE on his vacation for whatever reason.
> That can set up a lot of bad vibes, and the poor guy so sure he had the job.....tough toenails.  Whoever that guy is, all I can say is, you probably didn't want to work for Xelor anyway.  He is quite the character.





OldLady said:


> That can set up a lot of bad vibes, and the poor guy so sure he had the job.....



See this post:  How do you respond to the interview question, "What is your greatest weakness?".

I wasn't at all angry about having to interview the guy.  An hour or so is hardly a lot of time out of a day filled with doing as much of nothing as I can muster.


----------



## evenflow1969

Xelor said:


> FWIW, I've been asked that question only once in my career, and that was some thirty-plus years ago.  My answer went roughly as follows:
> 
> I'm somewhat vexed about how to answer that question.  I'm certainly not going to sit here and give you a reason not to give me an offer by telling you something odious about myself or divulging my deepest and darkest personal struggle, yet I don't care to lie to you either by saying I have no weaknesses for every human does have some.
> 
> I believe I've my interactions with you and your colleagues have not uncovered any material weaknesses in my character or qualifications for the consulting position I seek or for my long term prospects for developing and demonstrating the skills and temperament it'll take to eventually become a partner in the firm.  Thus what I'll say in response to that question is that I am aware of my strengths and weaknesses and on balance, I think I've shown that my strengths will make me a very strong member of your firm's team.    I can say too that I'm aware of my weaknesses and that I avail myself of every opportunity to attenuate them and that I am very careful not to let them compromise my work or my relationships.​Now I don't know if that answer got me the offer, but at the new hire training I attended after accepting the firm's offer, I bumped into the partner to whom I gave that answer and he remarked that it was far and away the best solution he'd ever heard for the dilemma posed by the "what is your greatest weakness" question.  He said that as far as he was concerned, it sealed the deal for him.
> 
> What I took away from that experience is that in my professional career as it had been in my academic career before, saying things that sharing my carefully considered thoughts and sharing those that aren't the pablum folks may often hear from others put into whatever the hell I may say was going to be one of the keys to my success.  Quite frankly, when I formed my answer to the question, what was in my mind was my parent's admonishment to say nothing when I had nothing nice to say.  I figured that axiom might as well apply to myself when asked to divulge a negative quality about myself.  After all,  if I can't be nice, or at least fair and neutral, to myself, then to whom will I be?


Sounds like you are only interested in being fair to your self. You admitted in your own words that no fair interviewer asks this question. Yet you ask it any way. Do you realy think that some one with real talent wants to work for some one who is not fair and feels zero guilt about it. As far as your giving us the answer to the test ! No body here seems to give a fuck! No one with a brain or options is going to work for you. So as you look at your employes over the next few days, you must ask yourself which ones did you ask that question to, and why are they stupid enough to work for you?


----------



## OldLady

Indeependent said:


> Xelor said:
> 
> 
> 
> FWIW, I've been asked that question only once in my career, and that was some thirty-plus years ago.  My answer went roughly as follows:
> 
> I'm somewhat vexed about how to answer that question.  I'm certainly not going to sit here and give you a reason not to give me an offer by telling you something odious about myself or divulging my deepest and darkest personal struggle, yet I don't care to lie to you either by saying I have no weaknesses for every human does have some.
> 
> I believe I've my interactions with you and your colleagues have not uncovered any material weaknesses in my character or qualifications for the consulting position I seek or for my long term prospects for developing and demonstrating the skills and temperament it'll take to eventually become a partner in the firm.  Thus what I'll say in response to that question is that I am aware of my strengths and weaknesses and on balance, I think I've shown that my strengths will make me a very strong member of your firm's team.    I can say too that I'm aware of my weaknesses and that I avail myself of every opportunity to attenuate them and that I am very careful not to let them compromise my work or my relationships.​Now I don't know if that answer got me the offer, but at the new hire training I attended after accepting the firm's offer, I bumped into the partner to whom I gave that answer and he remarked that it was far and away the best solution he'd ever heard for the dilemma posed by the "what is your greatest weakness" question.  He said that as far as he was concerned, it sealed the deal for him.
> 
> What I took away from that experience is that in my professional career as it had been in my academic career before, saying things that sharing my carefully considered thoughts and sharing those that aren't the pablum folks may often hear from others put into whatever the hell I may say was going to be one of the keys to my success.  Quite frankly, when I formed my answer to the question, what was in my mind was my parent's admonishment to say nothing when I had nothing nice to say.  I figured that axiom might as well apply to myself when asked to divulge a negative quality about myself.  After all,  if I can't be nice, or at least fair and neutral, to myself, then to whom will I be?
> 
> 
> 
> Is your Native American name Long Winded?
Click to expand...

Perhaps a bit of a weakness?  Picture his memos.


----------



## toobfreak

Xelor said:


> Yesterday I had to do a phone interview of an experienced hire candidate who seeks to join our firm as a senior manager (one step below "entry level" partner).  The interview was going along well and I decided to as one of the easiest "tough" questions there are:  What's your greatest weakness?



*For one thing, asking someone what their greatest weakness is, is a totally worthless and pointless question.  I am embarrassed for your using it.  It stems from the squeeshy-feeling feminine belief that people actually sit around and ASK themselves such inane questions!  Further, it presupposes that a person has the self-awareness to honestly ask AND answer such a question to oneself both meaningfully and accurately.  Psychologically, if a person really has the self-judgement to fairly ASK such a question, they probably have the capacity as well to have ADDRESSED and ACTED ON the issue long before they met you.  A lot of people have no "greatest weakness" (which implies a RANGE of weaknesses!).  A really sound person has no significant weaknesses at all, which leaves many good people in a real jam to try to think one up when asked.  For an "interviewer" to ask such an idiotic pointless question out of a need to fill interview time and appear "thorough" and think it will actually yield any meaningful data which they can interpret properly, points to the problem people have in interview situations these days where totally unqualified pinholes such as yourself with absolutely no sense of how to really judge and evaluate people has to resort to some grade school level bullshit that probably came out of a book somewhere on "interview techniques."*



> Well, there's a first time for everything, I suppose.  Yesterday was the first time I've asked that question and received an answer that by itself determined my decision about whether to give my imprimatur for hiring the candidate.
> 
> The man answered by in effect saying that he's been told that he can be difficult to work with.  Upon hearing that, I abruptly ended the interview, asking if he had any questions of me.  He didn't and that was that.



*I wouldn't have had any further questions either.   The fact that you ended the interview abruptly based solely on THAT probably showed him your company wasn't worth pursuing.  While expecting the candidate to be totally prepared for anything, you showed him you were completely unprepared for many answers.  That you took his reply as a deal-breaking negative is astounding.  There are a million reasons why a person might say that (whether even true about the person or not) and be a good OR bad thing.  Maybe one person who in the past was a slacker told him he was hard to work with because he was highly driven and perfectionistic demanding exceptional standards of himself!  Maybe he just said that because lacking any real weaknesses he could really see and admit to for you, he just said it because he thought it sounded self-effacing, very honest, self-perceptive and what he thought you wanted to hear.  Maybe that answer came out of the same book the question came from on "How to prepare for an interview."  No wonder jackals such as yourself spend so much time looking to fill positions and interviewing people-- --  so few people in HR really have any real skill in doing it effectively.  It is just thrust upon them.  
*


> I have no idea what led the candidate to think that giving the answer he did could possibly aid and abet his assertion that he'd be a good person for us to hire,



*And after ALL the trouble the guy had gone to jumping through loops to get that far in your circuitous maze probably for weeks, you didn't even bother to ask.*



> but insofar as he gave it, he must have his reasons.  What I do know is that being hard to work with and lacking the judgment not to say that in an interview indicated the guy is too stupid and under seasoned for us to hire in any capacity.



*So in other words, you as an interviewer are so shallow, that you are much less concerned with why the guy gave such a seemingly honest answer than you are that he didn't probably lie and give you a "good" approved, cookie-cutter answer;  one carefully planned, picked and thought out in advance to be "just right" for the interview to tell you what you want to hear.*



> I was so astounded that I emailed the people who did the preliminary "phone screen" and early stage interviews on the guy to inquire how his abject inanity and unfitness for our firm did not come through when they spoke with him.  I was and remain incredulous that the guy made it far enough through the interview process that he got to talk to me.



*Abject inanity and unfitness.  Sounds like your company is the Stepford Wives.  Who do you work for, Google? Going for the "perfect fit," eh?  Did it ever occur to you that all those other people saw something good in the guy and the problem was you?  In an age where Diversity is supposed to the the alter of truth in everything, one thing you can say today about the modern corporation is that they want NO diversity of thinking and ideas!  Only cookie-cutter fit ins.  Just diversity in the simple, easy things like skin color that gets the Fed off their back.  For all you really know, that man might have been the best thing that ever walked through your front door.*



> (Normally, I don't any longer do interviews, but the guy specifically expressed an interest in being part of my practice unit, and I have final say on all manager-and-above experienced hires who aim to it.  It was rather serendipitous that I had to be part of the interview team considering him because the unique nature of my unit's work militates for "growing" people more so than finding them from outside the firm.)



*And you should stay far, far away from interviewing anyone ever again.  I'd love to hear what YOUR greatest weakness is?  If you worked for me, not only would I not trust you to "grow" anyone into the well-groomed automaton position of brain-washed group-think you obviously have in mind for whomever you hire to assure they "fit in" properly, but I would probably demote or fire you for releasing a candidate on such thin, specious grounds with absolutely no idea what his answers even meant.  If you fuck up such easy things, what more important things must you get wrong every day?  I can get an 8th grader at minimum wage to do the "Pavlov's Dog" level of brain-dead interviewing you apparently conduct and I'm sure it would save the company a great deal of money with no worse results.*



> The guy could have said any number of things.  Hell, he could have gone with one of the standard pat answers to that question, and I'd have at least counted his answer as neither strong nor weak, but as neutral.  So with that as background, how did you answer the question I posed when you have been asked it?



*Case closed.  Is it any wonder this country is in sorry shape?  You are a fucking idiot drone and the real question is how stupid must a corporation be these days to allow a pinhead as yourself to aspire to the level of being in the position of judging others?  That must be your greatest weakness-----   the illusion that you know what you are doing.  Obviously all you need to get into your company is to do the very worst things-- -- -- give planned, rehearsed, cookie-cutter answers that actually reflect NOTHING of the real person being considered for the hire other than his willingness to CONFORM TO GROUP THINK.  The problem with group think is that if it is even a little bit wrong, then, THE ENTIRE GROUP IS WRONG.  Of course, being the fact that your company placed you in such authority, obviously I don't expect one watt of this to ever get through and make any sense to you-- -- --  you have been properly "grown" to fit your role as head imbecile.*


----------



## rightwinger

Xelor said:


> Yesterday I had to do a phone interview of an experienced hire candidate who seeks to join our firm as a senior manager (one step below "entry level" partner).  The interview was going along well and I decided to as one of the easiest "tough" questions there are:  What's your greatest weakness?
> 
> Well, there's a first time for everything, I suppose.  Yesterday was the first time I've asked that question and received an answer that by itself determined my decision about whether to give my imprimatur for hiring the candidate.
> 
> The man answered by in effect saying that he's been told that he can be difficult to work with.  Upon hearing that, I abruptly ended the interview, asking if he had any questions of me.  He didn't and that was that.
> 
> I have no idea what led the candidate to think that giving the answer he did could possibly aid and abet his assertion that he'd be a good person for us to hire, but insofar as he gave it, he must have his reasons.  What I do know is that being hard to work with and lacking the judgment not to say that in an interview indicated the guy is too stupid and under seasoned for us to hire in any capacity.   I was so astounded that I emailed the people who did the preliminary "phone screen" and early stage interviews on the guy to inquire how his abject inanity and unfitness for our firm did not come through when they spoke with him.  I was and remain incredulous that the guy made it far enough through the interview process that he got to talk to me.
> 
> (Normally, I don't any longer do interviews, but the guy specifically expressed an interest in being part of my practice unit, and I have final say on all manager-and-above experienced hires who aim to it.  It was rather serendipitous that I had to be part of the interview team considering him because the unique nature of my unit's work militates for "growing" people more so than finding them from outside the firm.)
> 
> The guy could have said any number of things.  Hell, he could have gone with one of the standard pat answers to that question, and I'd have at least counted his answer as neither strong nor weak, but as neutral.
> 
> So with that as background, how did you answer the question I posed when you have been asked it?



So the guy should have lied

That is a stupid question anyway.................Ummmm......Kryptonite?


----------



## usmbguest5318

evenflow1969 said:


> Xelor said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> evenflow1969 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Xelor said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Xelor said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> HereWeGoAgain said:
> 
> 
> 
> I was asked that question once and I answered with...I sometimes catch myself getting to detailed in my work and it slows my production.
> I was going to be making flight hardware for the shuttle program.
> 
> I got the job.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> HereWeGoAgain said:
> 
> 
> 
> I sometimes catch myself getting to detailed in my work and it slows my production.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That's essentially one of the pat answers one expects to receive upon asking that question.  If it or something like it is what I get in response, giving that sort of answer neither helps nor hinders the candidate's position with me.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> yiostheoy said:
> 
> 
> 
> You have to turn the question around and hit them back with it in a different form.
> 
> This is a part of rhetorical sophistry.
> 
> They are playing the game with you so you need to play it back on them.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Well, an interviewee may try that with me, but doing so is one of the ways to lessen the odds that I approve their receiving an offer.  When I'm the interviewer, I'm not the one being tested, as it were.  Candidates are well advised to keep that in mind at all times during their interview process.  I suspect in thinking that way about the situation that I'm not rare among principals, most especially not among very senior principals (people in the top three tiers of a firm's management).
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> See that is where you are wrong. If you are looking at the best candidates they likey have options. You had better belive they are trying to figure out who they are going to work for in that interview. Money is not realy a thing for me any more. My house and cars are paid for, I owe nobody any thing. I could go years with out a pay check. Although mon ey is no longer the biggest concern or even realy a concern, feeling productive is a big concern. I am self employed and do well at it. How ever I am getting to old to be the butcher, the baker and the candle stick maker. I would like to concentrate on one thing and do it well. I find a place that wants to offer real value to their customers and operates with integrity I would likely be there till I die and because I like to succeed above all else, I will do one hell of a job. I will not even entertain the idea of a job that does not offer value and integrity to it's customers. You are scaring away some good applicants with that attitude. If you want applicants that have no where else to go, keep that attitude. If you want applicants that are in demand you may want to sell what you have to offer. If you are high up in the firm you are not likely looking for the average Joe in your interviews. If these are positions of senior management I would think you are looking for exceptional people. These kind of people typically have options.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> evenflow1969 said:
> 
> 
> 
> See that is where you are wrong.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> TY, but I'm sure I know better than you what is the right way to handle anything and everything having to do with the interview process at my firm.  I don't know what makes you think you can be so presumptuous as to tell me that I'm wrong about such a thing.
> 
> 
> 
> evenflow1969 said:
> 
> 
> 
> If you are looking at the best candidates they likey have options.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> If that's the case, s/he'd do well to work elsewhere because pulling a stunt like that with me or my colleagues makes it clear to us that our firm is not a good fit for them; thus s/he not a good fit for us.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Ya, you Know better! Great answer! Expected from some one who is of senior management. Obvously there is nothing left for you to learn or improve on. Here is what you forget. I did not just interview for you. I am not asking you for a job. I would not take it any way. I do not need to impress you. You put a thread on a political site where people argue all day. Did you think your senior management position prohibits some one from disagreeing with you? If I am not on your pay roll. You want to tell me how it goes you are going to need a better argument than " I think I know better". Do you want to poke a hole in my logic as explained. You can take the I am me so I know better and shove it up your  fucking ass. If you are so far superior argue the logic!
Click to expand...




evenflow1969 said:


> Did you think your senior management position prohibits some one from disagreeing with you?



No.  I think that one's not knowing in what firm I'm a managing partner is sufficient for one to eschew the presumptuousness of telling me I'm wrong about my firm's approach to and philosophy about hiring and interviewing.


----------



## evenflow1969

toobfreak said:


> Xelor said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yesterday I had to do a phone interview of an experienced hire candidate who seeks to join our firm as a senior manager (one step below "entry level" partner).  The interview was going along well and I decided to as one of the easiest "tough" questions there are:  What's your greatest weakness?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *For one thing, asking someone what their greatest weakness is, is a totally worthless and pointless question.  I am embarrassed for your using it.  It stems from the squeeshy-feeling feminine belief that people actually sit around and ASK themselves such inane questions!  Further, it presupposes that a person has the self-awareness to honestly ask AND answer such a question to oneself both meaningfully and accurately.  Psychologically, if a person really has the self-judgement to fairly ASK such a question, they probably have the capacity as well to have ADDRESSED and ACTED ON the issue long before they met you.  A lot of people have no "greatest weakness" (which implies a RANGE of weaknesses!).  A really sound person has no significant weaknesses at all, which leaves many good people in a real jam to try to think one up when asked.  For an "interviewer" to ask such an idiotic pointless question out of a need to fill interview time and appear "thorough" and think it will actually yield any meaningful data which they can interpret properly, points to the problem people have in interview situations these days where totally unqualified pinholes such as yourself with absolutely no sense of how to really judge and evaluate people has to resort to some grade school level bullshit that probably came out of a book somewhere on "interview techniques."*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well, there's a first time for everything, I suppose.  Yesterday was the first time I've asked that question and received an answer that by itself determined my decision about whether to give my imprimatur for hiring the candidate.
> 
> The man answered by in effect saying that he's been told that he can be difficult to work with.  Upon hearing that, I abruptly ended the interview, asking if he had any questions of me.  He didn't and that was that.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *I wouldn't have had any further questions either.   The fact that you ended the interview abruptly based solely on THAT probably showed him your company wasn't worth pursuing.  While expecting the candidate to be totally prepared for anything, you showed him you were completely unprepared for many answers.  That you took his reply as a deal-breaking negative is astounding.  There are a million reasons why a person might say that (whether even true about the person or not) and be a good OR bad thing.  Maybe one person who in the past was a slacker told him he was hard to work with because he was highly driven and perfectionistic demanding exceptional standards of himself!  Maybe he just said that because lacking any real weaknesses he could really see and admit to for you, he just said it because he thought it sounded self-reflecting, very honest, self-perceptive and what he thought you wanted to hear.  Maybe that answer came out of the same book the question came from on "How to prepare for an interview."  No wonder jackals such as yourself spend so much time looking to fill positions and interviewing people-- --  so few people in HR really have any real skill in doing it effectively.  It is just thrust upon them.
> *
> 
> 
> 
> I have no idea what led the candidate to think that giving the answer he did could possibly aid and abet his assertion that he'd be a good person for us to hire,
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *And after ALL the trouble the guy had gone to jumping through loops to get that far in your circuitous maze probably for weeks, you didn't even bother to ask.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> but insofar as he gave it, he must have his reasons.  What I do know is that being hard to work with and lacking the judgment not to say that in an interview indicated the guy is too stupid and under seasoned for us to hire in any capacity.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *So in other words, you as an interviewer are so shallow, that you are much less concerned with why the guy gave such a seemingly honest answer than you are that he didn't probably lie and give you a "good" approved, cookie-cutter answer;  one carefully planned, picked and thought out in advance to be "just right" for the interview to tell you what you want to hear.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I was so astounded that I emailed the people who did the preliminary "phone screen" and early stage interviews on the guy to inquire how his abject inanity and unfitness for our firm did not come through when they spoke with him.  I was and remain incredulous that the guy made it far enough through the interview process that he got to talk to me.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *Abject inanity and unfitness.  Sounds like your company is the Stepford Wives.  Who do you work for, Google? Going for the "perfect fit," eh?  Did it ever occur to you that all those other people saw something good in the guy and the problem was you?  In an age where Diversity is supposed to the the alter of truth in everything, one thing you can say today about the modern corporation is that they want NO diversity of thinking and ideas!  Only cookie-cutter fit ins.  Just diversity in the simple, easy things like skin color that gets the Fed off their back.  For all you really know, that man might have been the best thing that ever walked through your front door.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (Normally, I don't any longer do interviews, but the guy specifically expressed an interest in being part of my practice unit, and I have final say on all manager-and-above experienced hires who aim to it.  It was rather serendipitous that I had to be part of the interview team considering him because the unique nature of my unit's work militates for "growing" people more so than finding them from outside the firm.)
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *And you should stay far, far away from interviewing anyone ever again.  I'd love to hear what YOUR greatest weakness is?  If you worked for me, not only would I not trust you to "grow" anyone into the well-groomed automaton position of brain-washed group-think you obviously have in mind for whomever you hire to assure they "fit in" properly, but I would probably demote or fire you for releasing a candidate on such thin, specious grounds with absolutely no idea what his answers even meant.  I can get an 8th grader at minimum wage to do the "Pavlov's Dog" level of brain-dead interviewing you apparently conduct.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The guy could have said any number of things.  Hell, he could have gone with one of the standard pat answers to that question, and I'd have at least counted his answer as neither strong nor weak, but as neutral.  So with that as background, how did you answer the question I posed when you have been asked it?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *Case closed.  Is it any wonder this country is in sorry shape?  You are a fucking idiot drone and the real question is how stupid must a corporation be these days to allow a pinhead as yourself to aspire to the level of being in the position of judging others?  That must be your greatest weakness-----   the illusion that you know what you are doing.  Obviously all you need to get into your company is to do the very worst things-- -- -- give planned, rehearsed, cookie-cutter answers that actually reflect NOTHING of the real person being considered for the hire other than his willingness to CONFORM TO GROUP THINK.  The problem with group think is that if it is even a little bit wrong, then, THE ENTIRE GROUP IS WRONG.  Of course, being the fact that your company placed you in such authority, obviously I don't expect one watt of this to ever get through and make any sense to you-- -- --  you have been properly "grown" to fit your role as head imbecile.*
Click to expand...

Fuck you tube, I hate you soooooo much. Just when I am ready to ignore you, you go and show intellegence and a well thought agrument. Now I have to pay attention again! Fuck,Fuck,Fuck


----------



## evenflow1969

Xelor said:


> evenflow1969 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Xelor said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> evenflow1969 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Xelor said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Xelor said:
> 
> 
> 
> That's essentially one of the pat answers one expects to receive upon asking that question.  If it or something like it is what I get in response, giving that sort of answer neither helps nor hinders the candidate's position with me.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> yiostheoy said:
> 
> 
> 
> You have to turn the question around and hit them back with it in a different form.
> 
> This is a part of rhetorical sophistry.
> 
> They are playing the game with you so you need to play it back on them.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Well, an interviewee may try that with me, but doing so is one of the ways to lessen the odds that I approve their receiving an offer.  When I'm the interviewer, I'm not the one being tested, as it were.  Candidates are well advised to keep that in mind at all times during their interview process.  I suspect in thinking that way about the situation that I'm not rare among principals, most especially not among very senior principals (people in the top three tiers of a firm's management).
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> See that is where you are wrong. If you are looking at the best candidates they likey have options. You had better belive they are trying to figure out who they are going to work for in that interview. Money is not realy a thing for me any more. My house and cars are paid for, I owe nobody any thing. I could go years with out a pay check. Although mon ey is no longer the biggest concern or even realy a concern, feeling productive is a big concern. I am self employed and do well at it. How ever I am getting to old to be the butcher, the baker and the candle stick maker. I would like to concentrate on one thing and do it well. I find a place that wants to offer real value to their customers and operates with integrity I would likely be there till I die and because I like to succeed above all else, I will do one hell of a job. I will not even entertain the idea of a job that does not offer value and integrity to it's customers. You are scaring away some good applicants with that attitude. If you want applicants that have no where else to go, keep that attitude. If you want applicants that are in demand you may want to sell what you have to offer. If you are high up in the firm you are not likely looking for the average Joe in your interviews. If these are positions of senior management I would think you are looking for exceptional people. These kind of people typically have options.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> evenflow1969 said:
> 
> 
> 
> See that is where you are wrong.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> TY, but I'm sure I know better than you what is the right way to handle anything and everything having to do with the interview process at my firm.  I don't know what makes you think you can be so presumptuous as to tell me that I'm wrong about such a thing.
> 
> 
> 
> evenflow1969 said:
> 
> 
> 
> If you are looking at the best candidates they likey have options.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> If that's the case, s/he'd do well to work elsewhere because pulling a stunt like that with me or my colleagues makes it clear to us that our firm is not a good fit for them; thus s/he not a good fit for us.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Ya, you Know better! Great answer! Expected from some one who is of senior management. Obvously there is nothing left for you to learn or improve on. Here is what you forget. I did not just interview for you. I am not asking you for a job. I would not take it any way. I do not need to impress you. You put a thread on a political site where people argue all day. Did you think your senior management position prohibits some one from disagreeing with you? If I am not on your pay roll. You want to tell me how it goes you are going to need a better argument than " I think I know better". Do you want to poke a hole in my logic as explained. You can take the I am me so I know better and shove it up your  fucking ass. If you are so far superior argue the logic!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> evenflow1969 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Did you think your senior management position prohibits some one from disagreeing with you?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No.  I think that one's not knowing in what firm I'm a managing partner is sufficient for one to eschew the presumptuousness of telling me I'm wrong about my firm's approach to and philosophy about hiring and interviewing.
Click to expand...

Every one thinks that their situation is totaly different  from every other. I do not care what feild you are in people with talent have options, other people in that feild are going to want to work with them. People with options are judging you in the interview as much as you are judging them. If you can not understand this I do not know what to say.


