problem with hypotheticals is most people can give an ideal way to handle a situation, but when the actual scenario presents itself, they deal with it in a non

problem with hypotheticals is most people can give an ideal way to handle a situation, but when the actual scenario presents itself, they deal with it in a non ideal way. I'd like to find out what that non-ideal way is and if the delta is small enough, then that person meets the bar. i can also add supplementary questions if i didn't get enough of a signal, such as the one you presented (i.e what do you think you could have done better) should add that the more you dig, the better you can identify where truth/embellishments lay. a reaaaaally good liar is rare and you can somewhat tell across differing kinds of quetsions where the red flags are. just need to create a robust system of questioning. this all sounds dystopian as i write it, but unfortunately that is the nature of interviewing