I see how this one interview question is expansive and sets up a line of followup questions.
I don't see why it's a good question. Presume you get an good answer to the question and every followup question. Now tell me this: how much more do you know about how capable the candidate is of doing the job you're hiring for? And, were these questions the fastest, most accurate way of learning that?
I submit: no. "What were the biggest challenges you faced"? How do I assess the answer to that question? How do I compare it with answers from other candidates? How do I track, over time, which challenges correlate to strong performance in the actual role we're hiring for? "Explain your manager's style and whether you liked it"? Come on.
Don't virtually all of these questions ask me to read tea leaves, to get a sense of whether I "like" or "respect" the candidate? That's not the same thing as learning whether the candidate will do a good job.
Oh, and good luck hiring anyone right out of college this way.
I don't see why it's a good question. Presume you get an good answer to the question and every followup question. Now tell me this: how much more do you know about how capable the candidate is of doing the job you're hiring for? And, were these questions the fastest, most accurate way of learning that?
I submit: no. "What were the biggest challenges you faced"? How do I assess the answer to that question? How do I compare it with answers from other candidates? How do I track, over time, which challenges correlate to strong performance in the actual role we're hiring for? "Explain your manager's style and whether you liked it"? Come on.
Don't virtually all of these questions ask me to read tea leaves, to get a sense of whether I "like" or "respect" the candidate? That's not the same thing as learning whether the candidate will do a good job.
Oh, and good luck hiring anyone right out of college this way.