----------



## usmbguest5318

toobfreak said:


> Xelor said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yesterday I had to do a phone interview of an experienced hire candidate who seeks to join our firm as a senior manager (one step below "entry level" partner).  The interview was going along well and I decided to as one of the easiest "tough" questions there are:  What's your greatest weakness?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *For one thing, asking someone what their greatest weakness is, is a totally worthless and pointless question.  I am embarrassed for your using it.  It stems from the squeeshy-feeling feminine belief that people actually sit around and ASK themselves such inane questions!  Further, it presupposes that a person has the self-awareness to honestly ask AND answer such a question to oneself both meaningfully and accurately.  Psychologically, if a person really has the self-judgement to fairly ASK such a question, they probably have the capacity as well to have ADDRESSED and ACTED ON the issue long before they met you.  A lot of people have no "greatest weakness" (which implies a RANGE of weaknesses!).  A really sound person has no significant weaknesses at all, which leaves many good people in a real jam to try to think one up when asked.  For an "interviewer" to ask such an idiotic pointless question out of a need to fill interview time and appear "thorough" and think it will actually yield any meaningful data which they can interpret properly, points to the problem people have in interview situations these days where totally unqualified pinholes such as yourself with absolutely no sense of how to really judge and evaluate people has to resort to some grade school level bullshit that probably came out of a book somewhere on "interview techniques."*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well, there's a first time for everything, I suppose.  Yesterday was the first time I've asked that question and received an answer that by itself determined my decision about whether to give my imprimatur for hiring the candidate.
> 
> The man answered by in effect saying that he's been told that he can be difficult to work with.  Upon hearing that, I abruptly ended the interview, asking if he had any questions of me.  He didn't and that was that.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *I wouldn't have had any further questions either.   The fact that you ended the interview abruptly based solely on THAT probably showed him your company wasn't worth pursuing.  While expecting the candidate to be totally prepared for anything, you showed him you were completely unprepared for many answers.  That you took his reply as a deal-breaking negative is astounding.  There are a million reasons why a person might say that (whether even true about the person or not) and be a good OR bad thing.  Maybe one person who in the past was a slacker told him he was hard to work with because he was highly driven and perfectionistic demanding exceptional standards of himself!  Maybe he just said that because lacking any real weaknesses he could really see and admit to for you, he just said it because he thought it sounded self-effacing, very honest, self-perceptive and what he thought you wanted to hear.  Maybe that answer came out of the same book the question came from on "How to prepare for an interview."  No wonder jackals such as yourself spend so much time looking to fill positions and interviewing people-- --  so few people in HR really have any real skill in doing it effectively.  It is just thrust upon them.
> *
> 
> 
> 
> I have no idea what led the candidate to think that giving the answer he did could possibly aid and abet his assertion that he'd be a good person for us to hire,
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *And after ALL the trouble the guy had gone to jumping through loops to get that far in your circuitous maze probably for weeks, you didn't even bother to ask.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> but insofar as he gave it, he must have his reasons.  What I do know is that being hard to work with and lacking the judgment not to say that in an interview indicated the guy is too stupid and under seasoned for us to hire in any capacity.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *So in other words, you as an interviewer are so shallow, that you are much less concerned with why the guy gave such a seemingly honest answer than you are that he didn't probably lie and give you a "good" approved, cookie-cutter answer;  one carefully planned, picked and thought out in advance to be "just right" for the interview to tell you what you want to hear.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I was so astounded that I emailed the people who did the preliminary "phone screen" and early stage interviews on the guy to inquire how his abject inanity and unfitness for our firm did not come through when they spoke with him.  I was and remain incredulous that the guy made it far enough through the interview process that he got to talk to me.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *Abject inanity and unfitness.  Sounds like your company is the Stepford Wives.  Who do you work for, Google? Going for the "perfect fit," eh?  Did it ever occur to you that all those other people saw something good in the guy and the problem was you?  In an age where Diversity is supposed to the the alter of truth in everything, one thing you can say today about the modern corporation is that they want NO diversity of thinking and ideas!  Only cookie-cutter fit ins.  Just diversity in the simple, easy things like skin color that gets the Fed off their back.  For all you really know, that man might have been the best thing that ever walked through your front door.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (Normally, I don't any longer do interviews, but the guy specifically expressed an interest in being part of my practice unit, and I have final say on all manager-and-above experienced hires who aim to it.  It was rather serendipitous that I had to be part of the interview team considering him because the unique nature of my unit's work militates for "growing" people more so than finding them from outside the firm.)
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *And you should stay far, far away from interviewing anyone ever again.  I'd love to hear what YOUR greatest weakness is?  If you worked for me, not only would I not trust you to "grow" anyone into the well-groomed automaton position of brain-washed group-think you obviously have in mind for whomever you hire to assure they "fit in" properly, but I would probably demote or fire you for releasing a candidate on such thin, specious grounds with absolutely no idea what his answers even meant.  If you fuck up such easy things, what more important things must you get wrong every day?  I can get an 8th grader at minimum wage to do the "Pavlov's Dog" level of brain-dead interviewing you apparently conduct and I'm sure it would save the company a great deal of money with no worse results.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The guy could have said any number of things.  Hell, he could have gone with one of the standard pat answers to that question, and I'd have at least counted his answer as neither strong nor weak, but as neutral.  So with that as background, how did you answer the question I posed when you have been asked it?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *Case closed.  Is it any wonder this country is in sorry shape?  You are a fucking idiot drone and the real question is how stupid must a corporation be these days to allow a pinhead as yourself to aspire to the level of being in the position of judging others?  That must be your greatest weakness-----   the illusion that you know what you are doing.  Obviously all you need to get into your company is to do the very worst things-- -- -- give planned, rehearsed, cookie-cutter answers that actually reflect NOTHING of the real person being considered for the hire other than his willingness to CONFORM TO GROUP THINK.  The problem with group think is that if it is even a little bit wrong, then, THE ENTIRE GROUP IS WRONG.  Of course, being the fact that your company placed you in such authority, obviously I don't expect one watt of this to ever get through and make any sense to you-- -- --  you have been properly "grown" to fit your role as head imbecile.*
Click to expand...




toobfreak said:


> That you took his reply as a deal-breaking negative is astounding. There are a million reasons why a person might say that (whether even true about the person or not) and be a good OR bad thing. *Maybe *one person who in the past was a slacker told him he was hard to work with because he was highly driven and perfectionistic demanding exceptional standards of himself! *Maybe *he just said that because lacking any real weaknesses he could really see and admit to for you, he just said it because he thought it sounded self-effacing, very honest, self-perceptive and what he thought you wanted to hear. *Maybe *that answer came out of the same book the question came from on "How to prepare for an interview."



You seem keen to ignore the fact that between you and I, only one of us was part to the conversation with the guy and that one wasn't you.  You've also managed to overlook the certitude of my having more awareness of the nature and content of the answer the guy gave than what I chose for brevity's sake to share in the OP.  

Be that as it may, I'm not of a mind to defend my decision to you or anyone else here.  I placed this thread in the Philosophy forum because it struck me as the closest fit, given the forum options from which one may choose, given that theme of my OP is the lack of good reasoning/judgment shown in the guy's answer.


----------



## toobfreak

evenflow1969 said:


> Fuck you tube, I hate you soooooo much. Just when I am ready to ignore you, you go and show intellegence and a well thought agrument. Now I have to pay attention again! Fuck,Fuck,Fuck



You would be well-advised to always pay close attention to me.  I could write a definitive book on this topic of evaluating people-- -- --  oh wait!  I did!


----------



## usmbguest5318

evenflow1969 said:


> Xelor said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> evenflow1969 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Xelor said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> evenflow1969 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Xelor said:
> 
> 
> 
> Well, an interviewee may try that with me, but doing so is one of the ways to lessen the odds that I approve their receiving an offer.  When I'm the interviewer, I'm not the one being tested, as it were.  Candidates are well advised to keep that in mind at all times during their interview process.  I suspect in thinking that way about the situation that I'm not rare among principals, most especially not among very senior principals (people in the top three tiers of a firm's management).
> 
> 
> 
> See that is where you are wrong. If you are looking at the best candidates they likey have options. You had better belive they are trying to figure out who they are going to work for in that interview. Money is not realy a thing for me any more. My house and cars are paid for, I owe nobody any thing. I could go years with out a pay check. Although mon ey is no longer the biggest concern or even realy a concern, feeling productive is a big concern. I am self employed and do well at it. How ever I am getting to old to be the butcher, the baker and the candle stick maker. I would like to concentrate on one thing and do it well. I find a place that wants to offer real value to their customers and operates with integrity I would likely be there till I die and because I like to succeed above all else, I will do one hell of a job. I will not even entertain the idea of a job that does not offer value and integrity to it's customers. You are scaring away some good applicants with that attitude. If you want applicants that have no where else to go, keep that attitude. If you want applicants that are in demand you may want to sell what you have to offer. If you are high up in the firm you are not likely looking for the average Joe in your interviews. If these are positions of senior management I would think you are looking for exceptional people. These kind of people typically have options.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> evenflow1969 said:
> 
> 
> 
> See that is where you are wrong.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> TY, but I'm sure I know better than you what is the right way to handle anything and everything having to do with the interview process at my firm.  I don't know what makes you think you can be so presumptuous as to tell me that I'm wrong about such a thing.
> 
> 
> 
> evenflow1969 said:
> 
> 
> 
> If you are looking at the best candidates they likey have options.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> If that's the case, s/he'd do well to work elsewhere because pulling a stunt like that with me or my colleagues makes it clear to us that our firm is not a good fit for them; thus s/he not a good fit for us.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Ya, you Know better! Great answer! Expected from some one who is of senior management. Obvously there is nothing left for you to learn or improve on. Here is what you forget. I did not just interview for you. I am not asking you for a job. I would not take it any way. I do not need to impress you. You put a thread on a political site where people argue all day. Did you think your senior management position prohibits some one from disagreeing with you? If I am not on your pay roll. You want to tell me how it goes you are going to need a better argument than " I think I know better". Do you want to poke a hole in my logic as explained. You can take the I am me so I know better and shove it up your  fucking ass. If you are so far superior argue the logic!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> evenflow1969 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Did you think your senior management position prohibits some one from disagreeing with you?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No.  I think that one's not knowing in what firm I'm a managing partner is sufficient for one to eschew the presumptuousness of telling me I'm wrong about my firm's approach to and philosophy about hiring and interviewing.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Every one thinks that their situation is totaly different  from every other. I do not care what feild you are in people with talent have options, other people in that feild are going to want to work with them. People with options are judging you in the interview as much as you are judging them. If you can not understand this I do not know what to say.
Click to expand...




evenflow1969 said:


> I do not care what feild you are in people with talent have options



I'm not denying that, not before and not now.  As I wrote earlier, such individuals failing to receive an offer from my firm would do well to exercise their option to work elsewhere.  I wish them well in doing so.  I just know that my firm is not a good fit for them.


----------



## koshergrl

Xelor said:


> FWIW, I've been asked that question only once in my career, and that was some thirty-plus years ago.  My answer went roughly as follows:
> 
> I'm somewhat vexed about how to answer that question.  I'm certainly not going to sit here and give you a reason not to give me an offer by telling you something odious about myself or divulging my deepest and darkest personal struggle, yet I don't care to lie to you either by saying I have no weaknesses for every human does have some.
> 
> I believe I've my interactions with you and your colleagues have not uncovered any material weaknesses in my character or qualifications for the consulting position I seek or for my long term prospects for developing and demonstrating the skills and temperament it'll take to eventually become a partner in the firm.  Thus what I'll say in response to that question is that I am aware of my strengths and weaknesses and on balance, I think I've shown that my strengths will make me a very strong member of your firm's team.    I can say too that I'm aware of my weaknesses and that I avail myself of every opportunity to attenuate them and that I am very careful not to let them compromise my work or my relationships.​Now I don't know if that answer got me the offer, but at the new hire training I attended after accepting the firm's offer, I bumped into the partner to whom I gave that answer and he remarked that it was far and away the best solution he'd ever heard for the dilemma posed by the "what is your greatest weakness" question.  He said that as far as he was concerned, it sealed the deal for him.
> 
> What I took away from that experience is that in my professional career as it had been in my academic career before, saying things that sharing my carefully considered thoughts and sharing those that aren't the pablum folks may often hear from others put into whatever the hell I may say was going to be one of the keys to my success.  Quite frankly, when I formed my answer to the question, what was in my mind was my parent's admonishment to say nothing when I had nothing nice to say.  I figured that axiom might as well apply to myself when asked to divulge a negative quality about myself.  After all,  if I can't be nice, or at least fair and neutral, to myself, then to whom will I be?


Gads please stop.


----------



## evenflow1969

Xelor said:


> toobfreak said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Xelor said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yesterday I had to do a phone interview of an experienced hire candidate who seeks to join our firm as a senior manager (one step below "entry level" partner).  The interview was going along well and I decided to as one of the easiest "tough" questions there are:  What's your greatest weakness?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *For one thing, asking someone what their greatest weakness is, is a totally worthless and pointless question.  I am embarrassed for your using it.  It stems from the squeeshy-feeling feminine belief that people actually sit around and ASK themselves such inane questions!  Further, it presupposes that a person has the self-awareness to honestly ask AND answer such a question to oneself both meaningfully and accurately.  Psychologically, if a person really has the self-judgement to fairly ASK such a question, they probably have the capacity as well to have ADDRESSED and ACTED ON the issue long before they met you.  A lot of people have no "greatest weakness" (which implies a RANGE of weaknesses!).  A really sound person has no significant weaknesses at all, which leaves many good people in a real jam to try to think one up when asked.  For an "interviewer" to ask such an idiotic pointless question out of a need to fill interview time and appear "thorough" and think it will actually yield any meaningful data which they can interpret properly, points to the problem people have in interview situations these days where totally unqualified pinholes such as yourself with absolutely no sense of how to really judge and evaluate people has to resort to some grade school level bullshit that probably came out of a book somewhere on "interview techniques."*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well, there's a first time for everything, I suppose.  Yesterday was the first time I've asked that question and received an answer that by itself determined my decision about whether to give my imprimatur for hiring the candidate.
> 
> The man answered by in effect saying that he's been told that he can be difficult to work with.  Upon hearing that, I abruptly ended the interview, asking if he had any questions of me.  He didn't and that was that.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *I wouldn't have had any further questions either.   The fact that you ended the interview abruptly based solely on THAT probably showed him your company wasn't worth pursuing.  While expecting the candidate to be totally prepared for anything, you showed him you were completely unprepared for many answers.  That you took his reply as a deal-breaking negative is astounding.  There are a million reasons why a person might say that (whether even true about the person or not) and be a good OR bad thing.  Maybe one person who in the past was a slacker told him he was hard to work with because he was highly driven and perfectionistic demanding exceptional standards of himself!  Maybe he just said that because lacking any real weaknesses he could really see and admit to for you, he just said it because he thought it sounded self-effacing, very honest, self-perceptive and what he thought you wanted to hear.  Maybe that answer came out of the same book the question came from on "How to prepare for an interview."  No wonder jackals such as yourself spend so much time looking to fill positions and interviewing people-- --  so few people in HR really have any real skill in doing it effectively.  It is just thrust upon them.
> *
> 
> 
> 
> I have no idea what led the candidate to think that giving the answer he did could possibly aid and abet his assertion that he'd be a good person for us to hire,
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *And after ALL the trouble the guy had gone to jumping through loops to get that far in your circuitous maze probably for weeks, you didn't even bother to ask.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> but insofar as he gave it, he must have his reasons.  What I do know is that being hard to work with and lacking the judgment not to say that in an interview indicated the guy is too stupid and under seasoned for us to hire in any capacity.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *So in other words, you as an interviewer are so shallow, that you are much less concerned with why the guy gave such a seemingly honest answer than you are that he didn't probably lie and give you a "good" approved, cookie-cutter answer;  one carefully planned, picked and thought out in advance to be "just right" for the interview to tell you what you want to hear.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I was so astounded that I emailed the people who did the preliminary "phone screen" and early stage interviews on the guy to inquire how his abject inanity and unfitness for our firm did not come through when they spoke with him.  I was and remain incredulous that the guy made it far enough through the interview process that he got to talk to me.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *Abject inanity and unfitness.  Sounds like your company is the Stepford Wives.  Who do you work for, Google? Going for the "perfect fit," eh?  Did it ever occur to you that all those other people saw something good in the guy and the problem was you?  In an age where Diversity is supposed to the the alter of truth in everything, one thing you can say today about the modern corporation is that they want NO diversity of thinking and ideas!  Only cookie-cutter fit ins.  Just diversity in the simple, easy things like skin color that gets the Fed off their back.  For all you really know, that man might have been the best thing that ever walked through your front door.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (Normally, I don't any longer do interviews, but the guy specifically expressed an interest in being part of my practice unit, and I have final say on all manager-and-above experienced hires who aim to it.  It was rather serendipitous that I had to be part of the interview team considering him because the unique nature of my unit's work militates for "growing" people more so than finding them from outside the firm.)
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *And you should stay far, far away from interviewing anyone ever again.  I'd love to hear what YOUR greatest weakness is?  If you worked for me, not only would I not trust you to "grow" anyone into the well-groomed automaton position of brain-washed group-think you obviously have in mind for whomever you hire to assure they "fit in" properly, but I would probably demote or fire you for releasing a candidate on such thin, specious grounds with absolutely no idea what his answers even meant.  If you fuck up such easy things, what more important things must you get wrong every day?  I can get an 8th grader at minimum wage to do the "Pavlov's Dog" level of brain-dead interviewing you apparently conduct and I'm sure it would save the company a great deal of money with no worse results.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The guy could have said any number of things.  Hell, he could have gone with one of the standard pat answers to that question, and I'd have at least counted his answer as neither strong nor weak, but as neutral.  So with that as background, how did you answer the question I posed when you have been asked it?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *Case closed.  Is it any wonder this country is in sorry shape?  You are a fucking idiot drone and the real question is how stupid must a corporation be these days to allow a pinhead as yourself to aspire to the level of being in the position of judging others?  That must be your greatest weakness-----   the illusion that you know what you are doing.  Obviously all you need to get into your company is to do the very worst things-- -- -- give planned, rehearsed, cookie-cutter answers that actually reflect NOTHING of the real person being considered for the hire other than his willingness to CONFORM TO GROUP THINK.  The problem with group think is that if it is even a little bit wrong, then, THE ENTIRE GROUP IS WRONG.  Of course, being the fact that your company placed you in such authority, obviously I don't expect one watt of this to ever get through and make any sense to you-- -- --  you have been properly "grown" to fit your role as head imbecile.*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> toobfreak said:
> 
> 
> 
> That you took his reply as a deal-breaking negative is astounding. There are a million reasons why a person might say that (whether even true about the person or not) and be a good OR bad thing. *Maybe *one person who in the past was a slacker told him he was hard to work with because he was highly driven and perfectionistic demanding exceptional standards of himself! *Maybe *he just said that because lacking any real weaknesses he could really see and admit to for you, he just said it because he thought it sounded self-effacing, very honest, self-perceptive and what he thought you wanted to hear. *Maybe *that answer came out of the same book the question came from on "How to prepare for an interview."
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You seem keen to ignore the fact that between you and I, only one of us was part to the conversation with the guy and that one wasn't you.  You've also managed to overlook the certitude of my having more awareness of the nature and content of the answer the guy gave than what I chose for brevity's sake to share in the OP.
> 
> Be that as it may, I'm not of a mind to defend my decision to you or anyone else here.  I placed this thread in the Philosophy forum because it struck me as the closest fit, given the forum options from which one may choose, given that theme of my OP is the lack of good reasoning/judgment shown in the guy's answer.
Click to expand...

On this guy you were likely right not to hire him. In one instance this worked out. As a policy though, do you realy want to agrue the logic I have presented. You must ask your self how many superior applicants over the years you have lost due to this question. How many top qualified people took another job due to your feeling that you are doing the only judging.


----------



## evenflow1969

toobfreak said:


> evenflow1969 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Fuck you tube, I hate you soooooo much. Just when I am ready to ignore you, you go and show intellegence and a well thought agrument. Now I have to pay attention again! Fuck,Fuck,Fuck
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You would be well-advised to always pay close attention to me.  I could write a definitive book on this topic of evaluating people-- -- --  oh wait!  I did!
Click to expand...

Continue to spel,. out your position as you just did and I will at least pay attention. Can not guarantee I will always agree, but you will get my undivided attention while reading.


----------



## Two Thumbs

Xelor said:


> Yesterday I had to do a phone interview of an experienced hire candidate who seeks to join our firm as a senior manager (one step below "entry level" partner).  The interview was going along well and I decided to as one of the easiest "tough" questions there are:  What's your greatest weakness?
> 
> Well, there's a first time for everything, I suppose.  Yesterday was the first time I've asked that question and received an answer that by itself determined my decision about whether to give my imprimatur for hiring the candidate.
> 
> The man answered by in effect saying that he's been told that he can be difficult to work with.  Upon hearing that, I abruptly ended the interview, asking if he had any questions of me.  He didn't and that was that.
> 
> I have no idea what led the candidate to think that giving the answer he did could possibly aid and abet his assertion that he'd be a good person for us to hire, but insofar as he gave it, he must have his reasons.  What I do know is that being hard to work with and lacking the judgment not to say that in an interview indicated the guy is too stupid and under seasoned for us to hire in any capacity.   I was so astounded that I emailed the people who did the preliminary "phone screen" and early stage interviews on the guy to inquire how his abject inanity and unfitness for our firm did not come through when they spoke with him.  I was and remain incredulous that the guy made it far enough through the interview process that he got to talk to me.
> 
> (Normally, I don't any longer do interviews, but the guy specifically expressed an interest in being part of my practice unit, and I have final say on all manager-and-above experienced hires who aim to it.  It was rather serendipitous that I had to be part of the interview team considering him because the unique nature of my unit's work militates for "growing" people more so than finding them from outside the firm.)
> 
> The guy could have said any number of things.  Hell, he could have gone with one of the standard pat answers to that question, and I'd have at least counted his answer as neither strong nor weak, but as neutral.
> 
> So with that as background, how did you answer the question I posed when you have been asked it?


good lord, you got your first honest answer to that question, ever.


No one gives an honest answer to that ignorant fucking question.


call him back and hire him.  Why?  b/c you know you have an honest worker that will give it to you straight.


----------



## rightwinger

OldLady said:


> Xelor said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yesterday I had to do a phone interview of an experienced hire candidate who seeks to join our firm as a senior manager (one step below "entry level" partner).  The interview was going along well and I decided to as one of the easiest "tough" questions there are:  What's your greatest weakness?
> 
> Well, there's a first time for everything, I suppose.  Yesterday was the first time I've asked that question and received an answer that by itself determined my decision about whether to give my imprimatur for hiring the candidate.
> 
> The man answered by in effect saying that he's been told that he can be difficult to work with.  Upon hearing that, I abruptly ended the interview, asking if he had any questions of me.  He didn't and that was that.
> 
> I have no idea what led the candidate to think that giving the answer he did could possibly aid and abet his assertion that he'd be a good person for us to hire, but insofar as he gave it, he must have his reasons.  What I do know is that being hard to work with and lacking the judgment not to say that in an interview indicated the guy is too stupid and under seasoned for us to hire in any capacity.   I was so astounded that I emailed the people who did the preliminary "phone screen" and early stage interviews on the guy to inquire how his abject inanity and unfitness for our firm did not come through when they spoke with him.  I was and remain incredulous that the guy made it far enough through the interview process that he got to talk to me.
> 
> (Normally, I don't any longer do interviews, but the guy specifically expressed an interest in being part of my practice unit, and I have final say on all manager-and-above experienced hires who aim to it.  It was rather serendipitous that I had to be part of the interview team considering him because the unique nature of my unit's work militates for "growing" people more so than finding them from outside the firm.)
> 
> The guy could have said any number of things.  Hell, he could have gone with one of the standard pat answers to that question, and I'd have at least counted his answer as neither strong nor weak, but as neutral.
> 
> So with that as background, how did you answer the question I posed when you have been asked it?
> 
> 
> 
> Honesty isn't a big value in your book?  You asked, you got an answer.
> What ARE the standard pat answers?  I hate those damned interview questions, and I don't remember what I said.  I don't think I got asked all that horseshit stuff for this job.  We talked about education and experience, etc.
Click to expand...


Asking....What is your greatest weakness
Shows the interviewer is either lazy or just an idiot


----------



## toobfreak

Xelor said:


> toobfreak said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Xelor said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yesterday I had to do a phone interview of an experienced hire candidate who seeks to join our firm as a senior manager (one step below "entry level" partner).  The interview was going along well and I decided to as one of the easiest "tough" questions there are:  What's your greatest weakness?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *For one thing, asking someone what their greatest weakness is, is a totally worthless and pointless question.  I am embarrassed for your using it.  It stems from the squeeshy-feeling feminine belief that people actually sit around and ASK themselves such inane questions!  Further, it presupposes that a person has the self-awareness to honestly ask AND answer such a question to oneself both meaningfully and accurately.  Psychologically, if a person really has the self-judgement to fairly ASK such a question, they probably have the capacity as well to have ADDRESSED and ACTED ON the issue long before they met you.  A lot of people have no "greatest weakness" (which implies a RANGE of weaknesses!).  A really sound person has no significant weaknesses at all, which leaves many good people in a real jam to try to think one up when asked.  For an "interviewer" to ask such an idiotic pointless question out of a need to fill interview time and appear "thorough" and think it will actually yield any meaningful data which they can interpret properly, points to the problem people have in interview situations these days where totally unqualified pinholes such as yourself with absolutely no sense of how to really judge and evaluate people has to resort to some grade school level bullshit that probably came out of a book somewhere on "interview techniques."*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well, there's a first time for everything, I suppose.  Yesterday was the first time I've asked that question and received an answer that by itself determined my decision about whether to give my imprimatur for hiring the candidate.
> 
> The man answered by in effect saying that he's been told that he can be difficult to work with.  Upon hearing that, I abruptly ended the interview, asking if he had any questions of me.  He didn't and that was that.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *I wouldn't have had any further questions either.   The fact that you ended the interview abruptly based solely on THAT probably showed him your company wasn't worth pursuing.  While expecting the candidate to be totally prepared for anything, you showed him you were completely unprepared for many answers.  That you took his reply as a deal-breaking negative is astounding.  There are a million reasons why a person might say that (whether even true about the person or not) and be a good OR bad thing.  Maybe one person who in the past was a slacker told him he was hard to work with because he was highly driven and perfectionistic demanding exceptional standards of himself!  Maybe he just said that because lacking any real weaknesses he could really see and admit to for you, he just said it because he thought it sounded self-effacing, very honest, self-perceptive and what he thought you wanted to hear.  Maybe that answer came out of the same book the question came from on "How to prepare for an interview."  No wonder jackals such as yourself spend so much time looking to fill positions and interviewing people-- --  so few people in HR really have any real skill in doing it effectively.  It is just thrust upon them.
> *
> 
> 
> 
> I have no idea what led the candidate to think that giving the answer he did could possibly aid and abet his assertion that he'd be a good person for us to hire,
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *And after ALL the trouble the guy had gone to jumping through loops to get that far in your circuitous maze probably for weeks, you didn't even bother to ask.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> but insofar as he gave it, he must have his reasons.  What I do know is that being hard to work with and lacking the judgment not to say that in an interview indicated the guy is too stupid and under seasoned for us to hire in any capacity.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *So in other words, you as an interviewer are so shallow, that you are much less concerned with why the guy gave such a seemingly honest answer than you are that he didn't probably lie and give you a "good" approved, cookie-cutter answer;  one carefully planned, picked and thought out in advance to be "just right" for the interview to tell you what you want to hear.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I was so astounded that I emailed the people who did the preliminary "phone screen" and early stage interviews on the guy to inquire how his abject inanity and unfitness for our firm did not come through when they spoke with him.  I was and remain incredulous that the guy made it far enough through the interview process that he got to talk to me.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *Abject inanity and unfitness.  Sounds like your company is the Stepford Wives.  Who do you work for, Google? Going for the "perfect fit," eh?  Did it ever occur to you that all those other people saw something good in the guy and the problem was you?  In an age where Diversity is supposed to the the alter of truth in everything, one thing you can say today about the modern corporation is that they want NO diversity of thinking and ideas!  Only cookie-cutter fit ins.  Just diversity in the simple, easy things like skin color that gets the Fed off their back.  For all you really know, that man might have been the best thing that ever walked through your front door.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (Normally, I don't any longer do interviews, but the guy specifically expressed an interest in being part of my practice unit, and I have final say on all manager-and-above experienced hires who aim to it.  It was rather serendipitous that I had to be part of the interview team considering him because the unique nature of my unit's work militates for "growing" people more so than finding them from outside the firm.)
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *And you should stay far, far away from interviewing anyone ever again.  I'd love to hear what YOUR greatest weakness is?  If you worked for me, not only would I not trust you to "grow" anyone into the well-groomed automaton position of brain-washed group-think you obviously have in mind for whomever you hire to assure they "fit in" properly, but I would probably demote or fire you for releasing a candidate on such thin, specious grounds with absolutely no idea what his answers even meant.  If you fuck up such easy things, what more important things must you get wrong every day?  I can get an 8th grader at minimum wage to do the "Pavlov's Dog" level of brain-dead interviewing you apparently conduct and I'm sure it would save the company a great deal of money with no worse results.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The guy could have said any number of things.  Hell, he could have gone with one of the standard pat answers to that question, and I'd have at least counted his answer as neither strong nor weak, but as neutral.  So with that as background, how did you answer the question I posed when you have been asked it?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *Case closed.  Is it any wonder this country is in sorry shape?  You are a fucking idiot drone and the real question is how stupid must a corporation be these days to allow a pinhead as yourself to aspire to the level of being in the position of judging others?  That must be your greatest weakness-----   the illusion that you know what you are doing.  Obviously all you need to get into your company is to do the very worst things-- -- -- give planned, rehearsed, cookie-cutter answers that actually reflect NOTHING of the real person being considered for the hire other than his willingness to CONFORM TO GROUP THINK.  The problem with group think is that if it is even a little bit wrong, then, THE ENTIRE GROUP IS WRONG.  Of course, being the fact that your company placed you in such authority, obviously I don't expect one watt of this to ever get through and make any sense to you-- -- --  you have been properly "grown" to fit your role as head imbecile.*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> toobfreak said:
> 
> 
> 
> That you took his reply as a deal-breaking negative is astounding. There are a million reasons why a person might say that (whether even true about the person or not) and be a good OR bad thing. *Maybe *one person who in the past was a slacker told him he was hard to work with because he was highly driven and perfectionistic demanding exceptional standards of himself! *Maybe *he just said that because lacking any real weaknesses he could really see and admit to for you, he just said it because he thought it sounded self-effacing, very honest, self-perceptive and what he thought you wanted to hear. *Maybe *that answer came out of the same book the question came from on "How to prepare for an interview."
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You seem keen to ignore the fact that between you and I, only one of us was part to the conversation with the guy and that one wasn't you.  You've also managed to overlook the certitude of my having more awareness of the nature and content of the answer the guy gave than what I chose for brevity's sake to share in the OP.
> 
> Be that as it may, I'm not of a mind to defend my decision to you or anyone else here.  I placed this thread in the Philosophy forum because it struck me as the closest fit, given the forum options from which one may choose, given that theme of my OP is the lack of good reasoning/judgment shown in the guy's answer.
Click to expand...


