7 ms·

There's one important question I haven't seen on here that's saved me on more than one occasion. "Are there any concerns you may have that I can address that m

There's one important question I haven't seen on here that's saved me on more than one occasion. "Are there any concerns you may have that I can address that may lead you to believe I'm not the right candidate?" I've been able to address: lack of previous experience, lack of a degree, time in between jobs, time spent at the last job, all thanks to this question.

cheez 6y ago
That is a fantastic question.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
mlthoughts2018 6y ago
Most of the time, if the interviewer formed these concerns, you’re just opening yourself up to give them space for confirmation bias to take over. What might have been one bad interview session out of six, which might not rule you out, now becomes a crater of destruction that will absolutely be a big talking point in the debrief and feedback. Additionally it comes off as insecure. Like you can’t tolerate the idea that you might actually have made mistakes or lacked skills or fluffed your resume or communicated badly, and you deserve a chance to debate your way out of it. Finally it also seems like fishing for negative feedback you can disagree with later. You likely won’t get significant feedback after the interviews are over since companies don’t reveal it for legal reasons, so you’re trying to get interviewers off-guard to get that feedback and later act like it’s unfair. As an interviewer I would strictly reply that I need to write down my notes from the interview, review and analyze them, and compare notes in the debrief session before I will develop any type of feedback, positive or negative. The interview itself is a place for information exchange, and trying to form opinions about positives / negatives on the spot amplifies the likelihood of bias or lack of context.
- fjeifisjf 6y ago
  It sounds like you are hiring for a bureaucratic corporate borg and parent poster wants to work for a human team striving to achieve something. Different strokes.
  - mlthoughts2018 6y ago
    I’m not saying anything about how I prefer to hire, apart from the fact I refuse to formulate concrete opinions inside an interview session and must take time after to ruminate on it and analyze details. The rest of it is just simply the facts of interviewing pretty much anywhere. I’ve seen it happen much more strongly in young startups than big corporations, but it’s extremely common everywhere. Small startups usually have fewer formalized practices in recruiting and less standardized HR practices, which leads to more bias and unfair judgment calls in recruiting compared with larger companies, not less.
- heavenlyblue 6y ago
  > As an interviewer I would strictly reply that I need to write down my notes from the interview, review and analyze them, and compare notes in the debrief session before I will develop any type of feedback, positive or negative. And everybody will know that you either seriously lack substance or that you are clearly lying.
  - dagmx 6y ago
    That’s a very unfair take. Many interview protocols specifically mention not discussing the candidates performance with the candidate
  - mlthoughts2018 6y ago
    Nobody except bitter / insecure people would think that. Everybody knows this is just how the hiring world works and random individual interviewers are not free to choose moralistic ideals about feedback.
    - 6y ago
dagmx 6y ago
Personally I agree with the other reply that advises against asking this. Everything in a job interview should be to frame you in a positive light. I see way too many candidates try and play the humble route, and all it does is sell them short. There’s a fine line between too humble and too full of yourself , and neither side is good to find yourself on. This particular question seems to me to be too humble. Questions like this may seem like it makes the candidate seem humble and open to feedback, but in actuality whenever someone has asked something like this it has made them appear insecure and planted more seeds of doubt in the interviewers mind since they now have to think about their shortcomings. Maybe phrasing it a better way would help: “What qualities are you looking for, for this role?” “Are there things you think i should brush up on , assuming I get this role?” “Where do you see me best being able to contribute in this role?” Those questions give you the same data points, leaving you to infer where you may be lacking. It leaves the interviewer with a sense of your confidence without seeming too full of yourself, and generally the wording makes them consider you as if you’re in the role, versus not in it. Again, a job interview is a sales pitch. People should be honest while balancing keeping the tone positive. You wouldn’t sell a car by pointing out its flaws. Don’t sell yourself the same way.
- quietbritishjim 6y ago
  I don't agree that asking this question is taking the humble route. Asking if they have any concerns doesn't mean you think that they should. In fact there's an obvious subtext that if they do have concerns then you can address them, so they're not really valid. That's almost the opposite of being humble! Personally I don't think it sounds either arrogant or humble overall, plus it shows a willingness to discuss difficult things in a polite manner (at least the question as stated above was polite) which is also a plus for a candidate.
  - sideshowb 6y ago
    Agreed. It's also engaging well with the meta game. Related - Once viewing a house to buy I asked the seller, is there anything you think I should know about this house that I haven't asked about. Their reply turned out to be a deal breaker (at the time - maybe it would have been fine but the point is we got a lot more information! )
