That's a thing, it's technically true in itself, and it's bad enough to sound plausible. I think you are a smart person and it's a good self-preserving tactic.

That's a thing, it's technically true in itself, and it's bad enough to sound plausible. I think you are a smart person and it's a good self-preserving tactic. We all have to eat. But this answer is unlikely to be the worst thing about you. You probably do have character flaws which affect your work. It's just that digging into them won't do anything except give the advantage to someone else who kept his mouth shut. I submit that what this question really does is test fit to a certain corporate culture. There's a tacit understanding that you are supposed to come up with some token flaw to use. People oblivious of this will either overshare or obviously deflect the question, and people who are stubbornly honest will also not give the expected answer. This kind of obliviousness or stubborn honesty can be a political liability. E.g.: if you are asked about your boss's or team's or company's worst weakness, you should also offer some bullshit token flaw which isn't really meaningful, because this determines their futures too. If a culture isn't specifically built to put honesty ahead of politics, politics will quickly take the lead and honesty will be a casualty.