*I'm sure you are not.  You made it quite clear that you ended the interview based solely on that one unexpected answer alone.  I didn't think anything I said would get through to you.  Your answer really is LAME because you expected us to give a cogent answer based on the provided information, but when the finger points at YOU, suddenly it is the typical bullshit "you simply don't know enough about my company."  Never mind the fact that I've written one of the definitive books on the science of evaluating people and personality, character, skills and drives.  I've forgotten more about how to read and judge people than you will ever know.  Of course I can't prove any of that to the many sorrowful USMBers here that would challenge that without giving away personal information so you can choose to think I'm full of it if you wish (which I have no doubt many will).  You may be right, maybe the guy wasn't a good hire and it is all moot now, but from reading your post, YOU WILL NEVER KNOW, because his interview put the burden on you to decide when it was much easier to just pass on the guy and move on to someone else who slides right in with a cookie cutter fit in Vaseline with no questions that might require YOU to take any responsibility for really judging the hire because that might lead to your being BLAMED if later on, he should not work out.  Typical problem with company HR people these days.  They hire "safe as possible"  looking to protect THEIR job.  And no, I don't need to know the particulars of your exact company, you've already provided enough.*


----------



## Two Thumbs

what's your greatest weakness;

I'm to honest
I show up way early for work and like to stay late
I'm a perfectionist


----------



## evenflow1969

Two Thumbs said:


> what's your greatest weakness;
> 
> I'm to honest
> I show up way early for work and like to stay late
> I'm a perfectionist


Next time I am asked it I am going to answer completely honestly. " If I had one I sure as hell would not tell You! Next question please!"


----------



## Two Thumbs

what's your greatest weakness;
honest list section

I do like to show up early, so I can get more coffee in me so that I don't go off on someone
I like to work alone, b/c I have real anger issues
I will surf the net on your time.
I eat a lot of beans and greens, so my farts have some serious stank


----------



## usmbguest5318

evenflow1969 said:


> Xelor said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> toobfreak said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Xelor said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yesterday I had to do a phone interview of an experienced hire candidate who seeks to join our firm as a senior manager (one step below "entry level" partner).  The interview was going along well and I decided to as one of the easiest "tough" questions there are:  What's your greatest weakness?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *For one thing, asking someone what their greatest weakness is, is a totally worthless and pointless question.  I am embarrassed for your using it.  It stems from the squeeshy-feeling feminine belief that people actually sit around and ASK themselves such inane questions!  Further, it presupposes that a person has the self-awareness to honestly ask AND answer such a question to oneself both meaningfully and accurately.  Psychologically, if a person really has the self-judgement to fairly ASK such a question, they probably have the capacity as well to have ADDRESSED and ACTED ON the issue long before they met you.  A lot of people have no "greatest weakness" (which implies a RANGE of weaknesses!).  A really sound person has no significant weaknesses at all, which leaves many good people in a real jam to try to think one up when asked.  For an "interviewer" to ask such an idiotic pointless question out of a need to fill interview time and appear "thorough" and think it will actually yield any meaningful data which they can interpret properly, points to the problem people have in interview situations these days where totally unqualified pinholes such as yourself with absolutely no sense of how to really judge and evaluate people has to resort to some grade school level bullshit that probably came out of a book somewhere on "interview techniques."*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well, there's a first time for everything, I suppose.  Yesterday was the first time I've asked that question and received an answer that by itself determined my decision about whether to give my imprimatur for hiring the candidate.
> 
> The man answered by in effect saying that he's been told that he can be difficult to work with.  Upon hearing that, I abruptly ended the interview, asking if he had any questions of me.  He didn't and that was that.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *I wouldn't have had any further questions either.   The fact that you ended the interview abruptly based solely on THAT probably showed him your company wasn't worth pursuing.  While expecting the candidate to be totally prepared for anything, you showed him you were completely unprepared for many answers.  That you took his reply as a deal-breaking negative is astounding.  There are a million reasons why a person might say that (whether even true about the person or not) and be a good OR bad thing.  Maybe one person who in the past was a slacker told him he was hard to work with because he was highly driven and perfectionistic demanding exceptional standards of himself!  Maybe he just said that because lacking any real weaknesses he could really see and admit to for you, he just said it because he thought it sounded self-effacing, very honest, self-perceptive and what he thought you wanted to hear.  Maybe that answer came out of the same book the question came from on "How to prepare for an interview."  No wonder jackals such as yourself spend so much time looking to fill positions and interviewing people-- --  so few people in HR really have any real skill in doing it effectively.  It is just thrust upon them.
> *
> 
> 
> 
> I have no idea what led the candidate to think that giving the answer he did could possibly aid and abet his assertion that he'd be a good person for us to hire,
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *And after ALL the trouble the guy had gone to jumping through loops to get that far in your circuitous maze probably for weeks, you didn't even bother to ask.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> but insofar as he gave it, he must have his reasons.  What I do know is that being hard to work with and lacking the judgment not to say that in an interview indicated the guy is too stupid and under seasoned for us to hire in any capacity.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *So in other words, you as an interviewer are so shallow, that you are much less concerned with why the guy gave such a seemingly honest answer than you are that he didn't probably lie and give you a "good" approved, cookie-cutter answer;  one carefully planned, picked and thought out in advance to be "just right" for the interview to tell you what you want to hear.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I was so astounded that I emailed the people who did the preliminary "phone screen" and early stage interviews on the guy to inquire how his abject inanity and unfitness for our firm did not come through when they spoke with him.  I was and remain incredulous that the guy made it far enough through the interview process that he got to talk to me.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *Abject inanity and unfitness.  Sounds like your company is the Stepford Wives.  Who do you work for, Google? Going for the "perfect fit," eh?  Did it ever occur to you that all those other people saw something good in the guy and the problem was you?  In an age where Diversity is supposed to the the alter of truth in everything, one thing you can say today about the modern corporation is that they want NO diversity of thinking and ideas!  Only cookie-cutter fit ins.  Just diversity in the simple, easy things like skin color that gets the Fed off their back.  For all you really know, that man might have been the best thing that ever walked through your front door.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (Normally, I don't any longer do interviews, but the guy specifically expressed an interest in being part of my practice unit, and I have final say on all manager-and-above experienced hires who aim to it.  It was rather serendipitous that I had to be part of the interview team considering him because the unique nature of my unit's work militates for "growing" people more so than finding them from outside the firm.)
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *And you should stay far, far away from interviewing anyone ever again.  I'd love to hear what YOUR greatest weakness is?  If you worked for me, not only would I not trust you to "grow" anyone into the well-groomed automaton position of brain-washed group-think you obviously have in mind for whomever you hire to assure they "fit in" properly, but I would probably demote or fire you for releasing a candidate on such thin, specious grounds with absolutely no idea what his answers even meant.  If you fuck up such easy things, what more important things must you get wrong every day?  I can get an 8th grader at minimum wage to do the "Pavlov's Dog" level of brain-dead interviewing you apparently conduct and I'm sure it would save the company a great deal of money with no worse results.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The guy could have said any number of things.  Hell, he could have gone with one of the standard pat answers to that question, and I'd have at least counted his answer as neither strong nor weak, but as neutral.  So with that as background, how did you answer the question I posed when you have been asked it?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *Case closed.  Is it any wonder this country is in sorry shape?  You are a fucking idiot drone and the real question is how stupid must a corporation be these days to allow a pinhead as yourself to aspire to the level of being in the position of judging others?  That must be your greatest weakness-----   the illusion that you know what you are doing.  Obviously all you need to get into your company is to do the very worst things-- -- -- give planned, rehearsed, cookie-cutter answers that actually reflect NOTHING of the real person being considered for the hire other than his willingness to CONFORM TO GROUP THINK.  The problem with group think is that if it is even a little bit wrong, then, THE ENTIRE GROUP IS WRONG.  Of course, being the fact that your company placed you in such authority, obviously I don't expect one watt of this to ever get through and make any sense to you-- -- --  you have been properly "grown" to fit your role as head imbecile.*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> toobfreak said:
> 
> 
> 
> That you took his reply as a deal-breaking negative is astounding. There are a million reasons why a person might say that (whether even true about the person or not) and be a good OR bad thing. *Maybe *one person who in the past was a slacker told him he was hard to work with because he was highly driven and perfectionistic demanding exceptional standards of himself! *Maybe *he just said that because lacking any real weaknesses he could really see and admit to for you, he just said it because he thought it sounded self-effacing, very honest, self-perceptive and what he thought you wanted to hear. *Maybe *that answer came out of the same book the question came from on "How to prepare for an interview."
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You seem keen to ignore the fact that between you and I, only one of us was part to the conversation with the guy and that one wasn't you.  You've also managed to overlook the certitude of my having more awareness of the nature and content of the answer the guy gave than what I chose for brevity's sake to share in the OP.
> 
> Be that as it may, I'm not of a mind to defend my decision to you or anyone else here.  I placed this thread in the Philosophy forum because it struck me as the closest fit, given the forum options from which one may choose, given that theme of my OP is the lack of good reasoning/judgment shown in the guy's answer.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> On this guy you were likely right not to hire him. In one instance this worked out. As a policy though, do you realy want to agrue the logic I have presented. You must ask your self how many superior applicants over the years you have lost due to this question. How many top qualified people took another job due to your feeling that you are doing the only judging.
Click to expand...




evenflow1969 said:


> You must ask your self how many superior applicants over the years you have lost due to this question.



No, because I already know the answer to that question.


----------



## rightwinger

My greatest weakness?

I guess I just am too hard a worker


----------



## evenflow1969

Xelor said:


> evenflow1969 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Xelor said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> toobfreak said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Xelor said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yesterday I had to do a phone interview of an experienced hire candidate who seeks to join our firm as a senior manager (one step below "entry level" partner).  The interview was going along well and I decided to as one of the easiest "tough" questions there are:  What's your greatest weakness?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *For one thing, asking someone what their greatest weakness is, is a totally worthless and pointless question.  I am embarrassed for your using it.  It stems from the squeeshy-feeling feminine belief that people actually sit around and ASK themselves such inane questions!  Further, it presupposes that a person has the self-awareness to honestly ask AND answer such a question to oneself both meaningfully and accurately.  Psychologically, if a person really has the self-judgement to fairly ASK such a question, they probably have the capacity as well to have ADDRESSED and ACTED ON the issue long before they met you.  A lot of people have no "greatest weakness" (which implies a RANGE of weaknesses!).  A really sound person has no significant weaknesses at all, which leaves many good people in a real jam to try to think one up when asked.  For an "interviewer" to ask such an idiotic pointless question out of a need to fill interview time and appear "thorough" and think it will actually yield any meaningful data which they can interpret properly, points to the problem people have in interview situations these days where totally unqualified pinholes such as yourself with absolutely no sense of how to really judge and evaluate people has to resort to some grade school level bullshit that probably came out of a book somewhere on "interview techniques."*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well, there's a first time for everything, I suppose.  Yesterday was the first time I've asked that question and received an answer that by itself determined my decision about whether to give my imprimatur for hiring the candidate.
> 
> The man answered by in effect saying that he's been told that he can be difficult to work with.  Upon hearing that, I abruptly ended the interview, asking if he had any questions of me.  He didn't and that was that.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *I wouldn't have had any further questions either.   The fact that you ended the interview abruptly based solely on THAT probably showed him your company wasn't worth pursuing.  While expecting the candidate to be totally prepared for anything, you showed him you were completely unprepared for many answers.  That you took his reply as a deal-breaking negative is astounding.  There are a million reasons why a person might say that (whether even true about the person or not) and be a good OR bad thing.  Maybe one person who in the past was a slacker told him he was hard to work with because he was highly driven and perfectionistic demanding exceptional standards of himself!  Maybe he just said that because lacking any real weaknesses he could really see and admit to for you, he just said it because he thought it sounded self-effacing, very honest, self-perceptive and what he thought you wanted to hear.  Maybe that answer came out of the same book the question came from on "How to prepare for an interview."  No wonder jackals such as yourself spend so much time looking to fill positions and interviewing people-- --  so few people in HR really have any real skill in doing it effectively.  It is just thrust upon them.
> *
> 
> 
> 
> I have no idea what led the candidate to think that giving the answer he did could possibly aid and abet his assertion that he'd be a good person for us to hire,
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *And after ALL the trouble the guy had gone to jumping through loops to get that far in your circuitous maze probably for weeks, you didn't even bother to ask.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> but insofar as he gave it, he must have his reasons.  What I do know is that being hard to work with and lacking the judgment not to say that in an interview indicated the guy is too stupid and under seasoned for us to hire in any capacity.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *So in other words, you as an interviewer are so shallow, that you are much less concerned with why the guy gave such a seemingly honest answer than you are that he didn't probably lie and give you a "good" approved, cookie-cutter answer;  one carefully planned, picked and thought out in advance to be "just right" for the interview to tell you what you want to hear.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I was so astounded that I emailed the people who did the preliminary "phone screen" and early stage interviews on the guy to inquire how his abject inanity and unfitness for our firm did not come through when they spoke with him.  I was and remain incredulous that the guy made it far enough through the interview process that he got to talk to me.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *Abject inanity and unfitness.  Sounds like your company is the Stepford Wives.  Who do you work for, Google? Going for the "perfect fit," eh?  Did it ever occur to you that all those other people saw something good in the guy and the problem was you?  In an age where Diversity is supposed to the the alter of truth in everything, one thing you can say today about the modern corporation is that they want NO diversity of thinking and ideas!  Only cookie-cutter fit ins.  Just diversity in the simple, easy things like skin color that gets the Fed off their back.  For all you really know, that man might have been the best thing that ever walked through your front door.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (Normally, I don't any longer do interviews, but the guy specifically expressed an interest in being part of my practice unit, and I have final say on all manager-and-above experienced hires who aim to it.  It was rather serendipitous that I had to be part of the interview team considering him because the unique nature of my unit's work militates for "growing" people more so than finding them from outside the firm.)
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *And you should stay far, far away from interviewing anyone ever again.  I'd love to hear what YOUR greatest weakness is?  If you worked for me, not only would I not trust you to "grow" anyone into the well-groomed automaton position of brain-washed group-think you obviously have in mind for whomever you hire to assure they "fit in" properly, but I would probably demote or fire you for releasing a candidate on such thin, specious grounds with absolutely no idea what his answers even meant.  If you fuck up such easy things, what more important things must you get wrong every day?  I can get an 8th grader at minimum wage to do the "Pavlov's Dog" level of brain-dead interviewing you apparently conduct and I'm sure it would save the company a great deal of money with no worse results.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The guy could have said any number of things.  Hell, he could have gone with one of the standard pat answers to that question, and I'd have at least counted his answer as neither strong nor weak, but as neutral.  So with that as background, how did you answer the question I posed when you have been asked it?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *Case closed.  Is it any wonder this country is in sorry shape?  You are a fucking idiot drone and the real question is how stupid must a corporation be these days to allow a pinhead as yourself to aspire to the level of being in the position of judging others?  That must be your greatest weakness-----   the illusion that you know what you are doing.  Obviously all you need to get into your company is to do the very worst things-- -- -- give planned, rehearsed, cookie-cutter answers that actually reflect NOTHING of the real person being considered for the hire other than his willingness to CONFORM TO GROUP THINK.  The problem with group think is that if it is even a little bit wrong, then, THE ENTIRE GROUP IS WRONG.  Of course, being the fact that your company placed you in such authority, obviously I don't expect one watt of this to ever get through and make any sense to you-- -- --  you have been properly "grown" to fit your role as head imbecile.*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> toobfreak said:
> 
> 
> 
> That you took his reply as a deal-breaking negative is astounding. There are a million reasons why a person might say that (whether even true about the person or not) and be a good OR bad thing. *Maybe *one person who in the past was a slacker told him he was hard to work with because he was highly driven and perfectionistic demanding exceptional standards of himself! *Maybe *he just said that because lacking any real weaknesses he could really see and admit to for you, he just said it because he thought it sounded self-effacing, very honest, self-perceptive and what he thought you wanted to hear. *Maybe *that answer came out of the same book the question came from on "How to prepare for an interview."
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You seem keen to ignore the fact that between you and I, only one of us was part to the conversation with the guy and that one wasn't you.  You've also managed to overlook the certitude of my having more awareness of the nature and content of the answer the guy gave than what I chose for brevity's sake to share in the OP.
> 
> Be that as it may, I'm not of a mind to defend my decision to you or anyone else here.  I placed this thread in the Philosophy forum because it struck me as the closest fit, given the forum options from which one may choose, given that theme of my OP is the lack of good reasoning/judgment shown in the guy's answer.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> On this guy you were likely right not to hire him. In one instance this worked out. As a policy though, do you realy want to agrue the logic I have presented. You must ask your self how many superior applicants over the years you have lost due to this question. How many top qualified people took another job due to your feeling that you are doing the only judging.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> evenflow1969 said:
> 
> 
> 
> You must ask your self how many superior applicants over the years you have lost due to this question.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No, because I already know the answer to that question.
Click to expand...

Wow, I did not now you were a mind reader. Can you read mine right now?


----------



## Two Thumbs

Don't look for me come 4:45, I'm clearing a path to the exit


----------



## OldLady

rightwinger said:


> OldLady said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Xelor said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yesterday I had to do a phone interview of an experienced hire candidate who seeks to join our firm as a senior manager (one step below "entry level" partner).  The interview was going along well and I decided to as one of the easiest "tough" questions there are:  What's your greatest weakness?
> 
> Well, there's a first time for everything, I suppose.  Yesterday was the first time I've asked that question and received an answer that by itself determined my decision about whether to give my imprimatur for hiring the candidate.
> 
> The man answered by in effect saying that he's been told that he can be difficult to work with.  Upon hearing that, I abruptly ended the interview, asking if he had any questions of me.  He didn't and that was that.
> 
> I have no idea what led the candidate to think that giving the answer he did could possibly aid and abet his assertion that he'd be a good person for us to hire, but insofar as he gave it, he must have his reasons.  What I do know is that being hard to work with and lacking the judgment not to say that in an interview indicated the guy is too stupid and under seasoned for us to hire in any capacity.   I was so astounded that I emailed the people who did the preliminary "phone screen" and early stage interviews on the guy to inquire how his abject inanity and unfitness for our firm did not come through when they spoke with him.  I was and remain incredulous that the guy made it far enough through the interview process that he got to talk to me.
> 
> (Normally, I don't any longer do interviews, but the guy specifically expressed an interest in being part of my practice unit, and I have final say on all manager-and-above experienced hires who aim to it.  It was rather serendipitous that I had to be part of the interview team considering him because the unique nature of my unit's work militates for "growing" people more so than finding them from outside the firm.)
> 
> The guy could have said any number of things.  Hell, he could have gone with one of the standard pat answers to that question, and I'd have at least counted his answer as neither strong nor weak, but as neutral.
> 
> So with that as background, how did you answer the question I posed when you have been asked it?
> 
> 
> 
> Honesty isn't a big value in your book?  You asked, you got an answer.
> What ARE the standard pat answers?  I hate those damned interview questions, and I don't remember what I said.  I don't think I got asked all that horseshit stuff for this job.  We talked about education and experience, etc.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Asking....What is your greatest weakness
> Shows the interviewer is either lazy or just an idiot
Click to expand...

It's sophistry that's been institutionalized.  It's a game.  Ask a question and sit back and see how clever the interviewee is in coming up with a non answer.   Xelor responded with a short essay which showed thoughtfulness and completely skirted the question.  Some people (like me) might make a joke out of it.  I don't know what I'd say.  It's not the kind of question that teaches a prospective employer much, imo, since NO ONE is going to tell the truth (except the hapless guy Xelor just interviewed).

I suppose Xelor's right that it doesn't show a lot of common sense, but I do admire the guy's guts.


----------



## usmbguest5318

Two Thumbs said:


> Xelor said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yesterday I had to do a phone interview of an experienced hire candidate who seeks to join our firm as a senior manager (one step below "entry level" partner).  The interview was going along well and I decided to as one of the easiest "tough" questions there are:  What's your greatest weakness?
> 
> Well, there's a first time for everything, I suppose.  Yesterday was the first time I've asked that question and received an answer that by itself determined my decision about whether to give my imprimatur for hiring the candidate.
> 
> The man answered by in effect saying that he's been told that he can be difficult to work with.  Upon hearing that, I abruptly ended the interview, asking if he had any questions of me.  He didn't and that was that.
> 
> I have no idea what led the candidate to think that giving the answer he did could possibly aid and abet his assertion that he'd be a good person for us to hire, but insofar as he gave it, he must have his reasons.  What I do know is that being hard to work with and lacking the judgment not to say that in an interview indicated the guy is too stupid and under seasoned for us to hire in any capacity.   I was so astounded that I emailed the people who did the preliminary "phone screen" and early stage interviews on the guy to inquire how his abject inanity and unfitness for our firm did not come through when they spoke with him.  I was and remain incredulous that the guy made it far enough through the interview process that he got to talk to me.
> 
> (Normally, I don't any longer do interviews, but the guy specifically expressed an interest in being part of my practice unit, and I have final say on all manager-and-above experienced hires who aim to it.  It was rather serendipitous that I had to be part of the interview team considering him because the unique nature of my unit's work militates for "growing" people more so than finding them from outside the firm.)
> 
> The guy could have said any number of things.  Hell, he could have gone with one of the standard pat answers to that question, and I'd have at least counted his answer as neither strong nor weak, but as neutral.
> 
> So with that as background, how did you answer the question I posed when you have been asked it?
> 
> 
> 
> good lord, you got your first honest answer to that question, ever.
> 
> 
> No one gives an honest answer to that ignorant fucking question.
> 
> 
> call him back and hire him.  Why?  b/c you know you have an honest worker that will give it to you straight.
Click to expand...

Not happening.  I won't advocate for hiring anyone whom I know by their own admission have by their prior superiors been told they are difficult to work with.  As I already stated:

"The guy could have said any number of things.  Hell, he could have gone with one of the standard pat answers to that question, and I'd have at least counted his answer as neither strong nor weak, but as neutral."​FWIW, I've had other candidates give honest answers to that question that also are not self-deprecating.  I shared what was my "solution" was for overcoming the dilemma that question poses.  The handful of other honest and inventive responses/approaches I've heard aren't the same one I used, but neither were they pat answers.  

The purposes of that question are:

To get a sense of how the person, on their feet, handles "sticky" situations.
To get a sense of one's judgment.
To get a sense of one's innovativeness.
To get a sense of one's diplomacy skill.
One can "punt" the question by offering one of the pat answers that depicts a trait normally considered as a positive and instead depicts it as a negative.  Doing that won't earn one any points, but neither will it cost points for though though they are "pablum," they are at least politic answers.  Alternatively, one can tackle the question head on in an innovative way that both answers it while also maintaining the "solvency" of one's argument that one is indeed deserving of an offer.  Doing that with aplomb will absolutely earn one points.

Unless one answers that question by sharing something that is, as the guy of whom I've written expressed, truly a negative attribute, one is unlikely to gain or lose an interviewer's approbation.  As I indicated in my OP, never before have I actually come across someone who denigrated themselves by attesting to being one of the things no employer particularly wants to see in anyone it hires.