yodsanklai 6y ago
I guess this is very subjective but personally I wouldn't ask this question, especially in a technical interview. First, it may embarrass the interviewer. They may not be willing to answer this question. Second, after you know the answer, you won't be able to fix anything. You don't want to start arguing that lacking a degree is not a big deal. It's akin to asking someone in a date "any reason why you wouldn't like me?". It feels like lacking confidence and anticipating rejection. This question could make sense if you don't get an offer. If you get a chance to talk to the recruiter, you can ask them if there are particular things you could try to improve if you were to interview again at their company.
- davidw 6y ago
  > You don't want to start arguing that lacking a degree is not a big deal. If 'having a degree' is a 'big deal' for the company, it's probably not the best place to work anyway. But what that question might uncover is that the interviewer is concerned that because you lack a degree, you might lack some CS background. That's a valid concern that you could refute by talking about how you've learned a lot on your own.
  - WalterBright 6y ago
    I was watching "Roadkill" the other day. On the show a couple of mechanics try to pass themselves off as bumpkin mechanics muddling through fixing cars. But every once in a while they'll slip up. For example, one of them said the engine was behaving in an adiabatic way. This is a term one only learns taking a college level thermodynamics course. It's hard to fake having an engineering education, and if you have one it should show in an interview whether or not you have the degree.
    - davidw 6y ago
      The term also comes up in meterology, for instance Chinook winds: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinook_wind https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinook_wind Which I learned because I'm curious, not because I have a degree in anything related.
devcpp 6y ago
As an interviewer at a FAANG, this gets an immediate "I may not answer that" and a little disappointment in my mind. We do not assess resumes, only performance at the interviews. Resumes are only for screening. But this may be a good question at small companies that don't have a streamlined process. Take into account who you're talking to.
- novok 6y ago
  Also as a FANG interviewer, despite training saying otherwise, you know interviewers still think about that stuff anyway.
- jamespollack 6y ago
  "Resumes are only for screening" -- yeah FAANGs suck at looking at you as a person, at every point in the interview process you end up having to repeat yourself and almost no interviewer ever looks at your resume. it's as if your entire history of being alive and working doesn't matter, only that you can operate as a DS&A robot that doesn't ask too many questions. "I may not answer that" - Borg
  - Shish2k 6y ago
    > yeah FAANGs suck at looking at you as a person […] almost no interviewer ever looks at your resume I feel like I’m missing your point here... you are correct - when I’m doing a coding interview, I don’t care if you’re black or white, male or female, university educated or self-taught, the only thing I care about is whether or not you can code[1]. You seem to be suggesting that that’s a bad thing? [1] Of course any major red flags like muttering racist curses when you get frustrated would also be noted; it’s not like I ignore the human side of things, I’m just not actively looking for that~
    - webdood90 6y ago
      what's funny is that YOU are missing the point
    - dev_tty01 6y ago
yongjik 6y ago
This will put the interviewer in a very awkward position. Imagine the interviewer thinks you have a problem in area X, and they spell it out right there, "I think your expertise in X might be lacking," and then for all they know, they're walking into a discussion on whether X should be considered necessary for the job, with the very person they need to assess - a potential minefield. Sure, you may be a reasonable person and have a reasonable answer for their concern, but they don't know it.
- remus 6y ago
  Surely it is the person/company doing the hiring who has the say in what is and isn't required for the position? Assuming the interviewer isn't doing something that's blatantly illegal ("Do you plan on having children in the next x years?", "I think you're too old for this position" etc.) I don,t think an interviewee is really in a position to argue this as surely they'd almost always have very limited knowledge of what the position actually entails compared to the person doing the hiring.
  - yongjik 6y ago
    Exactly, no interviewer would want to have such a discussion with the interviewee. So their best course of action would be to smile and say "I don't have any concerns, thanks for asking."
romanows 6y ago
What interviewer isn't going to dig into their concerns anyway? I mean, if you can read the person and they seem like they'd be down for "let's get down to brass tacks" kinda talk, go for it. Maybe it makes you seem like a serious person to certain kinds of people. It might be a little uncomfortable for someone like me. I'd rather you ask, "what are your favorite qualities in your best employees" and then respond to that. Maybe it's just my area of work but I can't imagine caring about previous experience, degree, or anything. I mean, the candidate has gotten past the resume screen already so you're just living up to that impression and other candidates at that point.

cheez 6y ago

That is a fantastic question.

