www.thegrindstone.com: I used to go into job interviews with that cheap, totally overly-used “weakness” that is totally not a weakness at all: “Oh, you know,” I’d say with a smirk, “I’m competitive. I guess it’s a detriment to my colleagues.” What a terrible answer. Not only is it transparent, it’s sort of predictable.
According to Forbes, it may be better to go into the job interview with a sincere and honest answer—an answer that you can, of course, turn into something positive. First you may want to take a personality test, like this one here, to figure out what your limitations (and your strengths!) actually are.
9 comments:
This reminds me of when I was a commander and we were doing job interviews for some of the more advanced positions in our unit.
We would usually ask the soldiers what they thought were his weaknesses.
It was always pretty interesting to hear. They were usually really honest but what we were really trying to understand with that question was whether the soldiers were aware of their weaknesses.
It wasn't like a normal job interview, because we did personally know the people who were interviewing. But we wanted to see if they saw themselves similarly to the way we perceived them.
It usually showed a lot of maturity when someone could honestly lay out some real weaknesses .
The title of the article is pretty misleading: I really wasn't surprised at all. It seems to make sense that giving a bullshit answer to an important question at a job interview is a bad idea. Yes, you shouldn't say,"My weakness is that I'm stupid", but it wouldn't really have occurred to me to say "My weakness is that I'm too good at my job and make others feel bad about themselves" either.
I feel like this is often how I feel about those "Revolutionary/ground-breaking/secret way to ace/improve your job interview/resume/life/productivity !!" articles. They are often pretty obvious, and most of their advice is purely based on common sense.
I think that's because there really is no secret formula for any of those problems, but people like to be told that there is. It's reassuring to think that there is a "right" way to do something. The time we spend in school, especially up until college, is all about getting the right or wrong answer. So once we're all grown-up trying to figure out how real life works, it's easy to just tell yourself that there's a formula to getting it all right. Checking off the right boxes and all that. I know I'm starting to really drift off-topic here, but I'd really like to see A LOT of changes in the way education is handled in this country and many others, and explaining to students that gray areas are ok is one of those big changes that needs to happen.
While I think the information in this article is useful, it does not surprise me at all. I think it is fairly obvious that the weaknesses you discuss in job interviews should not seem fake or over exaggerated to the point where the employer can tell that you are lying. What this article does not bring up is how difficult it can be to not only be honest with yourself about your weaknesses, but also with how difficult it can be to admit your positive characteristics. I think it can be just as difficult for someone to admit their strengths as it is for them to admit their weaknesses. When someone is discussing their strengths, they must be careful to not discuss them in a way where they sound cocky. Similarly, when someone discusses their weaknesses, they cannot bring up a weakness that would make the employer not want to hire them. Basically, someone going into an interview is tasked with coming up with the "perfect" list of personal characteristics without being dishonest.
I have to agree with Camille and Jess. The information in this article, while useful, was not surprising. Obviously I would not tell my interviewer that my weakness is being a detriment to my colleagues. Also, obviously, I should be telling the truth in an interview. One good point the article made was to remind readers that they should be sure to mention what they are doing to solve their weakness. I think what stuck out most in this article was that at the end the author made a point to pinpoint that "ladies" when instructing them about not mentioning certain weaknesses. Why can't men be gossips as well? I felt there was some unnecessary stereotyping there.
I was all set to write about how I wish this article spoke more about different ways to spin the weakness question that are both sincere and eloquent. But damn, that last paragraph was just so unnecessary and asinine that I was ready to throw my computer across the room. Even though it looks like this website is geared towards women, I can't imagine what possessed the author to add that into what was a reasonable, though slightly simplistic article.
It is pointless to try and explain the "correct" answer to any interview question that asks about you or your personality. What's more important is to understand why the question is being asked. Your interviewer doesn't want you to admit a fatal flaw that will completely take you out of consideration for the position. Rather, the true "correct" answer to the question is to show that you are in touch with yourself. In other words, that you are able to look at your work and personality and objectively critique yourself.
While I appreciate Camille's point about tips like this being common sense, sometimes people only realize how obvious something is when it is laid out in front of them. As students, we are being required to comment on articles like this every week, leading us to keep the "common sense" information fresh in our minds. For those who haven't had a job interview in a while, this tip might not be the first thing that comes to their mind when trying to determine their interview strategy.
So I took the personality test that was mentioned in the article what I found out is not exactly something that I want to tell an employer. It says I worry too much and put others needs in front of my own. These are two traits that don't really bode well to say to a potential employer. I also have no idea how I can swing them to be good. So while I would probably never give the answer that the woman in the article gave (and I would never give the other sexist "lady" problems that she identifies at the end of the article) I think that she is on to something about picking something related to the job you are applying for but is not going to make you look that bad or is something that you can over come. While full honesty is good I think that twisting the truth can be okay.
This article doesn't really give any useful information. It just tells you to be honest with your answer instead of using some obviously contrived answer that shows you haven't put any thought into the interview which seems to me is basically common sense. The title is incredibly misleading and clearly just there to try to draw in site views. There is no real "secret" here, just use common sense and be honest.
This is a tough one in interviews, and a little bit of a cop out for the interviewer as well. "Sometimes I just work too hard..." is another cliche I've both heard and used in answer to this relatively useless interview question. I think the question must be more about seeing the candidates reaction and gauging how they have prepared for the interview than anything else. Still, even if I don't like it, I have to be ready for the question. The first step is to be aware of your weaknesses and to be honest with yourself about them. This takes some humility, and also some courage to sincerely ask your peers what they think of you and to be magnanimous in the face of their helpful honesty. For me this is what is meant by mentor, a colleague with whom you have strong enough relationship that they can tell you exactly what they think and you can take it from them. I have been lucky enough to have had two mentors e in my career, and they spared no word when it came to my weaknesses. So when I go into an interview, at least I know what they are, but which to talk about? I'm not going to tell them I'm a jerk, because no one wants to work with a jerk, and they'll find out sooner or later that I don't mean anything by it. I'm not going to tell them that I talk too much, or sometimes explain things in too much detail... well I am going to tell them that if they are listening at all and can read between the lines. No, for me my fall back has become the trade offs I make in my work between the details and the big picture, that sometimes I get caught up in details and lose sight of the full scope of a project. I think most people can relate to that, which is key. I think the best answers to this question have to be ones that the interviewer can see in themselves. The best case scenario in an interview to my mind is one where you can create empathy between you and the interviewer. Put them in your shoes, because they would never turn themselves down for a job.
Post a Comment