----------



## Two Thumbs

Xelor said:


> Two Thumbs said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Xelor said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yesterday I had to do a phone interview of an experienced hire candidate who seeks to join our firm as a senior manager (one step below "entry level" partner).  The interview was going along well and I decided to as one of the easiest "tough" questions there are:  What's your greatest weakness?
> 
> Well, there's a first time for everything, I suppose.  Yesterday was the first time I've asked that question and received an answer that by itself determined my decision about whether to give my imprimatur for hiring the candidate.
> 
> The man answered by in effect saying that he's been told that he can be difficult to work with.  Upon hearing that, I abruptly ended the interview, asking if he had any questions of me.  He didn't and that was that.
> 
> I have no idea what led the candidate to think that giving the answer he did could possibly aid and abet his assertion that he'd be a good person for us to hire, but insofar as he gave it, he must have his reasons.  What I do know is that being hard to work with and lacking the judgment not to say that in an interview indicated the guy is too stupid and under seasoned for us to hire in any capacity.   I was so astounded that I emailed the people who did the preliminary "phone screen" and early stage interviews on the guy to inquire how his abject inanity and unfitness for our firm did not come through when they spoke with him.  I was and remain incredulous that the guy made it far enough through the interview process that he got to talk to me.
> 
> (Normally, I don't any longer do interviews, but the guy specifically expressed an interest in being part of my practice unit, and I have final say on all manager-and-above experienced hires who aim to it.  It was rather serendipitous that I had to be part of the interview team considering him because the unique nature of my unit's work militates for "growing" people more so than finding them from outside the firm.)
> 
> The guy could have said any number of things.  Hell, he could have gone with one of the standard pat answers to that question, and I'd have at least counted his answer as neither strong nor weak, but as neutral.
> 
> So with that as background, how did you answer the question I posed when you have been asked it?
> 
> 
> 
> good lord, you got your first honest answer to that question, ever.
> 
> 
> No one gives an honest answer to that ignorant fucking question.
> 
> 
> call him back and hire him.  Why?  b/c you know you have an honest worker that will give it to you straight.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Not happening.  I won't advocate for hiring anyone whom I know by their own admission have by their prior superiors been told they are difficult to work with.  As I already stated:
> 
> "The guy could have said any number of things.  Hell, he could have gone with one of the standard pat answers to that question, and I'd have at least counted his answer as neither strong nor weak, but as neutral."​FWIW, I've had other candidates give honest answers to that question that also are not self-deprecating.  I shared what was my "solution" was for overcoming the dilemma that question poses.  The handful of other honest and inventive responses/approaches I've heard aren't the same one I used, but neither were they pat answers.
> 
> The purposes of that question are:
> 
> To get a sense of how the person, on their feet, handles "sticky" situations.
> To get a sense of one's judgment.
> To get a sense of one's innovativeness.
> To get a sense of one's diplomacy skill.
> One can "punt" the question by offering one of the pat answers that depicts a trait normally considered as a positive and instead depicts it as a negative.  Doing that won't earn one any points, but neither will it cost points for though though they are "pablum," they are at least politic answers.  Alternatively, one can tackle the question head on in an innovative way that both answers it while also maintaining the "solvency" of one's argument that one is indeed deserving of an offer.  Doing that with aplomb will absolutely earn one points.
> 
> Unless one answers that question by sharing something that is, as the guy of whom I've written expressed, truly a negative attribute, one is unlikely to gain or lose an interviewer's approbation.  As I indicated in my OP, never before have I actually come across someone who denigrated themselves by attesting to being one of the things no employer particularly wants to see in anyone it hires.
Click to expand...

so you actually wanted him to lie.

awesome


----------



## usmbguest5318

OldLady said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> OldLady said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Xelor said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yesterday I had to do a phone interview of an experienced hire candidate who seeks to join our firm as a senior manager (one step below "entry level" partner).  The interview was going along well and I decided to as one of the easiest "tough" questions there are:  What's your greatest weakness?
> 
> Well, there's a first time for everything, I suppose.  Yesterday was the first time I've asked that question and received an answer that by itself determined my decision about whether to give my imprimatur for hiring the candidate.
> 
> The man answered by in effect saying that he's been told that he can be difficult to work with.  Upon hearing that, I abruptly ended the interview, asking if he had any questions of me.  He didn't and that was that.
> 
> I have no idea what led the candidate to think that giving the answer he did could possibly aid and abet his assertion that he'd be a good person for us to hire, but insofar as he gave it, he must have his reasons.  What I do know is that being hard to work with and lacking the judgment not to say that in an interview indicated the guy is too stupid and under seasoned for us to hire in any capacity.   I was so astounded that I emailed the people who did the preliminary "phone screen" and early stage interviews on the guy to inquire how his abject inanity and unfitness for our firm did not come through when they spoke with him.  I was and remain incredulous that the guy made it far enough through the interview process that he got to talk to me.
> 
> (Normally, I don't any longer do interviews, but the guy specifically expressed an interest in being part of my practice unit, and I have final say on all manager-and-above experienced hires who aim to it.  It was rather serendipitous that I had to be part of the interview team considering him because the unique nature of my unit's work militates for "growing" people more so than finding them from outside the firm.)
> 
> The guy could have said any number of things.  Hell, he could have gone with one of the standard pat answers to that question, and I'd have at least counted his answer as neither strong nor weak, but as neutral.
> 
> So with that as background, how did you answer the question I posed when you have been asked it?
> 
> 
> 
> Honesty isn't a big value in your book?  You asked, you got an answer.
> What ARE the standard pat answers?  I hate those damned interview questions, and I don't remember what I said.  I don't think I got asked all that horseshit stuff for this job.  We talked about education and experience, etc.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Asking....What is your greatest weakness
> Shows the interviewer is either lazy or just an idiot
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It's sophistry that's been institutionalized.  It's a game.  Ask a question and sit back and see how clever the interviewee is in coming up with a non answer.   Xelor responded with a short essay which showed thoughtfulness and completely skirted the question.  Some people (like me) might make a joke out of it.  I don't know what I'd say.  It's not the kind of question that teaches a prospective employer much, imo, since NO ONE is going to tell the truth (except the hapless guy Xelor just interviewed).
> 
> I suppose Xelor's right that it doesn't show a lot of common sense, but I do admire the guy's guts.
Click to expand...




OldLady said:


> Some people (like me) might make a joke out of it.


That is a fine and effective way to parry that question.  A well formed joke would in all likelihood earn you points.  It certainly would were I the interviewer.



OldLady said:


> It's a game. Ask a question and sit back and see how clever the interviewee is in coming up with a non answer.



It is something of a game.  In my industry, however, the one thing of which one can be certain is that clients will sooner or later put one in an awkward position that must be addressed right then and there.  Our people who are have a manger or higher title will have to deal with it, and being able to do so with aplomb -- whatever that means given one's style and personality.  Mostly, I just want to learn what is the candidate's particular style for dealing with such situations.  There is rarely, if ever, any single right way to do so, but compromising oneself or the firm is always among the wrong ways to handle it.


----------



## usmbguest5318

evenflow1969 said:


> Xelor said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> evenflow1969 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Xelor said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> toobfreak said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Xelor said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yesterday I had to do a phone interview of an experienced hire candidate who seeks to join our firm as a senior manager (one step below "entry level" partner).  The interview was going along well and I decided to as one of the easiest "tough" questions there are:  What's your greatest weakness?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *For one thing, asking someone what their greatest weakness is, is a totally worthless and pointless question.  I am embarrassed for your using it.  It stems from the squeeshy-feeling feminine belief that people actually sit around and ASK themselves such inane questions!  Further, it presupposes that a person has the self-awareness to honestly ask AND answer such a question to oneself both meaningfully and accurately.  Psychologically, if a person really has the self-judgement to fairly ASK such a question, they probably have the capacity as well to have ADDRESSED and ACTED ON the issue long before they met you.  A lot of people have no "greatest weakness" (which implies a RANGE of weaknesses!).  A really sound person has no significant weaknesses at all, which leaves many good people in a real jam to try to think one up when asked.  For an "interviewer" to ask such an idiotic pointless question out of a need to fill interview time and appear "thorough" and think it will actually yield any meaningful data which they can interpret properly, points to the problem people have in interview situations these days where totally unqualified pinholes such as yourself with absolutely no sense of how to really judge and evaluate people has to resort to some grade school level bullshit that probably came out of a book somewhere on "interview techniques."*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well, there's a first time for everything, I suppose.  Yesterday was the first time I've asked that question and received an answer that by itself determined my decision about whether to give my imprimatur for hiring the candidate.
> 
> The man answered by in effect saying that he's been told that he can be difficult to work with.  Upon hearing that, I abruptly ended the interview, asking if he had any questions of me.  He didn't and that was that.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *I wouldn't have had any further questions either.   The fact that you ended the interview abruptly based solely on THAT probably showed him your company wasn't worth pursuing.  While expecting the candidate to be totally prepared for anything, you showed him you were completely unprepared for many answers.  That you took his reply as a deal-breaking negative is astounding.  There are a million reasons why a person might say that (whether even true about the person or not) and be a good OR bad thing.  Maybe one person who in the past was a slacker told him he was hard to work with because he was highly driven and perfectionistic demanding exceptional standards of himself!  Maybe he just said that because lacking any real weaknesses he could really see and admit to for you, he just said it because he thought it sounded self-effacing, very honest, self-perceptive and what he thought you wanted to hear.  Maybe that answer came out of the same book the question came from on "How to prepare for an interview."  No wonder jackals such as yourself spend so much time looking to fill positions and interviewing people-- --  so few people in HR really have any real skill in doing it effectively.  It is just thrust upon them.
> *
> 
> 
> 
> I have no idea what led the candidate to think that giving the answer he did could possibly aid and abet his assertion that he'd be a good person for us to hire,
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *And after ALL the trouble the guy had gone to jumping through loops to get that far in your circuitous maze probably for weeks, you didn't even bother to ask.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> but insofar as he gave it, he must have his reasons.  What I do know is that being hard to work with and lacking the judgment not to say that in an interview indicated the guy is too stupid and under seasoned for us to hire in any capacity.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *So in other words, you as an interviewer are so shallow, that you are much less concerned with why the guy gave such a seemingly honest answer than you are that he didn't probably lie and give you a "good" approved, cookie-cutter answer;  one carefully planned, picked and thought out in advance to be "just right" for the interview to tell you what you want to hear.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I was so astounded that I emailed the people who did the preliminary "phone screen" and early stage interviews on the guy to inquire how his abject inanity and unfitness for our firm did not come through when they spoke with him.  I was and remain incredulous that the guy made it far enough through the interview process that he got to talk to me.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *Abject inanity and unfitness.  Sounds like your company is the Stepford Wives.  Who do you work for, Google? Going for the "perfect fit," eh?  Did it ever occur to you that all those other people saw something good in the guy and the problem was you?  In an age where Diversity is supposed to the the alter of truth in everything, one thing you can say today about the modern corporation is that they want NO diversity of thinking and ideas!  Only cookie-cutter fit ins.  Just diversity in the simple, easy things like skin color that gets the Fed off their back.  For all you really know, that man might have been the best thing that ever walked through your front door.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (Normally, I don't any longer do interviews, but the guy specifically expressed an interest in being part of my practice unit, and I have final say on all manager-and-above experienced hires who aim to it.  It was rather serendipitous that I had to be part of the interview team considering him because the unique nature of my unit's work militates for "growing" people more so than finding them from outside the firm.)
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *And you should stay far, far away from interviewing anyone ever again.  I'd love to hear what YOUR greatest weakness is?  If you worked for me, not only would I not trust you to "grow" anyone into the well-groomed automaton position of brain-washed group-think you obviously have in mind for whomever you hire to assure they "fit in" properly, but I would probably demote or fire you for releasing a candidate on such thin, specious grounds with absolutely no idea what his answers even meant.  If you fuck up such easy things, what more important things must you get wrong every day?  I can get an 8th grader at minimum wage to do the "Pavlov's Dog" level of brain-dead interviewing you apparently conduct and I'm sure it would save the company a great deal of money with no worse results.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The guy could have said any number of things.  Hell, he could have gone with one of the standard pat answers to that question, and I'd have at least counted his answer as neither strong nor weak, but as neutral.  So with that as background, how did you answer the question I posed when you have been asked it?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *Case closed.  Is it any wonder this country is in sorry shape?  You are a fucking idiot drone and the real question is how stupid must a corporation be these days to allow a pinhead as yourself to aspire to the level of being in the position of judging others?  That must be your greatest weakness-----   the illusion that you know what you are doing.  Obviously all you need to get into your company is to do the very worst things-- -- -- give planned, rehearsed, cookie-cutter answers that actually reflect NOTHING of the real person being considered for the hire other than his willingness to CONFORM TO GROUP THINK.  The problem with group think is that if it is even a little bit wrong, then, THE ENTIRE GROUP IS WRONG.  Of course, being the fact that your company placed you in such authority, obviously I don't expect one watt of this to ever get through and make any sense to you-- -- --  you have been properly "grown" to fit your role as head imbecile.*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> toobfreak said:
> 
> 
> 
> That you took his reply as a deal-breaking negative is astounding. There are a million reasons why a person might say that (whether even true about the person or not) and be a good OR bad thing. *Maybe *one person who in the past was a slacker told him he was hard to work with because he was highly driven and perfectionistic demanding exceptional standards of himself! *Maybe *he just said that because lacking any real weaknesses he could really see and admit to for you, he just said it because he thought it sounded self-effacing, very honest, self-perceptive and what he thought you wanted to hear. *Maybe *that answer came out of the same book the question came from on "How to prepare for an interview."
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You seem keen to ignore the fact that between you and I, only one of us was part to the conversation with the guy and that one wasn't you.  You've also managed to overlook the certitude of my having more awareness of the nature and content of the answer the guy gave than what I chose for brevity's sake to share in the OP.
> 
> Be that as it may, I'm not of a mind to defend my decision to you or anyone else here.  I placed this thread in the Philosophy forum because it struck me as the closest fit, given the forum options from which one may choose, given that theme of my OP is the lack of good reasoning/judgment shown in the guy's answer.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> On this guy you were likely right not to hire him. In one instance this worked out. As a policy though, do you realy want to agrue the logic I have presented. You must ask your self how many superior applicants over the years you have lost due to this question. How many top qualified people took another job due to your feeling that you are doing the only judging.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> evenflow1969 said:
> 
> 
> 
> You must ask your self how many superior applicants over the years you have lost due to this question.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No, because I already know the answer to that question.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Wow, I did not now you were a mind reader. Can you read mine right now?
Click to expand...




evenflow1969 said:


> Can you read mine right now?


Insofar as I have no will to try, now or at any other time, no.


----------



## usmbguest5318

OldLady said:


> I do admire the guy's guts.


Yeah.  Okay.  I'll give him that.  I'll note to that one's being adept risk manages and having the sense to exercise a prudent degree of aversion to taking risks that need not be taken are very important qualities/skills that even  junior level (below partner) managers personnel in my firm must exhibit consistently.


----------



## usmbguest5318

Xelor said:


> Two Thumbs said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Xelor said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yesterday I had to do a phone interview of an experienced hire candidate who seeks to join our firm as a senior manager (one step below "entry level" partner).  The interview was going along well and I decided to as one of the easiest "tough" questions there are:  What's your greatest weakness?
> 
> Well, there's a first time for everything, I suppose.  Yesterday was the first time I've asked that question and received an answer that by itself determined my decision about whether to give my imprimatur for hiring the candidate.
> 
> The man answered by in effect saying that he's been told that he can be difficult to work with.  Upon hearing that, I abruptly ended the interview, asking if he had any questions of me.  He didn't and that was that.
> 
> I have no idea what led the candidate to think that giving the answer he did could possibly aid and abet his assertion that he'd be a good person for us to hire, but insofar as he gave it, he must have his reasons.  What I do know is that being hard to work with and lacking the judgment not to say that in an interview indicated the guy is too stupid and under seasoned for us to hire in any capacity.   I was so astounded that I emailed the people who did the preliminary "phone screen" and early stage interviews on the guy to inquire how his abject inanity and unfitness for our firm did not come through when they spoke with him.  I was and remain incredulous that the guy made it far enough through the interview process that he got to talk to me.
> 
> (Normally, I don't any longer do interviews, but the guy specifically expressed an interest in being part of my practice unit, and I have final say on all manager-and-above experienced hires who aim to it.  It was rather serendipitous that I had to be part of the interview team considering him because the unique nature of my unit's work militates for "growing" people more so than finding them from outside the firm.)
> 
> The guy could have said any number of things.  Hell, he could have gone with one of the standard pat answers to that question, and I'd have at least counted his answer as neither strong nor weak, but as neutral.
> 
> So with that as background, how did you answer the question I posed when you have been asked it?
> 
> 
> 
> good lord, you got your first honest answer to that question, ever.
> 
> 
> No one gives an honest answer to that ignorant fucking question.
> 
> 
> call him back and hire him.  Why?  b/c you know you have an honest worker that will give it to you straight.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Not happening.  I won't advocate for hiring anyone whom I know by their own admission have by their prior superiors been told they are difficult to work with.  As I already stated:
> 
> "The guy could have said any number of things.  Hell, he could have gone with one of the standard pat answers to that question, and I'd have at least counted his answer as neither strong nor weak, but as neutral."​FWIW, I've had other candidates give honest answers to that question that also are not self-deprecating.  I shared what was my "solution" was for overcoming the dilemma that question poses.  The handful of other honest and inventive responses/approaches I've heard aren't the same one I used, but neither were they pat answers.
> 
> The purposes of that question are:
> 
> To get a sense of how the person, on their feet, handles "sticky" situations.
> To get a sense of one's judgment.
> To get a sense of one's innovativeness.
> To get a sense of one's diplomacy skill.
> One can "punt" the question by offering one of the pat answers that depicts a trait normally considered as a positive and instead depicts it as a negative.  Doing that won't earn one any points, but neither will it cost points for though though they are "pablum," they are at least politic answers.  Alternatively, one can tackle the question head on in an innovative way that both answers it while also maintaining the "solvency" of one's argument that one is indeed deserving of an offer.  Doing that with aplomb will absolutely earn one points.
> 
> Unless one answers that question by sharing something that is, as the guy of whom I've written expressed, truly a negative attribute, one is unlikely to gain or lose an interviewer's approbation.  As I indicated in my OP, never before have I actually come across someone who denigrated themselves by attesting to being one of the things no employer particularly wants to see in anyone it hires.
Click to expand...




Two Thumbs said:


> so you actually wanted him to lie.
> 
> awesome


There are multiple acceptable ways to handle that question without lying.  I shared the one I used and I discussed the "punt" option that other members have stated they'd use.  OldLady shared another (How do you respond to the interview question, "What is your greatest weakness?").

How you managed, from my remarks in post 75 and the approach shared regarding how I handled the question, to infer that I want a candidate to lie in response to that question is beyond me, but sure as cats have climbing gear, you did...


----------



## usmbguest5318

Indeependent said:


> Why not simply take 10-15 minutes of a simulated run through of a project?
> The “Weak” question means you don’t want to hire the candi.





Indeependent said:


> Why not simply take 10-15 minutes of a simulated run through of a project?



That or something resembling it is among the things we do when circumstances allow and militate for it.  The man who whom I interviewed didn't have circumstances that allowed us to set up an experiential interview apropos to the position he sought.  As I noted elsewhere in this thread, he sought to on-board ASAP and we were of a mind to facilitate his doing so, so we went with a traditional interview approach.


----------



## usmbguest5318

toobfreak said:


> Xelor said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> toobfreak said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Xelor said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yesterday I had to do a phone interview of an experienced hire candidate who seeks to join our firm as a senior manager (one step below "entry level" partner).  The interview was going along well and I decided to as one of the easiest "tough" questions there are:  What's your greatest weakness?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *For one thing, asking someone what their greatest weakness is, is a totally worthless and pointless question.  I am embarrassed for your using it.  It stems from the squeeshy-feeling feminine belief that people actually sit around and ASK themselves such inane questions!  Further, it presupposes that a person has the self-awareness to honestly ask AND answer such a question to oneself both meaningfully and accurately.  Psychologically, if a person really has the self-judgement to fairly ASK such a question, they probably have the capacity as well to have ADDRESSED and ACTED ON the issue long before they met you.  A lot of people have no "greatest weakness" (which implies a RANGE of weaknesses!).  A really sound person has no significant weaknesses at all, which leaves many good people in a real jam to try to think one up when asked.  For an "interviewer" to ask such an idiotic pointless question out of a need to fill interview time and appear "thorough" and think it will actually yield any meaningful data which they can interpret properly, points to the problem people have in interview situations these days where totally unqualified pinholes such as yourself with absolutely no sense of how to really judge and evaluate people has to resort to some grade school level bullshit that probably came out of a book somewhere on "interview techniques."*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well, there's a first time for everything, I suppose.  Yesterday was the first time I've asked that question and received an answer that by itself determined my decision about whether to give my imprimatur for hiring the candidate.
> 
> The man answered by in effect saying that he's been told that he can be difficult to work with.  Upon hearing that, I abruptly ended the interview, asking if he had any questions of me.  He didn't and that was that.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *I wouldn't have had any further questions either.   The fact that you ended the interview abruptly based solely on THAT probably showed him your company wasn't worth pursuing.  While expecting the candidate to be totally prepared for anything, you showed him you were completely unprepared for many answers.  That you took his reply as a deal-breaking negative is astounding.  There are a million reasons why a person might say that (whether even true about the person or not) and be a good OR bad thing.  Maybe one person who in the past was a slacker told him he was hard to work with because he was highly driven and perfectionistic demanding exceptional standards of himself!  Maybe he just said that because lacking any real weaknesses he could really see and admit to for you, he just said it because he thought it sounded self-effacing, very honest, self-perceptive and what he thought you wanted to hear.  Maybe that answer came out of the same book the question came from on "How to prepare for an interview."  No wonder jackals such as yourself spend so much time looking to fill positions and interviewing people-- --  so few people in HR really have any real skill in doing it effectively.  It is just thrust upon them.
> *
> 
> 
> 
> I have no idea what led the candidate to think that giving the answer he did could possibly aid and abet his assertion that he'd be a good person for us to hire,
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *And after ALL the trouble the guy had gone to jumping through loops to get that far in your circuitous maze probably for weeks, you didn't even bother to ask.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> but insofar as he gave it, he must have his reasons.  What I do know is that being hard to work with and lacking the judgment not to say that in an interview indicated the guy is too stupid and under seasoned for us to hire in any capacity.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *So in other words, you as an interviewer are so shallow, that you are much less concerned with why the guy gave such a seemingly honest answer than you are that he didn't probably lie and give you a "good" approved, cookie-cutter answer;  one carefully planned, picked and thought out in advance to be "just right" for the interview to tell you what you want to hear.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I was so astounded that I emailed the people who did the preliminary "phone screen" and early stage interviews on the guy to inquire how his abject inanity and unfitness for our firm did not come through when they spoke with him.  I was and remain incredulous that the guy made it far enough through the interview process that he got to talk to me.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *Abject inanity and unfitness.  Sounds like your company is the Stepford Wives.  Who do you work for, Google? Going for the "perfect fit," eh?  Did it ever occur to you that all those other people saw something good in the guy and the problem was you?  In an age where Diversity is supposed to the the alter of truth in everything, one thing you can say today about the modern corporation is that they want NO diversity of thinking and ideas!  Only cookie-cutter fit ins.  Just diversity in the simple, easy things like skin color that gets the Fed off their back.  For all you really know, that man might have been the best thing that ever walked through your front door.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (Normally, I don't any longer do interviews, but the guy specifically expressed an interest in being part of my practice unit, and I have final say on all manager-and-above experienced hires who aim to it.  It was rather serendipitous that I had to be part of the interview team considering him because the unique nature of my unit's work militates for "growing" people more so than finding them from outside the firm.)
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *And you should stay far, far away from interviewing anyone ever again.  I'd love to hear what YOUR greatest weakness is?  If you worked for me, not only would I not trust you to "grow" anyone into the well-groomed automaton position of brain-washed group-think you obviously have in mind for whomever you hire to assure they "fit in" properly, but I would probably demote or fire you for releasing a candidate on such thin, specious grounds with absolutely no idea what his answers even meant.  If you fuck up such easy things, what more important things must you get wrong every day?  I can get an 8th grader at minimum wage to do the "Pavlov's Dog" level of brain-dead interviewing you apparently conduct and I'm sure it would save the company a great deal of money with no worse results.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The guy could have said any number of things.  Hell, he could have gone with one of the standard pat answers to that question, and I'd have at least counted his answer as neither strong nor weak, but as neutral.  So with that as background, how did you answer the question I posed when you have been asked it?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *Case closed.  Is it any wonder this country is in sorry shape?  You are a fucking idiot drone and the real question is how stupid must a corporation be these days to allow a pinhead as yourself to aspire to the level of being in the position of judging others?  That must be your greatest weakness-----   the illusion that you know what you are doing.  Obviously all you need to get into your company is to do the very worst things-- -- -- give planned, rehearsed, cookie-cutter answers that actually reflect NOTHING of the real person being considered for the hire other than his willingness to CONFORM TO GROUP THINK.  The problem with group think is that if it is even a little bit wrong, then, THE ENTIRE GROUP IS WRONG.  Of course, being the fact that your company placed you in such authority, obviously I don't expect one watt of this to ever get through and make any sense to you-- -- --  you have been properly "grown" to fit your role as head imbecile.*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> toobfreak said:
> 
> 
> 
> That you took his reply as a deal-breaking negative is astounding. There are a million reasons why a person might say that (whether even true about the person or not) and be a good OR bad thing. *Maybe *one person who in the past was a slacker told him he was hard to work with because he was highly driven and perfectionistic demanding exceptional standards of himself! *Maybe *he just said that because lacking any real weaknesses he could really see and admit to for you, he just said it because he thought it sounded self-effacing, very honest, self-perceptive and what he thought you wanted to hear. *Maybe *that answer came out of the same book the question came from on "How to prepare for an interview."
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You seem keen to ignore the fact that between you and I, only one of us was part to the conversation with the guy and that one wasn't you.  You've also managed to overlook the certitude of my having more awareness of the nature and content of the answer the guy gave than what I chose for brevity's sake to share in the OP.
> 
> Be that as it may, I'm not of a mind to defend my decision to you or anyone else here.  I placed this thread in the Philosophy forum because it struck me as the closest fit, given the forum options from which one may choose, given that theme of my OP is the lack of good reasoning/judgment shown in the guy's answer.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *I'm sure you are not.  You made it quite clear that you ended the interview based solely on that one unexpected answer alone.  I didn't think anything I said would get through to you.  Your answer really is LAME because you expected us to give a cogent answer based on the provided information, but when the finger points at YOU, suddenly it is the typical bullshit "you simply don't know enough about my company."  Never mind the fact that I've written one of the definitive books on the science of evaluating people and personality, character, skills and drives.  I've forgotten more about how to read and judge people than you will ever know.  Of course I can't prove any of that to the many sorrowful USMBers here that would challenge that without giving away personal information so you can choose to think I'm full of it if you wish (which I have no doubt many will).  You may be right, maybe the guy wasn't a good hire and it is all moot now, but from reading your post, YOU WILL NEVER KNOW, because his interview put the burden on you to decide when it was much easier to just pass on the guy and move on to someone else who slides right in with a cookie cutter fit in Vaseline with no questions that might require YOU to take any responsibility for really judging the hire because that might lead to your being BLAMED if later on, he should not work out.  Typical problem with company HR people these days.  They hire "safe as possible"  looking to protect THEIR job.  And no, I don't need to know the particulars of your exact company, you've already provided enough.*
Click to expand...




toobfreak said:


> you expected us to give a cogent answer based on the provided information



All I expected of anyone here was that they answer the thread question found at the end of the OP.  


Xelor said:


> So with that as background, how did you answer the question I posed when you have been asked it?


The rest of the OP was simply contextual background I shared so folks would know what inspired me to ask that question.


----------



## Indeependent

Xelor said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why not simply take 10-15 minutes of a simulated run through of a project?
> The “Weak” question means you don’t want to hire the candi.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why not simply take 10-15 minutes of a simulated run through of a project?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That or something resembling it is among the things we do when circumstances allow and militate for it.  The man who whom I interviewed didn't have circumstances that allowed us to set up an experiential interview apropos to the position he sought.  As I noted elsewhere in this thread, he sought to on-board ASAP and we were of a mind to facilitate his doing so, so we went with a traditional interview approach.
Click to expand...

Anyone who cannot conduct this type of interview on the phone in the Smart Device Age should not be interviewing anyone on the phone period.