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]

mlthoughts2018 6y ago

Most of the time, if the interviewer formed these concerns, you’re just opening yourself up to give them space for confirmation bias to take over. What might have been one bad interview session out of six, which might not rule you out, now becomes a crater of destruction that will absolutely be a big talking point in the debrief and feedback. Additionally it comes off as insecure. Like you can’t tolerate the idea that you might actually have made mistakes or lacked skills or fluffed your resume or communicated badly, and you deserve a chance to debate your way out of it. Finally it also seems like fishing for negative feedback you can disagree with later. You likely won’t get significant feedback after the interviews are over since companies don’t reveal it for legal reasons, so you’re trying to get interviewers off-guard to get that feedback and later act like it’s unfair. As an interviewer I would strictly reply that I need to write down my notes from the interview, review and analyze them, and compare notes in the debrief session before I will develop any type of feedback, positive or negative. The interview itself is a place for information exchange, and trying to form opinions about positives / negatives on the spot amplifies the likelihood of bias or lack of context.

fjeifisjf 6y ago
It sounds like you are hiring for a bureaucratic corporate borg and parent poster wants to work for a human team striving to achieve something. Different strokes.
- mlthoughts2018 6y ago
  I’m not saying anything about how I prefer to hire, apart from the fact I refuse to formulate concrete opinions inside an interview session and must take time after to ruminate on it and analyze details. The rest of it is just simply the facts of interviewing pretty much anywhere. I’ve seen it happen much more strongly in young startups than big corporations, but it’s extremely common everywhere. Small startups usually have fewer formalized practices in recruiting and less standardized HR practices, which leads to more bias and unfair judgment calls in recruiting compared with larger companies, not less.
heavenlyblue 6y ago
> As an interviewer I would strictly reply that I need to write down my notes from the interview, review and analyze them, and compare notes in the debrief session before I will develop any type of feedback, positive or negative. And everybody will know that you either seriously lack substance or that you are clearly lying.
- dagmx 6y ago
  That’s a very unfair take. Many interview protocols specifically mention not discussing the candidates performance with the candidate
- mlthoughts2018 6y ago
  Nobody except bitter / insecure people would think that. Everybody knows this is just how the hiring world works and random individual interviewers are not free to choose moralistic ideals about feedback.
  - 6y ago

dagmx 6y ago

Personally I agree with the other reply that advises against asking this. Everything in a job interview should be to frame you in a positive light. I see way too many candidates try and play the humble route, and all it does is sell them short. There’s a fine line between too humble and too full of yourself , and neither side is good to find yourself on. This particular question seems to me to be too humble. Questions like this may seem like it makes the candidate seem humble and open to feedback, but in actuality whenever someone has asked something like this it has made them appear insecure and planted more seeds of doubt in the interviewers mind since they now have to think about their shortcomings. Maybe phrasing it a better way would help: “What qualities are you looking for, for this role?” “Are there things you think i should brush up on , assuming I get this role?” “Where do you see me best being able to contribute in this role?” Those questions give you the same data points, leaving you to infer where you may be lacking. It leaves the interviewer with a sense of your confidence without seeming too full of yourself, and generally the wording makes them consider you as if you’re in the role, versus not in it. Again, a job interview is a sales pitch. People should be honest while balancing keeping the tone positive. You wouldn’t sell a car by pointing out its flaws. Don’t sell yourself the same way.

quietbritishjim 6y ago
I don't agree that asking this question is taking the humble route. Asking if they have any concerns doesn't mean you think that they should. In fact there's an obvious subtext that if they do have concerns then you can address them, so they're not really valid. That's almost the opposite of being humble! Personally I don't think it sounds either arrogant or humble overall, plus it shows a willingness to discuss difficult things in a polite manner (at least the question as stated above was polite) which is also a plus for a candidate.
- sideshowb 6y ago
  Agreed. It's also engaging well with the meta game. Related - Once viewing a house to buy I asked the seller, is there anything you think I should know about this house that I haven't asked about. Their reply turned out to be a deal breaker (at the time - maybe it would have been fine but the point is we got a lot more information! )

yodsanklai 6y ago

I guess this is very subjective but personally I wouldn't ask this question, especially in a technical interview. First, it may embarrass the interviewer. They may not be willing to answer this question. Second, after you know the answer, you won't be able to fix anything. You don't want to start arguing that lacking a degree is not a big deal. It's akin to asking someone in a date "any reason why you wouldn't like me?". It feels like lacking confidence and anticipating rejection. This question could make sense if you don't get an offer. If you get a chance to talk to the recruiter, you can ask them if there are particular things you could try to improve if you were to interview again at their company.