----------



## CrusaderFrank

Xelor said:


> Yesterday I had to do a phone interview of an experienced hire candidate who seeks to join our firm as a senior manager (one step below "entry level" partner).  The interview was going along well and I decided to as one of the easiest "tough" questions there are:  What's your greatest weakness?
> 
> Well, there's a first time for everything, I suppose.  Yesterday was the first time I've asked that question and received an answer that by itself determined my decision about whether to give my imprimatur for hiring the candidate.
> 
> The man answered by in effect saying that he's been told that he can be difficult to work with.  Upon hearing that, I abruptly ended the interview, asking if he had any questions of me.  He didn't and that was that.
> 
> I have no idea what led the candidate to think that giving the answer he did could possibly aid and abet his assertion that he'd be a good person for us to hire, but insofar as he gave it, he must have his reasons.  What I do know is that being hard to work with and lacking the judgment not to say that in an interview indicated the guy is too stupid and under seasoned for us to hire in any capacity.   I was so astounded that I emailed the people who did the preliminary "phone screen" and early stage interviews on the guy to inquire how his abject inanity and unfitness for our firm did not come through when they spoke with him.  I was and remain incredulous that the guy made it far enough through the interview process that he got to talk to me.
> 
> (Normally, I don't any longer do interviews, but the guy specifically expressed an interest in being part of my practice unit, and I have final say on all manager-and-above experienced hires who aim to it.  It was rather serendipitous that I had to be part of the interview team considering him because the unique nature of my unit's work militates for "growing" people more so than finding them from outside the firm.)
> 
> The guy could have said any number of things.  Hell, he could have gone with one of the standard pat answers to that question, and I'd have at least counted his answer as neither strong nor weak, but as neutral.
> 
> So with that as background, how did you answer the question I posed when you have been asked it?


did you want him to bullshit you?  I thought his was a good answer and you could have followed up with, "why"?


----------



## evenflow1969

Xelor said:


> toobfreak said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Xelor said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> toobfreak said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Xelor said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yesterday I had to do a phone interview of an experienced hire candidate who seeks to join our firm as a senior manager (one step below "entry level" partner).  The interview was going along well and I decided to as one of the easiest "tough" questions there are:  What's your greatest weakness?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *For one thing, asking someone what their greatest weakness is, is a totally worthless and pointless question.  I am embarrassed for your using it.  It stems from the squeeshy-feeling feminine belief that people actually sit around and ASK themselves such inane questions!  Further, it presupposes that a person has the self-awareness to honestly ask AND answer such a question to oneself both meaningfully and accurately.  Psychologically, if a person really has the self-judgement to fairly ASK such a question, they probably have the capacity as well to have ADDRESSED and ACTED ON the issue long before they met you.  A lot of people have no "greatest weakness" (which implies a RANGE of weaknesses!).  A really sound person has no significant weaknesses at all, which leaves many good people in a real jam to try to think one up when asked.  For an "interviewer" to ask such an idiotic pointless question out of a need to fill interview time and appear "thorough" and think it will actually yield any meaningful data which they can interpret properly, points to the problem people have in interview situations these days where totally unqualified pinholes such as yourself with absolutely no sense of how to really judge and evaluate people has to resort to some grade school level bullshit that probably came out of a book somewhere on "interview techniques."*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well, there's a first time for everything, I suppose.  Yesterday was the first time I've asked that question and received an answer that by itself determined my decision about whether to give my imprimatur for hiring the candidate.
> 
> The man answered by in effect saying that he's been told that he can be difficult to work with.  Upon hearing that, I abruptly ended the interview, asking if he had any questions of me.  He didn't and that was that.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *I wouldn't have had any further questions either.   The fact that you ended the interview abruptly based solely on THAT probably showed him your company wasn't worth pursuing.  While expecting the candidate to be totally prepared for anything, you showed him you were completely unprepared for many answers.  That you took his reply as a deal-breaking negative is astounding.  There are a million reasons why a person might say that (whether even true about the person or not) and be a good OR bad thing.  Maybe one person who in the past was a slacker told him he was hard to work with because he was highly driven and perfectionistic demanding exceptional standards of himself!  Maybe he just said that because lacking any real weaknesses he could really see and admit to for you, he just said it because he thought it sounded self-effacing, very honest, self-perceptive and what he thought you wanted to hear.  Maybe that answer came out of the same book the question came from on "How to prepare for an interview."  No wonder jackals such as yourself spend so much time looking to fill positions and interviewing people-- --  so few people in HR really have any real skill in doing it effectively.  It is just thrust upon them.
> *
> 
> 
> 
> I have no idea what led the candidate to think that giving the answer he did could possibly aid and abet his assertion that he'd be a good person for us to hire,
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *And after ALL the trouble the guy had gone to jumping through loops to get that far in your circuitous maze probably for weeks, you didn't even bother to ask.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> but insofar as he gave it, he must have his reasons.  What I do know is that being hard to work with and lacking the judgment not to say that in an interview indicated the guy is too stupid and under seasoned for us to hire in any capacity.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *So in other words, you as an interviewer are so shallow, that you are much less concerned with why the guy gave such a seemingly honest answer than you are that he didn't probably lie and give you a "good" approved, cookie-cutter answer;  one carefully planned, picked and thought out in advance to be "just right" for the interview to tell you what you want to hear.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I was so astounded that I emailed the people who did the preliminary "phone screen" and early stage interviews on the guy to inquire how his abject inanity and unfitness for our firm did not come through when they spoke with him.  I was and remain incredulous that the guy made it far enough through the interview process that he got to talk to me.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *Abject inanity and unfitness.  Sounds like your company is the Stepford Wives.  Who do you work for, Google? Going for the "perfect fit," eh?  Did it ever occur to you that all those other people saw something good in the guy and the problem was you?  In an age where Diversity is supposed to the the alter of truth in everything, one thing you can say today about the modern corporation is that they want NO diversity of thinking and ideas!  Only cookie-cutter fit ins.  Just diversity in the simple, easy things like skin color that gets the Fed off their back.  For all you really know, that man might have been the best thing that ever walked through your front door.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (Normally, I don't any longer do interviews, but the guy specifically expressed an interest in being part of my practice unit, and I have final say on all manager-and-above experienced hires who aim to it.  It was rather serendipitous that I had to be part of the interview team considering him because the unique nature of my unit's work militates for "growing" people more so than finding them from outside the firm.)
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *And you should stay far, far away from interviewing anyone ever again.  I'd love to hear what YOUR greatest weakness is?  If you worked for me, not only would I not trust you to "grow" anyone into the well-groomed automaton position of brain-washed group-think you obviously have in mind for whomever you hire to assure they "fit in" properly, but I would probably demote or fire you for releasing a candidate on such thin, specious grounds with absolutely no idea what his answers even meant.  If you fuck up such easy things, what more important things must you get wrong every day?  I can get an 8th grader at minimum wage to do the "Pavlov's Dog" level of brain-dead interviewing you apparently conduct and I'm sure it would save the company a great deal of money with no worse results.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The guy could have said any number of things.  Hell, he could have gone with one of the standard pat answers to that question, and I'd have at least counted his answer as neither strong nor weak, but as neutral.  So with that as background, how did you answer the question I posed when you have been asked it?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *Case closed.  Is it any wonder this country is in sorry shape?  You are a fucking idiot drone and the real question is how stupid must a corporation be these days to allow a pinhead as yourself to aspire to the level of being in the position of judging others?  That must be your greatest weakness-----   the illusion that you know what you are doing.  Obviously all you need to get into your company is to do the very worst things-- -- -- give planned, rehearsed, cookie-cutter answers that actually reflect NOTHING of the real person being considered for the hire other than his willingness to CONFORM TO GROUP THINK.  The problem with group think is that if it is even a little bit wrong, then, THE ENTIRE GROUP IS WRONG.  Of course, being the fact that your company placed you in such authority, obviously I don't expect one watt of this to ever get through and make any sense to you-- -- --  you have been properly "grown" to fit your role as head imbecile.*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> toobfreak said:
> 
> 
> 
> That you took his reply as a deal-breaking negative is astounding. There are a million reasons why a person might say that (whether even true about the person or not) and be a good OR bad thing. *Maybe *one person who in the past was a slacker told him he was hard to work with because he was highly driven and perfectionistic demanding exceptional standards of himself! *Maybe *he just said that because lacking any real weaknesses he could really see and admit to for you, he just said it because he thought it sounded self-effacing, very honest, self-perceptive and what he thought you wanted to hear. *Maybe *that answer came out of the same book the question came from on "How to prepare for an interview."
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You seem keen to ignore the fact that between you and I, only one of us was part to the conversation with the guy and that one wasn't you.  You've also managed to overlook the certitude of my having more awareness of the nature and content of the answer the guy gave than what I chose for brevity's sake to share in the OP.
> 
> Be that as it may, I'm not of a mind to defend my decision to you or anyone else here.  I placed this thread in the Philosophy forum because it struck me as the closest fit, given the forum options from which one may choose, given that theme of my OP is the lack of good reasoning/judgment shown in the guy's answer.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *I'm sure you are not.  You made it quite clear that you ended the interview based solely on that one unexpected answer alone.  I didn't think anything I said would get through to you.  Your answer really is LAME because you expected us to give a cogent answer based on the provided information, but when the finger points at YOU, suddenly it is the typical bullshit "you simply don't know enough about my company."  Never mind the fact that I've written one of the definitive books on the science of evaluating people and personality, character, skills and drives.  I've forgotten more about how to read and judge people than you will ever know.  Of course I can't prove any of that to the many sorrowful USMBers here that would challenge that without giving away personal information so you can choose to think I'm full of it if you wish (which I have no doubt many will).  You may be right, maybe the guy wasn't a good hire and it is all moot now, but from reading your post, YOU WILL NEVER KNOW, because his interview put the burden on you to decide when it was much easier to just pass on the guy and move on to someone else who slides right in with a cookie cutter fit in Vaseline with no questions that might require YOU to take any responsibility for really judging the hire because that might lead to your being BLAMED if later on, he should not work out.  Typical problem with company HR people these days.  They hire "safe as possible"  looking to protect THEIR job.  And no, I don't need to know the particulars of your exact company, you've already provided enough.*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> toobfreak said:
> 
> 
> 
> you expected us to give a cogent answer based on the provided information
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> All I expected of anyone here was that they answer the thread question found at the end of the OP.
> 
> 
> Xelor said:
> 
> 
> 
> So with that as background, how did you answer the question I posed when you have been asked it?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The rest of the OP was simply contextual background I shared so folks would know what inspired me to ask that question.
Click to expand...

You see that much like that interview, you expected us to full fill your expectations. What you did not realize that we are not interviewing and do not give a shit about your expectations. Instead you got judged by the audience replying. As I pointed out to you people with options are judging you as much or more than you are judging them. You see we do not give one shit what your expectations were. Why because we have options. We do not need your approval.  The response you are receiving here pretty much proves my logic. Get over your upper management self and start to realize you may not be all that you thought you were. You want what you expected go tell the fucking loser yes men you have hired to give it to you. They will, if they are capable. Mean while your compitition is making a sales pitch to real talent.


----------



## rightwinger

OldLady said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> OldLady said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Xelor said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yesterday I had to do a phone interview of an experienced hire candidate who seeks to join our firm as a senior manager (one step below "entry level" partner).  The interview was going along well and I decided to as one of the easiest "tough" questions there are:  What's your greatest weakness?
> 
> Well, there's a first time for everything, I suppose.  Yesterday was the first time I've asked that question and received an answer that by itself determined my decision about whether to give my imprimatur for hiring the candidate.
> 
> The man answered by in effect saying that he's been told that he can be difficult to work with.  Upon hearing that, I abruptly ended the interview, asking if he had any questions of me.  He didn't and that was that.
> 
> I have no idea what led the candidate to think that giving the answer he did could possibly aid and abet his assertion that he'd be a good person for us to hire, but insofar as he gave it, he must have his reasons.  What I do know is that being hard to work with and lacking the judgment not to say that in an interview indicated the guy is too stupid and under seasoned for us to hire in any capacity.   I was so astounded that I emailed the people who did the preliminary "phone screen" and early stage interviews on the guy to inquire how his abject inanity and unfitness for our firm did not come through when they spoke with him.  I was and remain incredulous that the guy made it far enough through the interview process that he got to talk to me.
> 
> (Normally, I don't any longer do interviews, but the guy specifically expressed an interest in being part of my practice unit, and I have final say on all manager-and-above experienced hires who aim to it.  It was rather serendipitous that I had to be part of the interview team considering him because the unique nature of my unit's work militates for "growing" people more so than finding them from outside the firm.)
> 
> The guy could have said any number of things.  Hell, he could have gone with one of the standard pat answers to that question, and I'd have at least counted his answer as neither strong nor weak, but as neutral.
> 
> So with that as background, how did you answer the question I posed when you have been asked it?
> 
> 
> 
> Honesty isn't a big value in your book?  You asked, you got an answer.
> What ARE the standard pat answers?  I hate those damned interview questions, and I don't remember what I said.  I don't think I got asked all that horseshit stuff for this job.  We talked about education and experience, etc.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Asking....What is your greatest weakness
> Shows the interviewer is either lazy or just an idiot
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It's sophistry that's been institutionalized.  It's a game.  Ask a question and sit back and see how clever the interviewee is in coming up with a non answer.   Xelor responded with a short essay which showed thoughtfulness and completely skirted the question.  Some people (like me) might make a joke out of it.  I don't know what I'd say.  It's not the kind of question that teaches a prospective employer much, imo, since NO ONE is going to tell the truth (except the hapless guy Xelor just interviewed).
> 
> I suppose Xelor's right that it doesn't show a lot of common sense, but I do admire the guy's guts.
Click to expand...

Look

Explain the job.
Ask what you have to offer the position
Ask for a review of accomplishments
Provide relevant hypotheticals and ask how you would respond

Save the silly psychological questions


----------



## Compost

My greatest weakness? Utter impatience with pathetically transparent questions from pompous pedantics flexing their paltry power.


----------



## rightwinger

Compost said:


> My greatest weakness? Utter impatience with pathetically transparent questions from pompous pedantics flexing their paltry power.


Exactly

The guy in the OP basically told the interviewer to fuck off

Why would he want the job?


----------



## Darkwind

I was asked that question once in an interview for a job that I was exploring, more than trying to land.  I sometimes get bored with My job and go on these little jaunts to see if there is a better opportunity available.

My reply was pretty straightforward.

"I'm sorry, I thought this interview was in response to a specific job and the strengths and skills I could bring to that job.  I see we are both just wasting each others time."

I shook hands and left.

Thankfully, I've never been asked such a question when I really needed the job.


----------



## usmbguest5318

Indeependent said:


> Xelor said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why not simply take 10-15 minutes of a simulated run through of a project?
> The “Weak” question means you don’t want to hire the candi.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why not simply take 10-15 minutes of a simulated run through of a project?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That or something resembling it is among the things we do when circumstances allow and militate for it.  The man who whom I interviewed didn't have circumstances that allowed us to set up an experiential interview apropos to the position he sought.  As I noted elsewhere in this thread, he sought to on-board ASAP and we were of a mind to facilitate his doing so, so we went with a traditional interview approach.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Anyone who cannot conduct this type of interview on the phone in the Smart Device Age should not be interviewing anyone on the phone period.
Click to expand...


Obviously, "simulated run through of a project" means something different to you than it does to me.  

I won't again make the mistake of replying to you without clarifying terms.  Ciao.


----------



## usmbguest5318

evenflow1969 said:


> Xelor said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> toobfreak said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Xelor said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> toobfreak said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Xelor said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yesterday I had to do a phone interview of an experienced hire candidate who seeks to join our firm as a senior manager (one step below "entry level" partner).  The interview was going along well and I decided to as one of the easiest "tough" questions there are:  What's your greatest weakness?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *For one thing, asking someone what their greatest weakness is, is a totally worthless and pointless question.  I am embarrassed for your using it.  It stems from the squeeshy-feeling feminine belief that people actually sit around and ASK themselves such inane questions!  Further, it presupposes that a person has the self-awareness to honestly ask AND answer such a question to oneself both meaningfully and accurately.  Psychologically, if a person really has the self-judgement to fairly ASK such a question, they probably have the capacity as well to have ADDRESSED and ACTED ON the issue long before they met you.  A lot of people have no "greatest weakness" (which implies a RANGE of weaknesses!).  A really sound person has no significant weaknesses at all, which leaves many good people in a real jam to try to think one up when asked.  For an "interviewer" to ask such an idiotic pointless question out of a need to fill interview time and appear "thorough" and think it will actually yield any meaningful data which they can interpret properly, points to the problem people have in interview situations these days where totally unqualified pinholes such as yourself with absolutely no sense of how to really judge and evaluate people has to resort to some grade school level bullshit that probably came out of a book somewhere on "interview techniques."*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well, there's a first time for everything, I suppose.  Yesterday was the first time I've asked that question and received an answer that by itself determined my decision about whether to give my imprimatur for hiring the candidate.
> 
> The man answered by in effect saying that he's been told that he can be difficult to work with.  Upon hearing that, I abruptly ended the interview, asking if he had any questions of me.  He didn't and that was that.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *I wouldn't have had any further questions either.   The fact that you ended the interview abruptly based solely on THAT probably showed him your company wasn't worth pursuing.  While expecting the candidate to be totally prepared for anything, you showed him you were completely unprepared for many answers.  That you took his reply as a deal-breaking negative is astounding.  There are a million reasons why a person might say that (whether even true about the person or not) and be a good OR bad thing.  Maybe one person who in the past was a slacker told him he was hard to work with because he was highly driven and perfectionistic demanding exceptional standards of himself!  Maybe he just said that because lacking any real weaknesses he could really see and admit to for you, he just said it because he thought it sounded self-effacing, very honest, self-perceptive and what he thought you wanted to hear.  Maybe that answer came out of the same book the question came from on "How to prepare for an interview."  No wonder jackals such as yourself spend so much time looking to fill positions and interviewing people-- --  so few people in HR really have any real skill in doing it effectively.  It is just thrust upon them.
> *
> 
> 
> 
> I have no idea what led the candidate to think that giving the answer he did could possibly aid and abet his assertion that he'd be a good person for us to hire,
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *And after ALL the trouble the guy had gone to jumping through loops to get that far in your circuitous maze probably for weeks, you didn't even bother to ask.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> but insofar as he gave it, he must have his reasons.  What I do know is that being hard to work with and lacking the judgment not to say that in an interview indicated the guy is too stupid and under seasoned for us to hire in any capacity.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *So in other words, you as an interviewer are so shallow, that you are much less concerned with why the guy gave such a seemingly honest answer than you are that he didn't probably lie and give you a "good" approved, cookie-cutter answer;  one carefully planned, picked and thought out in advance to be "just right" for the interview to tell you what you want to hear.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I was so astounded that I emailed the people who did the preliminary "phone screen" and early stage interviews on the guy to inquire how his abject inanity and unfitness for our firm did not come through when they spoke with him.  I was and remain incredulous that the guy made it far enough through the interview process that he got to talk to me.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *Abject inanity and unfitness.  Sounds like your company is the Stepford Wives.  Who do you work for, Google? Going for the "perfect fit," eh?  Did it ever occur to you that all those other people saw something good in the guy and the problem was you?  In an age where Diversity is supposed to the the alter of truth in everything, one thing you can say today about the modern corporation is that they want NO diversity of thinking and ideas!  Only cookie-cutter fit ins.  Just diversity in the simple, easy things like skin color that gets the Fed off their back.  For all you really know, that man might have been the best thing that ever walked through your front door.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (Normally, I don't any longer do interviews, but the guy specifically expressed an interest in being part of my practice unit, and I have final say on all manager-and-above experienced hires who aim to it.  It was rather serendipitous that I had to be part of the interview team considering him because the unique nature of my unit's work militates for "growing" people more so than finding them from outside the firm.)
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *And you should stay far, far away from interviewing anyone ever again.  I'd love to hear what YOUR greatest weakness is?  If you worked for me, not only would I not trust you to "grow" anyone into the well-groomed automaton position of brain-washed group-think you obviously have in mind for whomever you hire to assure they "fit in" properly, but I would probably demote or fire you for releasing a candidate on such thin, specious grounds with absolutely no idea what his answers even meant.  If you fuck up such easy things, what more important things must you get wrong every day?  I can get an 8th grader at minimum wage to do the "Pavlov's Dog" level of brain-dead interviewing you apparently conduct and I'm sure it would save the company a great deal of money with no worse results.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The guy could have said any number of things.  Hell, he could have gone with one of the standard pat answers to that question, and I'd have at least counted his answer as neither strong nor weak, but as neutral.  So with that as background, how did you answer the question I posed when you have been asked it?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *Case closed.  Is it any wonder this country is in sorry shape?  You are a fucking idiot drone and the real question is how stupid must a corporation be these days to allow a pinhead as yourself to aspire to the level of being in the position of judging others?  That must be your greatest weakness-----   the illusion that you know what you are doing.  Obviously all you need to get into your company is to do the very worst things-- -- -- give planned, rehearsed, cookie-cutter answers that actually reflect NOTHING of the real person being considered for the hire other than his willingness to CONFORM TO GROUP THINK.  The problem with group think is that if it is even a little bit wrong, then, THE ENTIRE GROUP IS WRONG.  Of course, being the fact that your company placed you in such authority, obviously I don't expect one watt of this to ever get through and make any sense to you-- -- --  you have been properly "grown" to fit your role as head imbecile.*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> toobfreak said:
> 
> 
> 
> That you took his reply as a deal-breaking negative is astounding. There are a million reasons why a person might say that (whether even true about the person or not) and be a good OR bad thing. *Maybe *one person who in the past was a slacker told him he was hard to work with because he was highly driven and perfectionistic demanding exceptional standards of himself! *Maybe *he just said that because lacking any real weaknesses he could really see and admit to for you, he just said it because he thought it sounded self-effacing, very honest, self-perceptive and what he thought you wanted to hear. *Maybe *that answer came out of the same book the question came from on "How to prepare for an interview."
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You seem keen to ignore the fact that between you and I, only one of us was part to the conversation with the guy and that one wasn't you.  You've also managed to overlook the certitude of my having more awareness of the nature and content of the answer the guy gave than what I chose for brevity's sake to share in the OP.
> 
> Be that as it may, I'm not of a mind to defend my decision to you or anyone else here.  I placed this thread in the Philosophy forum because it struck me as the closest fit, given the forum options from which one may choose, given that theme of my OP is the lack of good reasoning/judgment shown in the guy's answer.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *I'm sure you are not.  You made it quite clear that you ended the interview based solely on that one unexpected answer alone.  I didn't think anything I said would get through to you.  Your answer really is LAME because you expected us to give a cogent answer based on the provided information, but when the finger points at YOU, suddenly it is the typical bullshit "you simply don't know enough about my company."  Never mind the fact that I've written one of the definitive books on the science of evaluating people and personality, character, skills and drives.  I've forgotten more about how to read and judge people than you will ever know.  Of course I can't prove any of that to the many sorrowful USMBers here that would challenge that without giving away personal information so you can choose to think I'm full of it if you wish (which I have no doubt many will).  You may be right, maybe the guy wasn't a good hire and it is all moot now, but from reading your post, YOU WILL NEVER KNOW, because his interview put the burden on you to decide when it was much easier to just pass on the guy and move on to someone else who slides right in with a cookie cutter fit in Vaseline with no questions that might require YOU to take any responsibility for really judging the hire because that might lead to your being BLAMED if later on, he should not work out.  Typical problem with company HR people these days.  They hire "safe as possible"  looking to protect THEIR job.  And no, I don't need to know the particulars of your exact company, you've already provided enough.*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> toobfreak said:
> 
> 
> 
> you expected us to give a cogent answer based on the provided information
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> All I expected of anyone here was that they answer the thread question found at the end of the OP.
> 
> 
> Xelor said:
> 
> 
> 
> So with that as background, how did you answer the question I posed when you have been asked it?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The rest of the OP was simply contextual background I shared so folks would know what inspired me to ask that question.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You see that much like that interview, you expected us to full fill your expectations. What you did not realize that we are not interviewing and do not give a shit about your expectations. Instead you got judged by the audience replying. As I pointed out to you people with options are judging you as much or more than you are judging them. You see we do not give one shit what your expectations were. Why because we have options. We do not need your approval.  The response you are receiving here pretty much proves my logic. Get over your upper management self and start to realize you may not be all that you thought you were. You want what you expected go tell the fucking loser yes men you have hired to give it to you. They will, if they are capable. Mean while your compitition is making a sales pitch to real talent.
Click to expand...


----------



## usmbguest5318

rightwinger said:


> Compost said:
> 
> 
> 
> My greatest weakness? Utter impatience with pathetically transparent questions from pompous pedantics flexing their paltry power.
> 
> 
> 
> Exactly
> 
> The guy in the OP basically told the interviewer to fuck off
> 
> Why would he want the job?
Click to expand...




rightwinger said:


> The guy in the OP basically told the interviewer to fuck off


Maybe that was in his mind, and maybe it wasn't.  What I know is that he approached us asking for an opportunity to interview for a position we weren't seeking to fill.  We agreed to consider him because hiring him appeared initially to be an opportunity that fell into our laps, as it were, and we were thus willing to make a place for him.


----------



## Indeependent

Xelor said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Xelor said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why not simply take 10-15 minutes of a simulated run through of a project?
> The “Weak” question means you don’t want to hire the candi.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why not simply take 10-15 minutes of a simulated run through of a project?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That or something resembling it is among the things we do when circumstances allow and militate for it.  The man who whom I interviewed didn't have circumstances that allowed us to set up an experiential interview apropos to the position he sought.  As I noted elsewhere in this thread, he sought to on-board ASAP and we were of a mind to facilitate his doing so, so we went with a traditional interview approach.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Anyone who cannot conduct this type of interview on the phone in the Smart Device Age should not be interviewing anyone on the phone period.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Obviously, "simulated run through of a project" means something different to you than it does to me.
> 
> I won't again make the mistake of replying to you without clarifying terms.  Ciao.
Click to expand...

You don't seem to be very popular with quite a number of people here.
What it comes down to is you had a vacuous "feeling" and you don't want to admit to such.


----------



## evenflow1969

Xelor said:


> evenflow1969 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Xelor said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> toobfreak said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Xelor said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> toobfreak said:
> 
> 
> 
> *For one thing, asking someone what their greatest weakness is, is a totally worthless and pointless question.  I am embarrassed for your using it.  It stems from the squeeshy-feeling feminine belief that people actually sit around and ASK themselves such inane questions!  Further, it presupposes that a person has the self-awareness to honestly ask AND answer such a question to oneself both meaningfully and accurately.  Psychologically, if a person really has the self-judgement to fairly ASK such a question, they probably have the capacity as well to have ADDRESSED and ACTED ON the issue long before they met you.  A lot of people have no "greatest weakness" (which implies a RANGE of weaknesses!).  A really sound person has no significant weaknesses at all, which leaves many good people in a real jam to try to think one up when asked.  For an "interviewer" to ask such an idiotic pointless question out of a need to fill interview time and appear "thorough" and think it will actually yield any meaningful data which they can interpret properly, points to the problem people have in interview situations these days where totally unqualified pinholes such as yourself with absolutely no sense of how to really judge and evaluate people has to resort to some grade school level bullshit that probably came out of a book somewhere on "interview techniques."*
> 
> *I wouldn't have had any further questions either.   The fact that you ended the interview abruptly based solely on THAT probably showed him your company wasn't worth pursuing.  While expecting the candidate to be totally prepared for anything, you showed him you were completely unprepared for many answers.  That you took his reply as a deal-breaking negative is astounding.  There are a million reasons why a person might say that (whether even true about the person or not) and be a good OR bad thing.  Maybe one person who in the past was a slacker told him he was hard to work with because he was highly driven and perfectionistic demanding exceptional standards of himself!  Maybe he just said that because lacking any real weaknesses he could really see and admit to for you, he just said it because he thought it sounded self-effacing, very honest, self-perceptive and what he thought you wanted to hear.  Maybe that answer came out of the same book the question came from on "How to prepare for an interview."  No wonder jackals such as yourself spend so much time looking to fill positions and interviewing people-- --  so few people in HR really have any real skill in doing it effectively.  It is just thrust upon them.
> 
> And after ALL the trouble the guy had gone to jumping through loops to get that far in your circuitous maze probably for weeks, you didn't even bother to ask.*
> 
> *So in other words, you as an interviewer are so shallow, that you are much less concerned with why the guy gave such a seemingly honest answer than you are that he didn't probably lie and give you a "good" approved, cookie-cutter answer;  one carefully planned, picked and thought out in advance to be "just right" for the interview to tell you what you want to hear.*
> 
> *Abject inanity and unfitness.  Sounds like your company is the Stepford Wives.  Who do you work for, Google? Going for the "perfect fit," eh?  Did it ever occur to you that all those other people saw something good in the guy and the problem was you?  In an age where Diversity is supposed to the the alter of truth in everything, one thing you can say today about the modern corporation is that they want NO diversity of thinking and ideas!  Only cookie-cutter fit ins.  Just diversity in the simple, easy things like skin color that gets the Fed off their back.  For all you really know, that man might have been the best thing that ever walked through your front door.*
> 
> *And you should stay far, far away from interviewing anyone ever again.  I'd love to hear what YOUR greatest weakness is?  If you worked for me, not only would I not trust you to "grow" anyone into the well-groomed automaton position of brain-washed group-think you obviously have in mind for whomever you hire to assure they "fit in" properly, but I would probably demote or fire you for releasing a candidate on such thin, specious grounds with absolutely no idea what his answers even meant.  If you fuck up such easy things, what more important things must you get wrong every day?  I can get an 8th grader at minimum wage to do the "Pavlov's Dog" level of brain-dead interviewing you apparently conduct and I'm sure it would save the company a great deal of money with no worse results.*
> 
> *Case closed.  Is it any wonder this country is in sorry shape?  You are a fucking idiot drone and the real question is how stupid must a corporation be these days to allow a pinhead as yourself to aspire to the level of being in the position of judging others?  That must be your greatest weakness-----   the illusion that you know what you are doing.  Obviously all you need to get into your company is to do the very worst things-- -- -- give planned, rehearsed, cookie-cutter answers that actually reflect NOTHING of the real person being considered for the hire other than his willingness to CONFORM TO GROUP THINK.  The problem with group think is that if it is even a little bit wrong, then, THE ENTIRE GROUP IS WRONG.  Of course, being the fact that your company placed you in such authority, obviously I don't expect one watt of this to ever get through and make any sense to you-- -- --  you have been properly "grown" to fit your role as head imbecile.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> toobfreak said:
> 
> 
> 
> That you took his reply as a deal-breaking negative is astounding. There are a million reasons why a person might say that (whether even true about the person or not) and be a good OR bad thing. *Maybe *one person who in the past was a slacker told him he was hard to work with because he was highly driven and perfectionistic demanding exceptional standards of himself! *Maybe *he just said that because lacking any real weaknesses he could really see and admit to for you, he just said it because he thought it sounded self-effacing, very honest, self-perceptive and what he thought you wanted to hear. *Maybe *that answer came out of the same book the question came from on "How to prepare for an interview."
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You seem keen to ignore the fact that between you and I, only one of us was part to the conversation with the guy and that one wasn't you.  You've also managed to overlook the certitude of my having more awareness of the nature and content of the answer the guy gave than what I chose for brevity's sake to share in the OP.
> 
> Be that as it may, I'm not of a mind to defend my decision to you or anyone else here.  I placed this thread in the Philosophy forum because it struck me as the closest fit, given the forum options from which one may choose, given that theme of my OP is the lack of good reasoning/judgment shown in the guy's answer.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *I'm sure you are not.  You made it quite clear that you ended the interview based solely on that one unexpected answer alone.  I didn't think anything I said would get through to you.  Your answer really is LAME because you expected us to give a cogent answer based on the provided information, but when the finger points at YOU, suddenly it is the typical bullshit "you simply don't know enough about my company."  Never mind the fact that I've written one of the definitive books on the science of evaluating people and personality, character, skills and drives.  I've forgotten more about how to read and judge people than you will ever know.  Of course I can't prove any of that to the many sorrowful USMBers here that would challenge that without giving away personal information so you can choose to think I'm full of it if you wish (which I have no doubt many will).  You may be right, maybe the guy wasn't a good hire and it is all moot now, but from reading your post, YOU WILL NEVER KNOW, because his interview put the burden on you to decide when it was much easier to just pass on the guy and move on to someone else who slides right in with a cookie cutter fit in Vaseline with no questions that might require YOU to take any responsibility for really judging the hire because that might lead to your being BLAMED if later on, he should not work out.  Typical problem with company HR people these days.  They hire "safe as possible"  looking to protect THEIR job.  And no, I don't need to know the particulars of your exact company, you've already provided enough.*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> toobfreak said:
> 
> 
> 
> you expected us to give a cogent answer based on the provided information
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> All I expected of anyone here was that they answer the thread question found at the end of the OP.
> 
> 
> Xelor said:
> 
> 
> 
> So with that as background, how did you answer the question I posed when you have been asked it?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The rest of the OP was simply contextual background I shared so folks would know what inspired me to ask that question.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You see that much like that interview, you expected us to full fill your expectations. What you did not realize that we are not interviewing and do not give a shit about your expectations. Instead you got judged by the audience replying. As I pointed out to you people with options are judging you as much or more than you are judging them. You see we do not give one shit what your expectations were. Why because we have options. We do not need your approval.  The response you are receiving here pretty much proves my logic. Get over your upper management self and start to realize you may not be all that you thought you were. You want what you expected go tell the fucking loser yes men you have hired to give it to you. They will, if they are capable. Mean while your compitition is making a sales pitch to real talent.
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...

You do realize those guys are laghing at you right? Have you even had one person show agreement with you?


----------



## deanrd

Xelor said:


> Yesterday I had to do a phone interview of an experienced hire candidate who seeks to join our firm as a senior manager (one step below "entry level" partner).  The interview was going along well and I decided to as one of the easiest "tough" questions there are:  What's your greatest weakness?
> 
> Well, there's a first time for everything, I suppose.  Yesterday was the first time I've asked that question and received an answer that by itself determined my decision about whether to give my imprimatur for hiring the candidate.
> 
> The man answered by in effect saying that he's been told that he can be difficult to work with.  Upon hearing that, I abruptly ended the interview, asking if he had any questions of me.  He didn't and that was that.
> 
> I have no idea what led the candidate to think that giving the answer he did could possibly aid and abet his assertion that he'd be a good person for us to hire, but insofar as he gave it, he must have his reasons.  What I do know is that being hard to work with and lacking the judgment not to say that in an interview indicated the guy is too stupid and under seasoned for us to hire in any capacity.   I was so astounded that I emailed the people who did the preliminary "phone screen" and early stage interviews on the guy to inquire how his abject inanity and unfitness for our firm did not come through when they spoke with him.  I was and remain incredulous that the guy made it far enough through the interview process that he got to talk to me.
> 
> (Normally, I don't any longer do interviews, but the guy specifically expressed an interest in being part of my practice unit, and I have final say on all manager-and-above experienced hires who aim to it.  It was rather serendipitous that I had to be part of the interview team considering him because the unique nature of my unit's work militates for "growing" people more so than finding them from outside the firm.)
> 
> The guy could have said any number of things.  Hell, he could have gone with one of the standard pat answers to that question, and I'd have at least counted his answer as neither strong nor weak, but as neutral.
> 
> So with that as background, how did you answer the question I posed when you have been asked it?


When ever asked that question, always answer with something positive.

Example:

What's your greatest weakness?:

I never give up.

I'm always focused on the issue.  Some say too focused.

Some say my job means too much to me.

I'll give up my vacation time for important assignments.

I've been told I push my coworkers to get the job done.  But I have a hard time believing that because I always work so well with others.  I think I'm just highly motivated.

And so on.


----------



## usmbguest5318

evenflow1969 said:


> Xelor said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> evenflow1969 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Xelor said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> toobfreak said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Xelor said:
> 
> 
> 
> You seem keen to ignore the fact that between you and I, only one of us was part to the conversation with the guy and that one wasn't you.  You've also managed to overlook the certitude of my having more awareness of the nature and content of the answer the guy gave than what I chose for brevity's sake to share in the OP.
> 
> Be that as it may, I'm not of a mind to defend my decision to you or anyone else here.  I placed this thread in the Philosophy forum because it struck me as the closest fit, given the forum options from which one may choose, given that theme of my OP is the lack of good reasoning/judgment shown in the guy's answer.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *I'm sure you are not.  You made it quite clear that you ended the interview based solely on that one unexpected answer alone.  I didn't think anything I said would get through to you.  Your answer really is LAME because you expected us to give a cogent answer based on the provided information, but when the finger points at YOU, suddenly it is the typical bullshit "you simply don't know enough about my company."  Never mind the fact that I've written one of the definitive books on the science of evaluating people and personality, character, skills and drives.  I've forgotten more about how to read and judge people than you will ever know.  Of course I can't prove any of that to the many sorrowful USMBers here that would challenge that without giving away personal information so you can choose to think I'm full of it if you wish (which I have no doubt many will).  You may be right, maybe the guy wasn't a good hire and it is all moot now, but from reading your post, YOU WILL NEVER KNOW, because his interview put the burden on you to decide when it was much easier to just pass on the guy and move on to someone else who slides right in with a cookie cutter fit in Vaseline with no questions that might require YOU to take any responsibility for really judging the hire because that might lead to your being BLAMED if later on, he should not work out.  Typical problem with company HR people these days.  They hire "safe as possible"  looking to protect THEIR job.  And no, I don't need to know the particulars of your exact company, you've already provided enough.*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> toobfreak said:
> 
> 
> 
> you expected us to give a cogent answer based on the provided information
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> All I expected of anyone here was that they answer the thread question found at the end of the OP.
> 
> 
> Xelor said:
> 
> 
> 
> So with that as background, how did you answer the question I posed when you have been asked it?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The rest of the OP was simply contextual background I shared so folks would know what inspired me to ask that question.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You see that much like that interview, you expected us to full fill your expectations. What you did not realize that we are not interviewing and do not give a shit about your expectations. Instead you got judged by the audience replying. As I pointed out to you people with options are judging you as much or more than you are judging them. You see we do not give one shit what your expectations were. Why because we have options. We do not need your approval.  The response you are receiving here pretty much proves my logic. Get over your upper management self and start to realize you may not be all that you thought you were. You want what you expected go tell the fucking loser yes men you have hired to give it to you. They will, if they are capable. Mean while your compitition is making a sales pitch to real talent.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You do realize those guys are laghing at you right? Have you even had one person show agreement with you?
Click to expand...




evenflow1969 said:


> You do realize those guys are laghing at you right?


You do realize approbation from the folks here isn't something I sought, right?  There is nothing in the OP for folks to approve or disapprove in any way that matters.  I asked how people answer a particular question and some folks here felt it necessary to pen responses about me.  That interview question I asked wasn't about me and neither is this thread, as far as I'm concerned -- and seeing as it's my thread, that's all that matters to me.  Folks can answer the question I asked or they can not do so; either way I find out something I wanted to know, which was the point of my asking the question.


As I said:


Xelor said:


> [The guy wanted] to start ASAP because his wife had taken a new job for which his family had moved and his job wasn't portable.





Xelor said:


> [The guy] approached us asking for an opportunity to interview for a position we weren't seeking to fill. We agreed to consider him because hiring him appeared initially to be an opportunity that fell into our laps, as it were, and we were thus willing to make a place for him.


One member here introduced all sorts of abstractions, but the fact is they are worthless musings to someone who has no current job and seeks to obtain one that allows them to resume the lifestyle to which they've become accustomed (see "Associate principal/Senior project leader" at that link).

The fact is with the answer he gave, the interviewee showed he's not qualified for the job he sought, not by dint of his industry-specific, general business and economics skills, training and experience, for we'd have never considered interviewing him were we not of a mind that he had those "ducks in order," but by his temperament.

Handling the "What Are Your Weaknesses" Question in a Job Interview

Here's What An Interviewer Really Means When They Ask 'What Is Your Greatest Weakness?'

What to say when an interviewer asks, 'What's your biggest weakness?'
To be sure, when interviewing candidates for certain non-client-facing positions, I doubt anyone asks that question.  The mail clerks and other workers whose jobs call for them mainly to "put square pegs in square holes" for instance, may not be asked that question.  The position he sought isn't a "blue collar" one and we weren't going to interview or treat him as though it were.  In management consulting, the best subject matter KSAs aren't worth a damn if one's temperament isn't acceptable.

The fact of the matter is that over the course of the interview process for all revenue-side employees, a candidate is going to have to answer several so-called "brain teaser" questions and they're going to have not "screw the pooch" on every single one.  It's a big boon if someone "hits it out of the park" with those questions, but doing so isn't among the expectations interviewers, I, have because everyone knows that nobody likes those kinds of questions.  Members here don't have to like that and neither does the guy whom I rejected and neither do they and he have to like that I asked the question I did; however, they and he will have to find their several-hundred-thousand-dollar-a-year plus-fine-benefits-and-perqs job from a different employer than my firm, be it in management consulting or some other industry.


----------



## usmbguest5318

deanrd said:


> Xelor said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yesterday I had to do a phone interview of an experienced hire candidate who seeks to join our firm as a senior manager (one step below "entry level" partner).  The interview was going along well and I decided to as one of the easiest "tough" questions there are:  What's your greatest weakness?
> 
> Well, there's a first time for everything, I suppose.  Yesterday was the first time I've asked that question and received an answer that by itself determined my decision about whether to give my imprimatur for hiring the candidate.
> 
> The man answered by in effect saying that he's been told that he can be difficult to work with.  Upon hearing that, I abruptly ended the interview, asking if he had any questions of me.  He didn't and that was that.
> 
> I have no idea what led the candidate to think that giving the answer he did could possibly aid and abet his assertion that he'd be a good person for us to hire, but insofar as he gave it, he must have his reasons.  What I do know is that being hard to work with and lacking the judgment not to say that in an interview indicated the guy is too stupid and under seasoned for us to hire in any capacity.   I was so astounded that I emailed the people who did the preliminary "phone screen" and early stage interviews on the guy to inquire how his abject inanity and unfitness for our firm did not come through when they spoke with him.  I was and remain incredulous that the guy made it far enough through the interview process that he got to talk to me.
> 
> (Normally, I don't any longer do interviews, but the guy specifically expressed an interest in being part of my practice unit, and I have final say on all manager-and-above experienced hires who aim to it.  It was rather serendipitous that I had to be part of the interview team considering him because the unique nature of my unit's work militates for "growing" people more so than finding them from outside the firm.)
> 
> The guy could have said any number of things.  Hell, he could have gone with one of the standard pat answers to that question, and I'd have at least counted his answer as neither strong nor weak, but as neutral.
> 
> So with that as background, how did you answer the question I posed when you have been asked it?
> 
> 
> 
> When ever asked that question, always answer with something positive.
> 
> Example:
> 
> What's your greatest weakness?:
> 
> I never give up.
> 
> I'm always focused on the issue.  Some say too focused.
> 
> Some say my job means too much to me.
> 
> I'll give up my vacation time for important assignments.
> 
> I've been told I push my coworkers to get the job done.  But I have a hard time believing that because I always work so well with others.  I think I'm just highly motivated.
> 
> And so on.
Click to expand...




deanrd said:


> I've been told I push my coworkers to get the job done. But I have a hard time believing that because I always work so well with others.



Don't construe the two behaviors a being mutually exclusive or as indirectly proportional to one another.  Motivating colleagues to produce high quality results on-time and on-budget and working well with others both are two separate but related and required abilities of people who make good managers/leaders.  How one balances and deploys those qualities is what distinguishes good and excellent managers/leaders from mediocre and poor ones.  There is no good manager/leader who does not push his/her staff, and push hard, and also not work well with them and others.  For professionals, the "bar" moves in only one direction, up.


----------



## Dale Smith

Xelor said:


> Yesterday I had to do a phone interview of an experienced hire candidate who seeks to join our firm as a senior manager (one step below "entry level" partner).  The interview was going along well and I decided to as one of the easiest "tough" questions there are:  What's your greatest weakness?
> 
> Well, there's a first time for everything, I suppose.  Yesterday was the first time I've asked that question and received an answer that by itself determined my decision about whether to give my imprimatur for hiring the candidate.
> 
> The man answered by in effect saying that he's been told that he can be difficult to work with.  Upon hearing that, I abruptly ended the interview, asking if he had any questions of me.  He didn't and that was that.
> 
> I have no idea what led the candidate to think that giving the answer he did could possibly aid and abet his assertion that he'd be a good person for us to hire, but insofar as he gave it, he must have his reasons.  What I do know is that being hard to work with and lacking the judgment not to say that in an interview indicated the guy is too stupid and under seasoned for us to hire in any capacity.   I was so astounded that I emailed the people who did the preliminary "phone screen" and early stage interviews on the guy to inquire how his abject inanity and unfitness for our firm did not come through when they spoke with him.  I was and remain incredulous that the guy made it far enough through the interview process that he got to talk to me.
> 
> (Normally, I don't any longer do interviews, but the guy specifically expressed an interest in being part of my practice unit, and I have final say on all manager-and-above experienced hires who aim to it.  It was rather serendipitous that I had to be part of the interview team considering him because the unique nature of my unit's work militates for "growing" people more so than finding them from outside the firm.)
> 
> The guy could have said any number of things.  Hell, he could have gone with one of the standard pat answers to that question, and I'd have at least counted his answer as neither strong nor weak, but as neutral.
> 
> So with that as background, how did you answer the question I posed when you have been asked it?




I have had that question asked to me and my answer was "I don't accept setbacks with grace when I am working on a project. I reflect back more on my failure to deliver than I do about my successes even if the failure for the project had nothing to do with my efforts because maybe I could have changed the outcome via sheer will and where my strategic error occurred. I am not a graceful loser".


----------



## rightwinger

Xelor said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Compost said:
> 
> 
> 
> My greatest weakness? Utter impatience with pathetically transparent questions from pompous pedantics flexing their paltry power.
> 
> 
> 
> Exactly
> 
> The guy in the OP basically told the interviewer to fuck off
> 
> Why would he want the job?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> The guy in the OP basically told the interviewer to fuck off
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Maybe that was in his mind, and maybe it wasn't.  What I know is that he approached us asking for an opportunity to interview for a position we weren't seeking to fill.  We agreed to consider him because hiring him appeared initially to be an opportunity that fell into our laps, as it were, and we were thus willing to make a place for him.
Click to expand...


Sorry

But you suck as an interviewer

For God's sake....ask relevant questions
Don't Google "Top ten interview questions"


----------



## Lewdog

HereWeGoAgain said:


> I was asked that question once and I answered with...I sometimes catch myself getting to detailed in my work and it slows my production.
> I was going to be making flight hardware for the shuttle program.
> 
> I got the job.




Yep, that's the answer I usually give, or one of two others.

#2.  I always feel I could have done a better job, and don't settle for just success from a project, but instead look at ways I could improve on the next project.

#3.  I put customer service, and the happiness of the customer, over anything else as long as I'm staying within my capacity to do so by company policy.  There is not a better advertisement for a company than word-of-mouth from a satisfied customer.


----------



## Moonglow

I tell them my greatest weakness is having to work for a company like yours to maintain a lifestyle that I am comfortable with...


----------



## Mr Natural

My greatest weakness?

Being obsessed with doing a great job even if it means working nights and weekends at the expense of my family.

"You're hired!"


----------



## deanrd

Xelor said:


> deanrd said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Xelor said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yesterday I had to do a phone interview of an experienced hire candidate who seeks to join our firm as a senior manager (one step below "entry level" partner).  The interview was going along well and I decided to as one of the easiest "tough" questions there are:  What's your greatest weakness?
> 
> Well, there's a first time for everything, I suppose.  Yesterday was the first time I've asked that question and received an answer that by itself determined my decision about whether to give my imprimatur for hiring the candidate.
> 
> The man answered by in effect saying that he's been told that he can be difficult to work with.  Upon hearing that, I abruptly ended the interview, asking if he had any questions of me.  He didn't and that was that.
> 
> I have no idea what led the candidate to think that giving the answer he did could possibly aid and abet his assertion that he'd be a good person for us to hire, but insofar as he gave it, he must have his reasons.  What I do know is that being hard to work with and lacking the judgment not to say that in an interview indicated the guy is too stupid and under seasoned for us to hire in any capacity.   I was so astounded that I emailed the people who did the preliminary "phone screen" and early stage interviews on the guy to inquire how his abject inanity and unfitness for our firm did not come through when they spoke with him.  I was and remain incredulous that the guy made it far enough through the interview process that he got to talk to me.
> 
> (Normally, I don't any longer do interviews, but the guy specifically expressed an interest in being part of my practice unit, and I have final say on all manager-and-above experienced hires who aim to it.  It was rather serendipitous that I had to be part of the interview team considering him because the unique nature of my unit's work militates for "growing" people more so than finding them from outside the firm.)
> 
> The guy could have said any number of things.  Hell, he could have gone with one of the standard pat answers to that question, and I'd have at least counted his answer as neither strong nor weak, but as neutral.
> 
> So with that as background, how did you answer the question I posed when you have been asked it?
> 
> 
> 
> When ever asked that question, always answer with something positive.
> 
> Example:
> 
> What's your greatest weakness?:
> 
> I never give up.
> 
> I'm always focused on the issue.  Some say too focused.
> 
> Some say my job means too much to me.
> 
> I'll give up my vacation time for important assignments.
> 
> I've been told I push my coworkers to get the job done.  But I have a hard time believing that because I always work so well with others.  I think I'm just highly motivated.
> 
> And so on.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> deanrd said:
> 
> 
> 
> I've been told I push my coworkers to get the job done. But I have a hard time believing that because I always work so well with others.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Don't construe the two behaviors a being mutually exclusive or as indirectly proportional to one another.  Motivating colleagues to produce high quality results on-time and on-budget and working well with others both are two separate but related and required abilities of people who make good managers/leaders.  How one balances and deploys those qualities is what distinguishes good and excellent managers/leaders from mediocre and poor ones.  There is no good manager/leader who does not push his/her staff, and push hard, and also not work well with them and others.  For professionals, the "bar" moves in only one direction, up.
Click to expand...

I didn't see any mention of leader/manager in the original question.

I know from personal experience that you can motivate your co-workers without being a manager.  Encouraging words like "Let's get his done first" can work wonders.


----------



## deanrd

Mr Clean said:


> My greatest weakness?
> 
> Being obsessed with doing a great job even if it means working nights and weekends at the expense of my family.
> 
> "You're hired!"


Some families would be better off.


----------



## PredFan

I’m too trusting.


----------



## rightwinger

Moonglow said:


> I tell them my greatest weakness is having to work for a company like yours to maintain a lifestyle that I am comfortable with...



That's what it comes down to

I am willing to sell out my integrity to answer your stupid fucking question
Hey...its a paycheck


----------



## usmbguest5318

deanrd said:


> Xelor said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> deanrd said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Xelor said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yesterday I had to do a phone interview of an experienced hire candidate who seeks to join our firm as a senior manager (one step below "entry level" partner).  The interview was going along well and I decided to as one of the easiest "tough" questions there are:  What's your greatest weakness?
> 
> Well, there's a first time for everything, I suppose.  Yesterday was the first time I've asked that question and received an answer that by itself determined my decision about whether to give my imprimatur for hiring the candidate.
> 
> The man answered by in effect saying that he's been told that he can be difficult to work with.  Upon hearing that, I abruptly ended the interview, asking if he had any questions of me.  He didn't and that was that.
> 
> I have no idea what led the candidate to think that giving the answer he did could possibly aid and abet his assertion that he'd be a good person for us to hire, but insofar as he gave it, he must have his reasons.  What I do know is that being hard to work with and lacking the judgment not to say that in an interview indicated the guy is too stupid and under seasoned for us to hire in any capacity.   I was so astounded that I emailed the people who did the preliminary "phone screen" and early stage interviews on the guy to inquire how his abject inanity and unfitness for our firm did not come through when they spoke with him.  I was and remain incredulous that the guy made it far enough through the interview process that he got to talk to me.
> 
> (Normally, I don't any longer do interviews, but the guy specifically expressed an interest in being part of my practice unit, and I have final say on all manager-and-above experienced hires who aim to it.  It was rather serendipitous that I had to be part of the interview team considering him because the unique nature of my unit's work militates for "growing" people more so than finding them from outside the firm.)
> 
> The guy could have said any number of things.  Hell, he could have gone with one of the standard pat answers to that question, and I'd have at least counted his answer as neither strong nor weak, but as neutral.
> 
> So with that as background, how did you answer the question I posed when you have been asked it?
> 
> 
> 
> When ever asked that question, always answer with something positive.
> 
> Example:
> 
> What's your greatest weakness?:
> 
> I never give up.
> 
> I'm always focused on the issue.  Some say too focused.
> 
> Some say my job means too much to me.
> 
> I'll give up my vacation time for important assignments.
> 
> I've been told I push my coworkers to get the job done.  But I have a hard time believing that because I always work so well with others.  I think I'm just highly motivated.
> 
> And so on.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> deanrd said:
> 
> 
> 
> I've been told I push my coworkers to get the job done. But I have a hard time believing that because I always work so well with others.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Don't construe the two behaviors a being mutually exclusive or as indirectly proportional to one another.  Motivating colleagues to produce high quality results on-time and on-budget and working well with others both are two separate but related and required abilities of people who make good managers/leaders.  How one balances and deploys those qualities is what distinguishes good and excellent managers/leaders from mediocre and poor ones.  There is no good manager/leader who does not push his/her staff, and push hard, and also not work well with them and others.  For professionals, the "bar" moves in only one direction, up.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I didn't see any mention of leader/manager in the original question.
> 
> I know from personal experience that you can motivate your co-workers without being a manager.  Encouraging words like "Let's get his done first" can work wonders.
Click to expand...




deanrd said:


> I didn't see any mention of leader/manager in the original question.



Did you read the OP? 

First sentence in the OP:


Xelor said:


> Yesterday I had to do a phone interview of an experienced hire* candidate who seeks to join our firm as a senior manager* (one step below "entry level" partner).





deanrd said:


> I know from personal experience that you can motivate your co-workers without being a manager.


That is true.  That it is is why I wrote "manager/*leader*."


----------



## Indeependent

rightwinger said:


> Moonglow said:
> 
> 
> 
> I tell them my greatest weakness is having to work for a company like yours to maintain a lifestyle that I am comfortable with...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That's what it comes down to
> 
> I am willing to sell out my integrity to answer your stupid fucking question
> Hey...its a paycheck
Click to expand...