davidw 6y ago
> You don't want to start arguing that lacking a degree is not a big deal. If 'having a degree' is a 'big deal' for the company, it's probably not the best place to work anyway. But what that question might uncover is that the interviewer is concerned that because you lack a degree, you might lack some CS background. That's a valid concern that you could refute by talking about how you've learned a lot on your own.
- WalterBright 6y ago
  I was watching "Roadkill" the other day. On the show a couple of mechanics try to pass themselves off as bumpkin mechanics muddling through fixing cars. But every once in a while they'll slip up. For example, one of them said the engine was behaving in an adiabatic way. This is a term one only learns taking a college level thermodynamics course. It's hard to fake having an engineering education, and if you have one it should show in an interview whether or not you have the degree.
  - davidw 6y ago
    The term also comes up in meterology, for instance Chinook winds: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinook_wind https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinook_wind Which I learned because I'm curious, not because I have a degree in anything related.

devcpp 6y ago

As an interviewer at a FAANG, this gets an immediate "I may not answer that" and a little disappointment in my mind. We do not assess resumes, only performance at the interviews. Resumes are only for screening. But this may be a good question at small companies that don't have a streamlined process. Take into account who you're talking to.

novok 6y ago
Also as a FANG interviewer, despite training saying otherwise, you know interviewers still think about that stuff anyway.
jamespollack 6y ago
"Resumes are only for screening" -- yeah FAANGs suck at looking at you as a person, at every point in the interview process you end up having to repeat yourself and almost no interviewer ever looks at your resume. it's as if your entire history of being alive and working doesn't matter, only that you can operate as a DS&A robot that doesn't ask too many questions. "I may not answer that" - Borg
- Shish2k 6y ago
  > yeah FAANGs suck at looking at you as a person […] almost no interviewer ever looks at your resume I feel like I’m missing your point here... you are correct - when I’m doing a coding interview, I don’t care if you’re black or white, male or female, university educated or self-taught, the only thing I care about is whether or not you can code[1]. You seem to be suggesting that that’s a bad thing? [1] Of course any major red flags like muttering racist curses when you get frustrated would also be noted; it’s not like I ignore the human side of things, I’m just not actively looking for that~
  - webdood90 6y ago
    what's funny is that YOU are missing the point
  - dev_tty01 6y ago

yongjik 6y ago

This will put the interviewer in a very awkward position. Imagine the interviewer thinks you have a problem in area X, and they spell it out right there, "I think your expertise in X might be lacking," and then for all they know, they're walking into a discussion on whether X should be considered necessary for the job, with the very person they need to assess - a potential minefield. Sure, you may be a reasonable person and have a reasonable answer for their concern, but they don't know it.

remus 6y ago
Surely it is the person/company doing the hiring who has the say in what is and isn't required for the position? Assuming the interviewer isn't doing something that's blatantly illegal ("Do you plan on having children in the next x years?", "I think you're too old for this position" etc.) I don,t think an interviewee is really in a position to argue this as surely they'd almost always have very limited knowledge of what the position actually entails compared to the person doing the hiring.
- yongjik 6y ago
  Exactly, no interviewer would want to have such a discussion with the interviewee. So their best course of action would be to smile and say "I don't have any concerns, thanks for asking."

romanows 6y ago

What interviewer isn't going to dig into their concerns anyway? I mean, if you can read the person and they seem like they'd be down for "let's get down to brass tacks" kinda talk, go for it. Maybe it makes you seem like a serious person to certain kinds of people. It might be a little uncomfortable for someone like me. I'd rather you ask, "what are your favorite qualities in your best employees" and then respond to that. Maybe it's just my area of work but I can't imagine caring about previous experience, degree, or anything. I mean, the candidate has gotten past the resume screen already so you're just living up to that impression and other candidates at that point.