That leaves the interviewer and interviewed equal integrity.


----------



## Skull Pilot

I'm not sorry I missed out on the whole interview/ begging for a job experience.


----------



## Moonglow

Indeependent said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Moonglow said:
> 
> 
> 
> I tell them my greatest weakness is having to work for a company like yours to maintain a lifestyle that I am comfortable with...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That's what it comes down to
> 
> I am willing to sell out my integrity to answer your stupid fucking question
> Hey...its a paycheck
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That leaves the interviewer and interviewed equal integrity.
Click to expand...

They normally don't take it as such...Probably why I am still self employed 30 years later...


----------



## toobfreak

deanrd said:


> Xelor said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yesterday I had to do a phone interview of an experienced hire candidate who seeks to join our firm as a senior manager (one step below "entry level" partner).  The interview was going along well and I decided to as one of the easiest "tough" questions there are:  What's your greatest weakness?
> 
> Well, there's a first time for everything, I suppose.  Yesterday was the first time I've asked that question and received an answer that by itself determined my decision about whether to give my imprimatur for hiring the candidate.
> 
> The man answered by in effect saying that he's been told that he can be difficult to work with.  Upon hearing that, I abruptly ended the interview, asking if he had any questions of me.  He didn't and that was that.
> 
> I have no idea what led the candidate to think that giving the answer he did could possibly aid and abet his assertion that he'd be a good person for us to hire, but insofar as he gave it, he must have his reasons.  What I do know is that being hard to work with and lacking the judgment not to say that in an interview indicated the guy is too stupid and under seasoned for us to hire in any capacity.   I was so astounded that I emailed the people who did the preliminary "phone screen" and early stage interviews on the guy to inquire how his abject inanity and unfitness for our firm did not come through when they spoke with him.  I was and remain incredulous that the guy made it far enough through the interview process that he got to talk to me.
> 
> (Normally, I don't any longer do interviews, but the guy specifically expressed an interest in being part of my practice unit, and I have final say on all manager-and-above experienced hires who aim to it.  It was rather serendipitous that I had to be part of the interview team considering him because the unique nature of my unit's work militates for "growing" people more so than finding them from outside the firm.)
> 
> The guy could have said any number of things.  Hell, he could have gone with one of the standard pat answers to that question, and I'd have at least counted his answer as neither strong nor weak, but as neutral.
> 
> So with that as background, how did you answer the question I posed when you have been asked it?
> 
> 
> 
> When ever asked that question, always answer with something positive.
> 
> Example:
> 
> What's your greatest weakness?:
> 
> I never give up.
> 
> I'm always focused on the issue.  Some say too focused.
> 
> Some say my job means too much to me.
> 
> I'll give up my vacation time for important assignments.
> 
> I've been told I push my coworkers to get the job done.  But I have a hard time believing that because I always work so well with others.  I think I'm just highly motivated.
> 
> And so on.
Click to expand...



Yep, those are the officially prescribed cookie cutter answers.  Greatest weakness?  I'm too thorough.  I come in early and stay late working free to do a better job.  I took a pay cut to save the company money. . . .  It all sounds good and goes over well with HR staff looking for good conformers and interview game-players who know how to get in under the radar.  The question is always:  What will these people REALLY be like as employees after they are hired?  A company's greatest successes come from the Innovators who know how to solve problems by thinking outside the box;  how unfortunate that showing innovation or free thinking during a hiring interview will likely never get you even hired as you try to get past the dullards charged with interviewing to actually get to the people who would recognize and appreciate your creative skills.  

The problem in America today is that current corporate thinking is that all of the "bright minds" with the good ideas are all at the home central office being paid 6 figures and they always think they know what's best as they go out on their extended lunches being overpaid and dictate company policy to the other 99% of the company whom they expect to follow blindly without question like so many automatons with no brains.  If you are out in the "work force," they don't want to hear from you, you couldn't possibly have any worthwhile input;  just shut up and do your job and don't ask questions or you will be bumped.  Is it any wonder America struggles in many ways to keep up with the rest of the world------  80% of our brightest minds and best ideas are never even used.


----------



## Unkotare

Xelor said:


> evenflow1969 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Xelor said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yesterday I had to do a phone interview of an experienced hire candidate who seeks to join our firm as a senior manager (one step below "entry level" partner).  The interview was going along well and I decided to as one of the easiest "tough" questions there are:  What's your greatest weakness?
> 
> Well, there's a first time for everything, I suppose.  Yesterday was the first time I've asked that question and received an answer that by itself determined my decision about whether to give my imprimatur for hiring the candidate.
> 
> The man answered by in effect saying that he's been told that he can be difficult to work with.  Upon hearing that, I abruptly ended the interview, asking if he had any questions of me.  He didn't and that was that.
> 
> I have no idea what led the candidate to think that giving the answer he did could possibly aid and abet his assertion that he'd be a good person for us to hire, but insofar as he gave it, he must have his reasons.  What I do know is that being hard to work with and lacking the judgment not to say that in an interview indicated the guy is too stupid and under seasoned for us to hire in any capacity.   I was so astounded that I emailed the people who did the preliminary "phone screen" and early stage interviews on the guy to inquire how his abject inanity and unfitness for our firm did not come through when they spoke with him.  I was and remain incredulous that the guy made it far enough through the interview process that he got to talk to me.
> 
> (Normally, I don't any longer do interviews, but the guy specifically expressed an interest in being part of my practice unit, and I have final say on all manager-and-above experienced hires who aim to it.  It was rather serendipitous that I had to be part of the interview team considering him because the unique nature of my unit's work militates for "growing" people more so than finding them from outside the firm.)
> 
> The guy could have said any number of things.  Hell, he could have gone with one of the standard pat answers to that question, and I'd have at least counted his answer as neither strong nor weak, but as neutral.
> 
> So with that as background, how did you answer the question I posed when you have been asked it?
> 
> 
> 
> I absolutley dispise that question. You are begging to be lied to by asking it! The reality is that any one with half a brain would not tell some one their greatest weakness as it opens one up for exploitation. I almost feel as though they are trying to find out how good of a liar I am. Then I imagine, that if my lie was good enough and they will hire me and expect me to lie while working and fucking miserable I would be in a job that required lying all day. So I look for the most truethfull answer I can give them on the subject.  I answer with " I am not very good a taking compliments for a job well done as I feel that I should not even be here if it was not a job well done. I certainly prefer bonuses and raises over accolades." I would have to be in dire straights to take the job. Unless the situation was nothing like I expected from the question, I likely would not be there long. I would be continually looking for an employer that I felt was more interested in the truth than putting some one on the spot!
> 
> PS. I am hoping that an offer comes from some one who did not ask the question. Assuming similar pay I will take the job from the interviewer that did not ask that question first.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> evenflow1969 said:
> 
> 
> 
> The reality is that any one with half a brain would not tell some one their greatest weakness as it opens one up for exploitation. *I almost feel as though they are trying to find out how good of a liar I am*.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No fair interviewer asks that question for that reason.
Click to expand...




It is one of the most common interview questions of all.


----------



## OldLady

Indeependent said:


> Xelor said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Xelor said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why not simply take 10-15 minutes of a simulated run through of a project?
> The “Weak” question means you don’t want to hire the candi.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why not simply take 10-15 minutes of a simulated run through of a project?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That or something resembling it is among the things we do when circumstances allow and militate for it.  The man who whom I interviewed didn't have circumstances that allowed us to set up an experiential interview apropos to the position he sought.  As I noted elsewhere in this thread, he sought to on-board ASAP and we were of a mind to facilitate his doing so, so we went with a traditional interview approach.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Anyone who cannot conduct this type of interview on the phone in the Smart Device Age should not be interviewing anyone on the phone period.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Obviously, "simulated run through of a project" means something different to you than it does to me.
> 
> I won't again make the mistake of replying to you without clarifying terms.  Ciao.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You don't seem to be very popular with quite a number of people here.
> What it comes down to is you had a vacuous "feeling" and you don't want to admit to such.
Click to expand...

Is that the same as gas?


----------



## Indeependent

OldLady said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Xelor said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Xelor said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why not simply take 10-15 minutes of a simulated run through of a project?
> The “Weak” question means you don’t want to hire the candi.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why not simply take 10-15 minutes of a simulated run through of a project?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That or something resembling it is among the things we do when circumstances allow and militate for it.  The man who whom I interviewed didn't have circumstances that allowed us to set up an experiential interview apropos to the position he sought.  As I noted elsewhere in this thread, he sought to on-board ASAP and we were of a mind to facilitate his doing so, so we went with a traditional interview approach.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Anyone who cannot conduct this type of interview on the phone in the Smart Device Age should not be interviewing anyone on the phone period.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Obviously, "simulated run through of a project" means something different to you than it does to me.
> 
> I won't again make the mistake of replying to you without clarifying terms.  Ciao.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You don't seem to be very popular with quite a number of people here.
> What it comes down to is you had a vacuous "feeling" and you don't want to admit to such.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Is that the same as gas?
Click to expand...

More like being an arrogant ass.
A firm that assigns a phone interview that isn’t an appropriate phone interview, someone is derailing something.


----------



## rightwinger

My greatest weakness?

I just work too hard. My old supervisor would drive by the office at 2:30 in the morning and see me still at my desk. He would have to drag me out and send me home. I refused to take weekends and holidays off because there was too much work to do. I don't know my kids names and think they play some kind of sport. I missed my mothers funeral last year because it took place during the work day. I never take sick days and once fixed my own broken arm while sitting at my desk, I work through lunch and consider multitasking my greatest skill


----------



## OldLady

I have an entirely different spin on this whole situation, being an emotionally sensitive type.

When you apply for a job, it is about the most vulnerable that a person can be.  The power is all with the prospective employer.  You get all gussied up and go to sit before a total stranger to be judged on one of the most important aspects of your life--knowledge, experience and the ability to do a job well.  You are going, hat in hand, begging for work.  As far as a power imbalance, it's about as close to the helplessness of being sold into slavery as most of us will ever come.  It is all up to the decision of the prospective employer.

In this case, the guy is peremptorily rejected by the man with the power, who is sitting by a pool in the Bahamas, because he honestly answered a question.  And the man at poolside not only crushed the guy beneath his heel, he continued with a vituperative rant about just what a moron he was:
_I was so astounded that I emailed the people who did the preliminary "phone screen" and early stage interviews on the guy to inquire how his abject inanity and unfitness for our firm did not come through when they spoke with him. I was and remain incredulous that the guy made it far enough through the interview process that he got to talk to me._

So the nightmare of interviewing for a job and being rejected is compounded with the reminder that the interviewer is also judging our character, our intelligence and whatever else he sees fit to poke his nose into.

This story seems tailor made to emphasize how powerful the guy poolside is.  The argument that he needed to pose a difficult question to see how the interviewee would respond would make sense if he actually asked a difficult question.  But, as Xelor showed, it is such a common question that there are articles written about how to respond to it, so it's not really so hard, is it?  Just a cool way to torture the mouse before biting out it's guts.

I have always enjoyed conversing with Xelor and he's a smart guy, but a little empathy and compassion would go a long way here, regardless of the decision he made.  It's his business--literally--and he knows who fits in.  To me that wasn't the point of the thread.


----------



## usmbguest5318

OldLady said:


> I have an entirely different spin on this whole situation, being an emotionally sensitive type.
> 
> When you apply for a job, it is about the most vulnerable that a person can be.  The power is all with the prospective employer.  You get all gussied up and go to sit before a total stranger to be judged on one of the most important aspects of your life--knowledge, experience and the ability to do a job well.  You are going, hat in hand, begging for work.  As far as a power imbalance, it's about as close to the helplessness of being sold into slavery as most of us will ever come.  It is all up to the decision of the prospective employer.
> 
> In this case, the guy is peremptorily rejected by the man with the power, who is sitting by a pool in the Bahamas, because he honestly answered a question.  And the man at poolside not only crushed the guy beneath his heel, he continued with a vituperative rant about just what a moron he was:
> _I was so astounded that I emailed the people who did the preliminary "phone screen" and early stage interviews on the guy to inquire how his abject inanity and unfitness for our firm did not come through when they spoke with him. I was and remain incredulous that the guy made it far enough through the interview process that he got to talk to me._
> 
> So the nightmare of interviewing for a job and being rejected is compounded with the reminder that the interviewer is also judging our character, our intelligence and whatever else he sees fit to poke his nose into.
> 
> This story seems tailor made to emphasize how powerful the guy poolside is.  The argument that he needed to pose a difficult question to see how the interviewee would respond would make sense if he actually asked a difficult question.  But, as Xelor showed, it is such a common question that there are articles written about how to respond to it, so it's not really so hard, is it?  Just a cool way to torture the mouse before biting out it's guts.
> 
> I have always enjoyed conversing with Xelor and he's a smart guy, but a little empathy and compassion would go a long way here, regardless of the decision he made.  It's his business--literally--and he knows who fits in.  To me that wasn't the point of the thread.





OldLady said:


> The power is all with the prospective employer....You are going, hat in hand, begging for work.



I and my colleagues don't see it that way.  I doubt that most business owners see it that way.  The reality is that in the exchange of labor for money, both parties receive what they want and need.  Very few principals/firm establish staffing levels based on the notion of "how many people can they can help by exhibiting the largesse of _giving _them a job."



OldLady said:


> As far as a power imbalance, it's about as close to the helplessness of being sold into slavery as most of us will ever come.



The "imbalance" is that of any one individual rarely, if ever, being the only person who can perform adequately (or better) the tasks an employer needs done.  At the end of the day, every employee, when they go seeking a job, is saying, "I have something to sell and you have stated you desire to purchase that which I am selling."  Just as, for whatever reason(s), one chooses to purchase a Big Mac instead of a burrito, employers evaluate their options and purchase "Bill's" rather than "Bob's" labor.


OldLady said:


> In this case, the guy is peremptorily rejected by the man with the power, who is sitting by a pool in the Bahamas, because he honestly answered a question.


There was nothing peremptory going on.


Xelor said:


> His interview with me, when it started, was but a formality for (1) four of the five other partners on the interview team had emailed saying they recommend we hire the guy...I was of the mind that insofar as four partners thought the guy is "high quality," barring his really screwing up with me, his being hired was a "done deal," as they say.





Xelor said:


> Those factors combined to make me amenable to hiring the guy. The fact of the matter is that at the outset of the call, the guy was all but hired. I even was satisfied with him and his qualifications until he answered that question as he did.





OldLady said:


> In this case, the guy is peremptorily rejected by the man with the power, who is sitting by a pool in the Bahamas, because he honestly answered a question.



Like it or not, all employers have requirements that prospective workers must meet.  One can frame those requirements in whatever jaundiced language one wants, but at the end of the day, the requirements remain and seekers of the job must meet them, all of them.  As go the requirements evaluated by asking the "greatest weakness question, I've already discussed them and shown that mine is not the only firm that has them. 

How do you respond to the interview question, "What is your greatest weakness?"

How do you respond to the interview question, "What is your greatest weakness?"
Among the firms that also have those requirements are the news organizations that have let go of reporters, editors, anchors, etc. who chose to say publicly things that do not align with their former firm's values.  In most instances, the business (employee) requirements the person showed they lack in sufficient quantity are judgement and discretion.  Those are not opprobrious qualities to demand of workers, including workers seeking/holding a position that pays over $300K/year, though, frankly the wage doesn't have much to do with it.  Good judgement, thinking quickly on one's feet, and discretion are important qualities for workers at all pay grades.



OldLady said:


> So the nightmare of interviewing for a job and being rejected is compounded with the reminder that *the interviewer is also judging our character, our intelligence and whatever else he sees fit* to poke his nose into.



To the extent the employer/firm deems whatever be those qualities, they do and they are right to do so for nobody but a firm's owners/executive managers gets to decide what matters and what does not as goes the people from whom the firm purchases labor.  One need not like a firm's definition of what matters and what doesn't in that regard, but liking it, one has two choices:  (1) get over it and exhibit the requisite qualities to the best of one's ability, or (2) sell one's labor to a firm that doesn't think such things matter.



OldLady said:


> I have always enjoyed conversing with Xelor and he's a smart guy, but a little empathy and compassion would go a long way here, regardless of the decision he made. It's his business--literally--and he knows who fits in. *To me that wasn't the point of the thread*.



That wan't the point of the thread.  It is, however, a point that, in response to someone's comment, I later made


Xelor said:


> TY, but I'm sure I know better than you what is the right way to handle anything and everything having to do with the interview process at my firm. I don't know what makes you think you can be so presumptuous as to tell me that I'm wrong about such a thing.


.​


----------



## OldLady

Xelor said:


> OldLady said:
> 
> 
> 
> I have an entirely different spin on this whole situation, being an emotionally sensitive type.
> 
> When you apply for a job, it is about the most vulnerable that a person can be.  The power is all with the prospective employer.  You get all gussied up and go to sit before a total stranger to be judged on one of the most important aspects of your life--knowledge, experience and the ability to do a job well.  You are going, hat in hand, begging for work.  As far as a power imbalance, it's about as close to the helplessness of being sold into slavery as most of us will ever come.  It is all up to the decision of the prospective employer.
> 
> In this case, the guy is peremptorily rejected by the man with the power, who is sitting by a pool in the Bahamas, because he honestly answered a question.  And the man at poolside not only crushed the guy beneath his heel, he continued with a vituperative rant about just what a moron he was:
> _I was so astounded that I emailed the people who did the preliminary "phone screen" and early stage interviews on the guy to inquire how his abject inanity and unfitness for our firm did not come through when they spoke with him. I was and remain incredulous that the guy made it far enough through the interview process that he got to talk to me._
> 
> So the nightmare of interviewing for a job and being rejected is compounded with the reminder that the interviewer is also judging our character, our intelligence and whatever else he sees fit to poke his nose into.
> 
> This story seems tailor made to emphasize how powerful the guy poolside is.  The argument that he needed to pose a difficult question to see how the interviewee would respond would make sense if he actually asked a difficult question.  But, as Xelor showed, it is such a common question that there are articles written about how to respond to it, so it's not really so hard, is it?  Just a cool way to torture the mouse before biting out it's guts.
> 
> I have always enjoyed conversing with Xelor and he's a smart guy, but a little empathy and compassion would go a long way here, regardless of the decision he made.  It's his business--literally--and he knows who fits in.  To me that wasn't the point of the thread.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> OldLady said:
> 
> 
> 
> The power is all with the prospective employer....You are going, hat in hand, begging for work.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I and my colleagues don't see it that way.  I doubt that most business owners see it that way.  The reality is that in the exchange of labor for money, both parties receive what they want and need.  Very few principals/firm establish staffing levels based on the notion of "how many people can they can help by exhibiting the largesse of _giving _them a job."
> 
> 
> 
> OldLady said:
> 
> 
> 
> As far as a power imbalance, it's about as close to the helplessness of being sold into slavery as most of us will ever come.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The "imbalance" is that of any one individual rarely, if ever, being the only person who can perform adequately (or better) the tasks an employer needs done.  At the end of the day, every employee, when they go seeking a job, is saying, "I have something to sell and you have stated you desire to purchase that which I am selling."  Just as, for whatever reason(s), one chooses to purchase a Big Mac instead of a burrito, employers evaluate their options and purchase "Bill's" rather than "Bob's" labor.
> 
> 
> OldLady said:
> 
> 
> 
> In this case, the guy is peremptorily rejected by the man with the power, who is sitting by a pool in the Bahamas, because he honestly answered a question.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> There was nothing peremptory going on.
> 
> 
> Xelor said:
> 
> 
> 
> His interview with me, when it started, was but a formality for (1) four of the five other partners on the interview team had emailed saying they recommend we hire the guy...I was of the mind that insofar as four partners thought the guy is "high quality," barring his really screwing up with me, his being hired was a "done deal," as they say.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Xelor said:
> 
> 
> 
> Those factors combined to make me amenable to hiring the guy. The fact of the matter is that at the outset of the call, the guy was all but hired. I even was satisfied with him and his qualifications until he answered that question as he did.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> OldLady said:
> 
> 
> 
> In this case, the guy is peremptorily rejected by the man with the power, who is sitting by a pool in the Bahamas, because he honestly answered a question.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Like it or not, all employers have requirements that prospective workers must meet.  One can frame those requirements in whatever jaundiced language one wants, but at the end of the day, the requirements remain and seekers of the job must meet them, all of them.  As go the requirements evaluated by asking the "greatest weakness question, I've already discussed them and shown that mine is not the only firm that has them.
> 
> How do you respond to the interview question, "What is your greatest weakness?"
> 
> How do you respond to the interview question, "What is your greatest weakness?"
> Among the firms that also have those requirements are the news organizations that have let go of reporters, editors, anchors, etc. who chose to say publicly things that do not align with their former firm's values.  In most instances, the business (employee) requirements the person showed they lack in sufficient quantity are judgement and discretion.  Those are not opprobrious qualities to demand of workers, including workers seeking/holding a position that pays over $300K/year, though, frankly the wage doesn't have much to do with it.  Good judgement, thinking quickly on one's feet, and discretion are important qualities for workers at all pay grades.
> 
> 
> 
> OldLady said:
> 
> 
> 
> So the nightmare of interviewing for a job and being rejected is compounded with the reminder that *the interviewer is also judging our character, our intelligence and whatever else he sees fit* to poke his nose into.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> To the extent the employer/firm deems whatever be those qualities, they do and they are right to do so for nobody but a firm's owners/executive managers gets to decide what matters and what does not as goes the people from whom the firm purchases labor.  One need not like a firm's definition of what matters and what doesn't in that regard, but liking it, one has two choices:  (1) get over it and exhibit the requisite qualities to the best of one's ability, or (2) sell one's labor to a firm that doesn't think such things matter.
> 
> 
> 
> OldLady said:
> 
> 
> 
> I have always enjoyed conversing with Xelor and he's a smart guy, but a little empathy and compassion would go a long way here, regardless of the decision he made. It's his business--literally--and he knows who fits in. *To me that wasn't the point of the thread*.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That wan't the point of the thread.  It is, however, a point that, in response to someone's comment, I later made
> 
> 
> Xelor said:
> 
> 
> 
> TY, but I'm sure I know better than you what is the right way to handle anything and everything having to do with the interview process at my firm. I don't know what makes you think you can be so presumptuous as to tell me that I'm wrong about such a thing.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> .​
Click to expand...

Just sharing MY perspective.  I am aware you have a different one.  That doesn't make either of us "wrong," just viewing it differently.


----------



## usmbguest5318

Xelor said:


> OldLady said:
> 
> 
> 
> I have an entirely different spin on this whole situation, being an emotionally sensitive type.
> 
> When you apply for a job, it is about the most vulnerable that a person can be.  The power is all with the prospective employer.  You get all gussied up and go to sit before a total stranger to be judged on one of the most important aspects of your life--knowledge, experience and the ability to do a job well.  You are going, hat in hand, begging for work.  As far as a power imbalance, it's about as close to the helplessness of being sold into slavery as most of us will ever come.  It is all up to the decision of the prospective employer.
> 
> In this case, the guy is peremptorily rejected by the man with the power, who is sitting by a pool in the Bahamas, because he honestly answered a question.  And the man at poolside not only crushed the guy beneath his heel, he continued with a vituperative rant about just what a moron he was:
> _I was so astounded that I emailed the people who did the preliminary "phone screen" and early stage interviews on the guy to inquire how his abject inanity and unfitness for our firm did not come through when they spoke with him. I was and remain incredulous that the guy made it far enough through the interview process that he got to talk to me._
> 
> So the nightmare of interviewing for a job and being rejected is compounded with the reminder that the interviewer is also judging our character, our intelligence and whatever else he sees fit to poke his nose into.
> 
> This story seems tailor made to emphasize how powerful the guy poolside is.  The argument that he needed to pose a difficult question to see how the interviewee would respond would make sense if he actually asked a difficult question.  But, as Xelor showed, it is such a common question that there are articles written about how to respond to it, so it's not really so hard, is it?  Just a cool way to torture the mouse before biting out it's guts.
> 
> I have always enjoyed conversing with Xelor and he's a smart guy, but a little empathy and compassion would go a long way here, regardless of the decision he made.  It's his business--literally--and he knows who fits in.  To me that wasn't the point of the thread.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> OldLady said:
> 
> 
> 
> The power is all with the prospective employer....You are going, hat in hand, begging for work.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I and my colleagues don't see it that way.  I doubt that most business owners see it that way.  The reality is that in the exchange of labor for money, both parties receive what they want and need.  Very few principals/firm establish staffing levels based on the notion of "how many people can they can help by exhibiting the largesse of _giving _them a job."
> 
> 
> 
> OldLady said:
> 
> 
> 
> As far as a power imbalance, it's about as close to the helplessness of being sold into slavery as most of us will ever come.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The "imbalance" is that of any one individual rarely, if ever, being the only person who can perform adequately (or better) the tasks an employer needs done.  At the end of the day, every employee, when they go seeking a job, is saying, "I have something to sell and you have stated you desire to purchase that which I am selling."  Just as, for whatever reason(s), one chooses to purchase a Big Mac instead of a burrito, employers evaluate their options and purchase "Bill's" rather than "Bob's" labor.
> 
> 
> OldLady said:
> 
> 
> 
> In this case, the guy is peremptorily rejected by the man with the power, who is sitting by a pool in the Bahamas, because he honestly answered a question.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> There was nothing peremptory going on.
> 
> 
> Xelor said:
> 
> 
> 
> His interview with me, when it started, was but a formality for (1) four of the five other partners on the interview team had emailed saying they recommend we hire the guy...I was of the mind that insofar as four partners thought the guy is "high quality," barring his really screwing up with me, his being hired was a "done deal," as they say.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Xelor said:
> 
> 
> 
> Those factors combined to make me amenable to hiring the guy. The fact of the matter is that at the outset of the call, the guy was all but hired. I even was satisfied with him and his qualifications until he answered that question as he did.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> OldLady said:
> 
> 
> 
> In this case, the guy is peremptorily rejected by the man with the power, who is sitting by a pool in the Bahamas, because he honestly answered a question.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Like it or not, all employers have requirements that prospective workers must meet.  One can frame those requirements in whatever jaundiced language one wants, but at the end of the day, the requirements remain and seekers of the job must meet them, all of them.  As go the requirements evaluated by asking the "greatest weakness question, I've already discussed them and shown that mine is not the only firm that has them.
> 
> How do you respond to the interview question, "What is your greatest weakness?"
> 
> How do you respond to the interview question, "What is your greatest weakness?"
> Among the firms that also have those requirements are the news organizations that have let go of reporters, editors, anchors, etc. who chose to say publicly things that do not align with their former firm's values.  In most instances, the business (employee) requirements the person showed they lack in sufficient quantity are judgement and discretion.  Those are not opprobrious qualities to demand of workers, including workers seeking/holding a position that pays over $300K/year, though, frankly the wage doesn't have much to do with it.  Good judgement, thinking quickly on one's feet, and discretion are important qualities for workers at all pay grades.
> 
> 
> 
> OldLady said:
> 
> 
> 
> So the nightmare of interviewing for a job and being rejected is compounded with the reminder that *the interviewer is also judging our character, our intelligence and whatever else he sees fit* to poke his nose into.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> To the extent the employer/firm deems whatever be those qualities, they do and they are right to do so for nobody but a firm's owners/executive managers gets to decide what matters and what does not as goes the people from whom the firm purchases labor.  One need not like a firm's definition of what matters and what doesn't in that regard, but liking it, one has two choices:  (1) get over it and exhibit the requisite qualities to the best of one's ability, or (2) sell one's labor to a firm that doesn't think such things matter.
> 
> 
> 
> OldLady said:
> 
> 
> 
> I have always enjoyed conversing with Xelor and he's a smart guy, but a little empathy and compassion would go a long way here, regardless of the decision he made. It's his business--literally--and he knows who fits in. *To me that wasn't the point of the thread*.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That wan't the point of the thread.  It is, however, a point that, in response to someone's comment, I later made
> 
> 
> Xelor said:
> 
> 
> 
> TY, but I'm sure I know better than you what is the right way to handle anything and everything having to do with the interview process at my firm. I don't know what makes you think you can be so presumptuous as to tell me that I'm wrong about such a thing.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> .​
Click to expand...




OldLady said:


> Just sharing MY perspective.  I am aware you have a different one.  *That doesn't make either of us "wrong," just viewing it differently.*


In the abstract, I agree with you on that.


----------



## OldLady

Xelor said:


> Xelor said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> OldLady said:
> 
> 
> 
> I have an entirely different spin on this whole situation, being an emotionally sensitive type.
> 
> When you apply for a job, it is about the most vulnerable that a person can be.  The power is all with the prospective employer.  You get all gussied up and go to sit before a total stranger to be judged on one of the most important aspects of your life--knowledge, experience and the ability to do a job well.  You are going, hat in hand, begging for work.  As far as a power imbalance, it's about as close to the helplessness of being sold into slavery as most of us will ever come.  It is all up to the decision of the prospective employer.
> 
> In this case, the guy is peremptorily rejected by the man with the power, who is sitting by a pool in the Bahamas, because he honestly answered a question.  And the man at poolside not only crushed the guy beneath his heel, he continued with a vituperative rant about just what a moron he was:
> _I was so astounded that I emailed the people who did the preliminary "phone screen" and early stage interviews on the guy to inquire how his abject inanity and unfitness for our firm did not come through when they spoke with him. I was and remain incredulous that the guy made it far enough through the interview process that he got to talk to me._
> 
> So the nightmare of interviewing for a job and being rejected is compounded with the reminder that the interviewer is also judging our character, our intelligence and whatever else he sees fit to poke his nose into.
> 
> This story seems tailor made to emphasize how powerful the guy poolside is.  The argument that he needed to pose a difficult question to see how the interviewee would respond would make sense if he actually asked a difficult question.  But, as Xelor showed, it is such a common question that there are articles written about how to respond to it, so it's not really so hard, is it?  Just a cool way to torture the mouse before biting out it's guts.
> 
> I have always enjoyed conversing with Xelor and he's a smart guy, but a little empathy and compassion would go a long way here, regardless of the decision he made.  It's his business--literally--and he knows who fits in.  To me that wasn't the point of the thread.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> OldLady said:
> 
> 
> 
> The power is all with the prospective employer....You are going, hat in hand, begging for work.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I and my colleagues don't see it that way.  I doubt that most business owners see it that way.  The reality is that in the exchange of labor for money, both parties receive what they want and need.  Very few principals/firm establish staffing levels based on the notion of "how many people can they can help by exhibiting the largesse of _giving _them a job."
> 
> 
> 
> OldLady said:
> 
> 
> 
> As far as a power imbalance, it's about as close to the helplessness of being sold into slavery as most of us will ever come.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The "imbalance" is that of any one individual rarely, if ever, being the only person who can perform adequately (or better) the tasks an employer needs done.  At the end of the day, every employee, when they go seeking a job, is saying, "I have something to sell and you have stated you desire to purchase that which I am selling."  Just as, for whatever reason(s), one chooses to purchase a Big Mac instead of a burrito, employers evaluate their options and purchase "Bill's" rather than "Bob's" labor.
> 
> 
> OldLady said:
> 
> 
> 
> In this case, the guy is peremptorily rejected by the man with the power, who is sitting by a pool in the Bahamas, because he honestly answered a question.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> There was nothing peremptory going on.
> 
> 
> Xelor said:
> 
> 
> 
> His interview with me, when it started, was but a formality for (1) four of the five other partners on the interview team had emailed saying they recommend we hire the guy...I was of the mind that insofar as four partners thought the guy is "high quality," barring his really screwing up with me, his being hired was a "done deal," as they say.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Xelor said:
> 
> 
> 
> Those factors combined to make me amenable to hiring the guy. The fact of the matter is that at the outset of the call, the guy was all but hired. I even was satisfied with him and his qualifications until he answered that question as he did.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> OldLady said:
> 
> 
> 
> In this case, the guy is peremptorily rejected by the man with the power, who is sitting by a pool in the Bahamas, because he honestly answered a question.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Like it or not, all employers have requirements that prospective workers must meet.  One can frame those requirements in whatever jaundiced language one wants, but at the end of the day, the requirements remain and seekers of the job must meet them, all of them.  As go the requirements evaluated by asking the "greatest weakness question, I've already discussed them and shown that mine is not the only firm that has them.
> 
> How do you respond to the interview question, "What is your greatest weakness?"
> 
> How do you respond to the interview question, "What is your greatest weakness?"
> Among the firms that also have those requirements are the news organizations that have let go of reporters, editors, anchors, etc. who chose to say publicly things that do not align with their former firm's values.  In most instances, the business (employee) requirements the person showed they lack in sufficient quantity are judgement and discretion.  Those are not opprobrious qualities to demand of workers, including workers seeking/holding a position that pays over $300K/year, though, frankly the wage doesn't have much to do with it.  Good judgement, thinking quickly on one's feet, and discretion are important qualities for workers at all pay grades.
> 
> 
> 
> OldLady said:
> 
> 
> 
> So the nightmare of interviewing for a job and being rejected is compounded with the reminder that *the interviewer is also judging our character, our intelligence and whatever else he sees fit* to poke his nose into.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> To the extent the employer/firm deems whatever be those qualities, they do and they are right to do so for nobody but a firm's owners/executive managers gets to decide what matters and what does not as goes the people from whom the firm purchases labor.  One need not like a firm's definition of what matters and what doesn't in that regard, but liking it, one has two choices:  (1) get over it and exhibit the requisite qualities to the best of one's ability, or (2) sell one's labor to a firm that doesn't think such things matter.
> 
> 
> 
> OldLady said:
> 
> 
> 
> I have always enjoyed conversing with Xelor and he's a smart guy, but a little empathy and compassion would go a long way here, regardless of the decision he made. It's his business--literally--and he knows who fits in. *To me that wasn't the point of the thread*.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That wan't the point of the thread.  It is, however, a point that, in response to someone's comment, I later made
> 
> 
> Xelor said:
> 
> 
> 
> TY, but I'm sure I know better than you what is the right way to handle anything and everything having to do with the interview process at my firm. I don't know what makes you think you can be so presumptuous as to tell me that I'm wrong about such a thing.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> .​
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> OldLady said:
> 
> 
> 
> Just sharing MY perspective.  I am aware you have a different one.  *That doesn't make either of us "wrong," just viewing it differently.*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> In the abstract, I agree with you on that.
Click to expand...

LOL  But in this case, you are right.   Yes?


----------



## usmbguest5318

OldLady said:


> Xelor said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Xelor said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> OldLady said:
> 
> 
> 
> I have an entirely different spin on this whole situation, being an emotionally sensitive type.
> 
> When you apply for a job, it is about the most vulnerable that a person can be.  The power is all with the prospective employer.  You get all gussied up and go to sit before a total stranger to be judged on one of the most important aspects of your life--knowledge, experience and the ability to do a job well.  You are going, hat in hand, begging for work.  As far as a power imbalance, it's about as close to the helplessness of being sold into slavery as most of us will ever come.  It is all up to the decision of the prospective employer.
> 
> In this case, the guy is peremptorily rejected by the man with the power, who is sitting by a pool in the Bahamas, because he honestly answered a question.  And the man at poolside not only crushed the guy beneath his heel, he continued with a vituperative rant about just what a moron he was:
> _I was so astounded that I emailed the people who did the preliminary "phone screen" and early stage interviews on the guy to inquire how his abject inanity and unfitness for our firm did not come through when they spoke with him. I was and remain incredulous that the guy made it far enough through the interview process that he got to talk to me._
> 
> So the nightmare of interviewing for a job and being rejected is compounded with the reminder that the interviewer is also judging our character, our intelligence and whatever else he sees fit to poke his nose into.
> 
> This story seems tailor made to emphasize how powerful the guy poolside is.  The argument that he needed to pose a difficult question to see how the interviewee would respond would make sense if he actually asked a difficult question.  But, as Xelor showed, it is such a common question that there are articles written about how to respond to it, so it's not really so hard, is it?  Just a cool way to torture the mouse before biting out it's guts.
> 
> I have always enjoyed conversing with Xelor and he's a smart guy, but a little empathy and compassion would go a long way here, regardless of the decision he made.  It's his business--literally--and he knows who fits in.  To me that wasn't the point of the thread.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> OldLady said:
> 
> 
> 
> The power is all with the prospective employer....You are going, hat in hand, begging for work.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I and my colleagues don't see it that way.  I doubt that most business owners see it that way.  The reality is that in the exchange of labor for money, both parties receive what they want and need.  Very few principals/firm establish staffing levels based on the notion of "how many people can they can help by exhibiting the largesse of _giving _them a job."
> 
> 
> 
> OldLady said:
> 
> 
> 
> As far as a power imbalance, it's about as close to the helplessness of being sold into slavery as most of us will ever come.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The "imbalance" is that of any one individual rarely, if ever, being the only person who can perform adequately (or better) the tasks an employer needs done.  At the end of the day, every employee, when they go seeking a job, is saying, "I have something to sell and you have stated you desire to purchase that which I am selling."  Just as, for whatever reason(s), one chooses to purchase a Big Mac instead of a burrito, employers evaluate their options and purchase "Bill's" rather than "Bob's" labor.
> 
> 
> OldLady said:
> 
> 
> 
> In this case, the guy is peremptorily rejected by the man with the power, who is sitting by a pool in the Bahamas, because he honestly answered a question.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> There was nothing peremptory going on.
> 
> 
> Xelor said:
> 
> 
> 
> His interview with me, when it started, was but a formality for (1) four of the five other partners on the interview team had emailed saying they recommend we hire the guy...I was of the mind that insofar as four partners thought the guy is "high quality," barring his really screwing up with me, his being hired was a "done deal," as they say.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Xelor said:
> 
> 
> 
> Those factors combined to make me amenable to hiring the guy. The fact of the matter is that at the outset of the call, the guy was all but hired. I even was satisfied with him and his qualifications until he answered that question as he did.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> OldLady said:
> 
> 
> 
> In this case, the guy is peremptorily rejected by the man with the power, who is sitting by a pool in the Bahamas, because he honestly answered a question.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Like it or not, all employers have requirements that prospective workers must meet.  One can frame those requirements in whatever jaundiced language one wants, but at the end of the day, the requirements remain and seekers of the job must meet them, all of them.  As go the requirements evaluated by asking the "greatest weakness question, I've already discussed them and shown that mine is not the only firm that has them.
> 
> How do you respond to the interview question, "What is your greatest weakness?"
> 
> How do you respond to the interview question, "What is your greatest weakness?"
> Among the firms that also have those requirements are the news organizations that have let go of reporters, editors, anchors, etc. who chose to say publicly things that do not align with their former firm's values.  In most instances, the business (employee) requirements the person showed they lack in sufficient quantity are judgement and discretion.  Those are not opprobrious qualities to demand of workers, including workers seeking/holding a position that pays over $300K/year, though, frankly the wage doesn't have much to do with it.  Good judgement, thinking quickly on one's feet, and discretion are important qualities for workers at all pay grades.
> 
> 
> 
> OldLady said:
> 
> 
> 
> So the nightmare of interviewing for a job and being rejected is compounded with the reminder that *the interviewer is also judging our character, our intelligence and whatever else he sees fit* to poke his nose into.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> To the extent the employer/firm deems whatever be those qualities, they do and they are right to do so for nobody but a firm's owners/executive managers gets to decide what matters and what does not as goes the people from whom the firm purchases labor.  One need not like a firm's definition of what matters and what doesn't in that regard, but liking it, one has two choices:  (1) get over it and exhibit the requisite qualities to the best of one's ability, or (2) sell one's labor to a firm that doesn't think such things matter.
> 
> 
> 
> OldLady said:
> 
> 
> 
> I have always enjoyed conversing with Xelor and he's a smart guy, but a little empathy and compassion would go a long way here, regardless of the decision he made. It's his business--literally--and he knows who fits in. *To me that wasn't the point of the thread*.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That wan't the point of the thread.  It is, however, a point that, in response to someone's comment, I later made
> 
> 
> Xelor said:
> 
> 
> 
> TY, but I'm sure I know better than you what is the right way to handle anything and everything having to do with the interview process at my firm. I don't know what makes you think you can be so presumptuous as to tell me that I'm wrong about such a thing.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> .​
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> OldLady said:
> 
> 
> 
> Just sharing MY perspective.  I am aware you have a different one.  *That doesn't make either of us "wrong," just viewing it differently.*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> In the abstract, I agree with you on that.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> LOL  But in this case, you are right.   Yes?
Click to expand...

Insofar as it's my firm, I was party to the full interview conversation I had with the guy, and it's my practice unit within the firm, absolutely.

I don't volunteer my qualitative POV on the personal "life-level" decisions others make, unless, of course, they ask for it.  In this thread, I most certainly did not ask for input on my hiring decision.  What I asked is how they respond to the question I noted.  You did answer that question, and you did so directly and with integrity.  The consequence of your having enough courtesy to do so is that I'm willing to banter about various abstractions pertaining to the use of "brain teaser" interview questions.


----------



## OldLady

Xelor said:


> OldLady said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Xelor said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Xelor said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> OldLady said:
> 
> 
> 
> I have an entirely different spin on this whole situation, being an emotionally sensitive type.
> 
> When you apply for a job, it is about the most vulnerable that a person can be.  The power is all with the prospective employer.  You get all gussied up and go to sit before a total stranger to be judged on one of the most important aspects of your life--knowledge, experience and the ability to do a job well.  You are going, hat in hand, begging for work.  As far as a power imbalance, it's about as close to the helplessness of being sold into slavery as most of us will ever come.  It is all up to the decision of the prospective employer.
> 
> In this case, the guy is peremptorily rejected by the man with the power, who is sitting by a pool in the Bahamas, because he honestly answered a question.  And the man at poolside not only crushed the guy beneath his heel, he continued with a vituperative rant about just what a moron he was:
> _I was so astounded that I emailed the people who did the preliminary "phone screen" and early stage interviews on the guy to inquire how his abject inanity and unfitness for our firm did not come through when they spoke with him. I was and remain incredulous that the guy made it far enough through the interview process that he got to talk to me._
> 
> So the nightmare of interviewing for a job and being rejected is compounded with the reminder that the interviewer is also judging our character, our intelligence and whatever else he sees fit to poke his nose into.
> 
> This story seems tailor made to emphasize how powerful the guy poolside is.  The argument that he needed to pose a difficult question to see how the interviewee would respond would make sense if he actually asked a difficult question.  But, as Xelor showed, it is such a common question that there are articles written about how to respond to it, so it's not really so hard, is it?  Just a cool way to torture the mouse before biting out it's guts.
> 
> I have always enjoyed conversing with Xelor and he's a smart guy, but a little empathy and compassion would go a long way here, regardless of the decision he made.  It's his business--literally--and he knows who fits in.  To me that wasn't the point of the thread.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> OldLady said:
> 
> 
> 
> The power is all with the prospective employer....You are going, hat in hand, begging for work.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I and my colleagues don't see it that way.  I doubt that most business owners see it that way.  The reality is that in the exchange of labor for money, both parties receive what they want and need.  Very few principals/firm establish staffing levels based on the notion of "how many people can they can help by exhibiting the largesse of _giving _them a job."
> 
> 
> 
> OldLady said:
> 
> 
> 
> As far as a power imbalance, it's about as close to the helplessness of being sold into slavery as most of us will ever come.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The "imbalance" is that of any one individual rarely, if ever, being the only person who can perform adequately (or better) the tasks an employer needs done.  At the end of the day, every employee, when they go seeking a job, is saying, "I have something to sell and you have stated you desire to purchase that which I am selling."  Just as, for whatever reason(s), one chooses to purchase a Big Mac instead of a burrito, employers evaluate their options and purchase "Bill's" rather than "Bob's" labor.
> 
> 
> OldLady said:
> 
> 
> 
> In this case, the guy is peremptorily rejected by the man with the power, who is sitting by a pool in the Bahamas, because he honestly answered a question.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> There was nothing peremptory going on.
> 
> 
> Xelor said:
> 
> 
> 
> His interview with me, when it started, was but a formality for (1) four of the five other partners on the interview team had emailed saying they recommend we hire the guy...I was of the mind that insofar as four partners thought the guy is "high quality," barring his really screwing up with me, his being hired was a "done deal," as they say.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Xelor said:
> 
> 
> 
> Those factors combined to make me amenable to hiring the guy. The fact of the matter is that at the outset of the call, the guy was all but hired. I even was satisfied with him and his qualifications until he answered that question as he did.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> OldLady said:
> 
> 
> 
> In this case, the guy is peremptorily rejected by the man with the power, who is sitting by a pool in the Bahamas, because he honestly answered a question.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Like it or not, all employers have requirements that prospective workers must meet.  One can frame those requirements in whatever jaundiced language one wants, but at the end of the day, the requirements remain and seekers of the job must meet them, all of them.  As go the requirements evaluated by asking the "greatest weakness question, I've already discussed them and shown that mine is not the only firm that has them.
> 
> How do you respond to the interview question, "What is your greatest weakness?"
> 
> How do you respond to the interview question, "What is your greatest weakness?"
> Among the firms that also have those requirements are the news organizations that have let go of reporters, editors, anchors, etc. who chose to say publicly things that do not align with their former firm's values.  In most instances, the business (employee) requirements the person showed they lack in sufficient quantity are judgement and discretion.  Those are not opprobrious qualities to demand of workers, including workers seeking/holding a position that pays over $300K/year, though, frankly the wage doesn't have much to do with it.  Good judgement, thinking quickly on one's feet, and discretion are important qualities for workers at all pay grades.
> 
> 
> 
> OldLady said:
> 
> 
> 
> So the nightmare of interviewing for a job and being rejected is compounded with the reminder that *the interviewer is also judging our character, our intelligence and whatever else he sees fit* to poke his nose into.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> To the extent the employer/firm deems whatever be those qualities, they do and they are right to do so for nobody but a firm's owners/executive managers gets to decide what matters and what does not as goes the people from whom the firm purchases labor.  One need not like a firm's definition of what matters and what doesn't in that regard, but liking it, one has two choices:  (1) get over it and exhibit the requisite qualities to the best of one's ability, or (2) sell one's labor to a firm that doesn't think such things matter.
> 
> 
> 
> OldLady said:
> 
> 
> 
> I have always enjoyed conversing with Xelor and he's a smart guy, but a little empathy and compassion would go a long way here, regardless of the decision he made. It's his business--literally--and he knows who fits in. *To me that wasn't the point of the thread*.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That wan't the point of the thread.  It is, however, a point that, in response to someone's comment, I later made
> 
> 
> Xelor said:
> 
> 
> 
> TY, but I'm sure I know better than you what is the right way to handle anything and everything having to do with the interview process at my firm. I don't know what makes you think you can be so presumptuous as to tell me that I'm wrong about such a thing.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> .​
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> OldLady said:
> 
> 
> 
> Just sharing MY perspective.  I am aware you have a different one.  *That doesn't make either of us "wrong," just viewing it differently.*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> In the abstract, I agree with you on that.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> LOL  But in this case, you are right.   Yes?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Insofar as it's my firm, I was party to the full interview conversation I had with the guy, and it's my practice unit within the firm, absolutely.
Click to expand...

If you re-read my response, I never said it wasn't.  As a matter of fact, I specifically said it was up to you


----------



## usmbguest5318

OldLady said:


> Xelor said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> OldLady said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Xelor said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Xelor said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> OldLady said:
> 
> 
> 
> I have an entirely different spin on this whole situation, being an emotionally sensitive type.
> 
> When you apply for a job, it is about the most vulnerable that a person can be.  The power is all with the prospective employer.  You get all gussied up and go to sit before a total stranger to be judged on one of the most important aspects of your life--knowledge, experience and the ability to do a job well.  You are going, hat in hand, begging for work.  As far as a power imbalance, it's about as close to the helplessness of being sold into slavery as most of us will ever come.  It is all up to the decision of the prospective employer.
> 
> In this case, the guy is peremptorily rejected by the man with the power, who is sitting by a pool in the Bahamas, because he honestly answered a question.  And the man at poolside not only crushed the guy beneath his heel, he continued with a vituperative rant about just what a moron he was:
> _I was so astounded that I emailed the people who did the preliminary "phone screen" and early stage interviews on the guy to inquire how his abject inanity and unfitness for our firm did not come through when they spoke with him. I was and remain incredulous that the guy made it far enough through the interview process that he got to talk to me._
> 
> So the nightmare of interviewing for a job and being rejected is compounded with the reminder that the interviewer is also judging our character, our intelligence and whatever else he sees fit to poke his nose into.
> 
> This story seems tailor made to emphasize how powerful the guy poolside is.  The argument that he needed to pose a difficult question to see how the interviewee would respond would make sense if he actually asked a difficult question.  But, as Xelor showed, it is such a common question that there are articles written about how to respond to it, so it's not really so hard, is it?  Just a cool way to torture the mouse before biting out it's guts.
> 
> I have always enjoyed conversing with Xelor and he's a smart guy, but a little empathy and compassion would go a long way here, regardless of the decision he made.  It's his business--literally--and he knows who fits in.  To me that wasn't the point of the thread.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> OldLady said:
> 
> 
> 
> The power is all with the prospective employer....You are going, hat in hand, begging for work.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I and my colleagues don't see it that way.  I doubt that most business owners see it that way.  The reality is that in the exchange of labor for money, both parties receive what they want and need.  Very few principals/firm establish staffing levels based on the notion of "how many people can they can help by exhibiting the largesse of _giving _them a job."
> 
> 
> 
> OldLady said:
> 
> 
> 
> As far as a power imbalance, it's about as close to the helplessness of being sold into slavery as most of us will ever come.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The "imbalance" is that of any one individual rarely, if ever, being the only person who can perform adequately (or better) the tasks an employer needs done.  At the end of the day, every employee, when they go seeking a job, is saying, "I have something to sell and you have stated you desire to purchase that which I am selling."  Just as, for whatever reason(s), one chooses to purchase a Big Mac instead of a burrito, employers evaluate their options and purchase "Bill's" rather than "Bob's" labor.
> 
> 
> OldLady said:
> 
> 
> 
> In this case, the guy is peremptorily rejected by the man with the power, who is sitting by a pool in the Bahamas, because he honestly answered a question.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> There was nothing peremptory going on.
> 
> 
> Xelor said:
> 
> 
> 
> His interview with me, when it started, was but a formality for (1) four of the five other partners on the interview team had emailed saying they recommend we hire the guy...I was of the mind that insofar as four partners thought the guy is "high quality," barring his really screwing up with me, his being hired was a "done deal," as they say.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Xelor said:
> 
> 
> 
> Those factors combined to make me amenable to hiring the guy. The fact of the matter is that at the outset of the call, the guy was all but hired. I even was satisfied with him and his qualifications until he answered that question as he did.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> OldLady said:
> 
> 
> 
> In this case, the guy is peremptorily rejected by the man with the power, who is sitting by a pool in the Bahamas, because he honestly answered a question.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Like it or not, all employers have requirements that prospective workers must meet.  One can frame those requirements in whatever jaundiced language one wants, but at the end of the day, the requirements remain and seekers of the job must meet them, all of them.  As go the requirements evaluated by asking the "greatest weakness question, I've already discussed them and shown that mine is not the only firm that has them.
> 
> How do you respond to the interview question, "What is your greatest weakness?"
> 
> How do you respond to the interview question, "What is your greatest weakness?"
> Among the firms that also have those requirements are the news organizations that have let go of reporters, editors, anchors, etc. who chose to say publicly things that do not align with their former firm's values.  In most instances, the business (employee) requirements the person showed they lack in sufficient quantity are judgement and discretion.  Those are not opprobrious qualities to demand of workers, including workers seeking/holding a position that pays over $300K/year, though, frankly the wage doesn't have much to do with it.  Good judgement, thinking quickly on one's feet, and discretion are important qualities for workers at all pay grades.
> 
> 
> 
> OldLady said:
> 
> 
> 
> So the nightmare of interviewing for a job and being rejected is compounded with the reminder that *the interviewer is also judging our character, our intelligence and whatever else he sees fit* to poke his nose into.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> To the extent the employer/firm deems whatever be those qualities, they do and they are right to do so for nobody but a firm's owners/executive managers gets to decide what matters and what does not as goes the people from whom the firm purchases labor.  One need not like a firm's definition of what matters and what doesn't in that regard, but liking it, one has two choices:  (1) get over it and exhibit the requisite qualities to the best of one's ability, or (2) sell one's labor to a firm that doesn't think such things matter.
> 
> 
> 
> OldLady said:
> 
> 
> 
> I have always enjoyed conversing with Xelor and he's a smart guy, but a little empathy and compassion would go a long way here, regardless of the decision he made. It's his business--literally--and he knows who fits in. *To me that wasn't the point of the thread*.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That wan't the point of the thread.  It is, however, a point that, in response to someone's comment, I later made
> 
> 
> Xelor said:
> 
> 
> 
> TY, but I'm sure I know better than you what is the right way to handle anything and everything having to do with the interview process at my firm. I don't know what makes you think you can be so presumptuous as to tell me that I'm wrong about such a thing.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> .​
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> OldLady said:
> 
> 
> 
> Just sharing MY perspective.  I am aware you have a different one.  *That doesn't make either of us "wrong," just viewing it differently.*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> In the abstract, I agree with you on that.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> LOL  But in this case, you are right.   Yes?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Insofar as it's my firm, I was party to the full interview conversation I had with the guy, and it's my practice unit within the firm, absolutely.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> If you re-read my response, I never said it wasn't.  As a matter of fact, I specifically said it was up to you
Click to expand...

I take no exception with your doing so.  I don't agree with your abstract perspective on the matter.  We can each present our case on the matter, and that's fine.  I certainly don't think ill of you for differing with me on it.  I take exception with folks who, unlike you, step into the realm of presumptuousness.

The reason I wrote "absolutely," is because I don't volunteer my qualitative POV on the personal "life-level" decisions others make, unless, of course, they ask for it. In this thread, I most certainly did not ask for input on my hiring decision. What I asked is how they respond to the question I noted. You did answer that question, and you did so directly and with integrity, and it was clear you respect my decision in a situation that has nothing to do with you. The consequence of your having enough courtesy to do so is that I'm willing to banter about various abstractions pertaining to the use of "brain teaser" interview questions.


----------



## Penelope

So you didn't ask him why he has been told that?


----------



## Unkotare

Kryptonite.


----------

