• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to footer
Top Margin

Top Margin

Executive Resumes, Executive Interview Coaching, Master Resume Writer

  • Home
  • About
  • Reviews
  • Pricing
  • Samples
  • D-I-Y
  • Blog
  • Contact
  • Order Now
  • Client Login

“Epic Fail” Interview Answers

November 5, 2009 By Gayle Howard 18 Comments

You don’t have to have a degree in it, you don’t have to be a card carrying member of Mensa, nor do you need psychic abilities. When it all comes down to it, being successful at interviews is largely about using commonsense balanced with truth.

Let’s look at some examples:

Interviewer: So Fred as a leader of the IT department, I’m sure you’ve had some significant project challenges along the way. Can you give me an example of one of those projects, preferably one where you had a few problems and how you think you could have performed better?

Fred: I have successfully led many projects but they have always gone without a hitch. I have always given 100% of my efforts and enjoyed great relationships with the entire team.

Answer Critique: “Epic” Fail. Fred is trying to whitewash the situation. It is simply inconceivable that every project was flawless and seamlessly implemented. Life is not like that, and especially in a technology environment. Secondly, Fred has not answered the question “How could he have performed better?”. In attempting to sound like the perfect employee  he is asking the interviewer to believe that he has never made an error. This is highly unlikely; we all make errors some time! As a result of this answer, the interviewer knows the candidate is sidestepping the question and responding with untruths. Either that or the candidate has no personal insight and cannot identify when his performance is lacking! If Fred is actually telling the truth, then he is flawed candidate! Why? Because he has admitted to not having to solve problems and not having been in a situation recently where rapid thinking and troubleshooting is crucial. Either way, Fred has made a significant error in responding to the interviewer’s question in this way. It didn’t need great intelligence, it just needed common sense and the truth.

Interviewer: Fred, have you had experience in introducing a new product into a saturated market and if so, what were the results?

Fred: “I was looking for a flexible, robust and scalable solution that was both cutting edge and world-class. I did a gut-check and opted to create a team dialogue embedded with a philosophy to spurn blue-sky thinking and instead push the envelope within the boundaries of fiscal bandwidth.  By leveraging this strategy we were able to create a paradigm shift, boost team synergies, and at the same time circle the wagons so we could get our ducks in the row for the product”.

Answer critique: “Epic” Fail. Top of the annoyance list according to interviewers are people who cite vague, jargonistic and incomplete answers. Instead Fred could have said: Yes, I led my team to launch the i-Pack 2.0 product in what was an extremely saturated market. The challenges were immense; market surveys had indicated that not only was the market saturated, but in some areas, it was in decline. It was important to first survey potential consumers, review competition products and see how we could create a product that met consumer needs for colour, texture and style…”. By talking plainly, giving an example of the how, why, when, Fred is drawing the interviewer into his story, not putting up a brick wall of business jargon.

Interviewer: Fred I see here that you were involved in developing policy for the new technology division. Tell me more about that in terms of your area of responsibility.

Fred: The reason we had to develop I2 was due to the changes in CANN. The PRB team decided that CANN was too restricted to meet Fedgov’s BRB strategy so it was decided to implement CANN2. The Department Head of EH&S indicated that with SAR at its core, CANN2 would be a viable strategy with great ROI.

Answer Critique:”Epic” Fail. Fred has made the mistake of again pushing his interviewer away by talking about internal operations and using acronyms that nobody, unless they were working within the same department or company would have a clue what he was referring to. Never put the person you are communicating with at a disadvantage. At a minimum he or she will feel small and stupid and worse if the interviewer will become disconnected from you.  If you cannot get your point across to the interviewer, you lose.

Interviewing really isn’t a science. It’s just using the laws of communication: common sense, clear, concise words and phrases, truth and active listening.

Filed Under: Blog, Prepare Yourself, Thinking the right way Tagged With: Interviews, Prepare Yourself

About Gayle Howard

If you are interested in working with Gayle Howard—an executive resume writer, Certified Master Resume Writer, multi-award-winning resume writer, and Master LinkedIn profile writer, drop her a line now using the contact form at the link above. Gayle can help you get interviews for your dream job and bring the world of business to you by maximizing your exposure and connections on LinkedIn.

Reader Interactions

Comments

  1. Gayle Howard says

    November 9, 2009 at 10:15 am

    Placing a divide between you and the interviewer is just plain dumb. See my latest blog post: Epic Fail Interview Answers http://is.gd/4RaGC

    Reply
  2. Gayle Howard says

    November 9, 2009 at 8:15 pm

    Placing a divide between you and the interviewer is just plain dumb. See my latest blog post: Epic Fail Interview Answers http://is.gd/4RaGC

    Reply
  3. Gayle Howard says

    July 21, 2010 at 11:00 am

    #Jobseekers Interviewers cite vague, theoretical, future-oriented & incomplete answers as being top of annoyance list. http://bit.ly/a8fKOE

    Reply
  4. Gayle Howard says

    July 21, 2010 at 9:00 pm

    #Jobseekers Interviewers cite vague, theoretical, future-oriented & incomplete answers as being top of annoyance list. http://bit.ly/a8fKOE

    Reply
  5. DoYouBuzz says

    July 21, 2010 at 11:24 am

    RT @GayleHoward: #Jobseekers Interviewers cite vague, theoretical….& incomplete answers as being top of annoyance list http://ow.ly/2eJLJ

    Reply
  6. DoYouBuzz says

    July 21, 2010 at 9:24 pm

    RT @GayleHoward: #Jobseekers Interviewers cite vague, theoretical….& incomplete answers as being top of annoyance list http://ow.ly/2eJLJ

    Reply
  7. Angus One Ltd. says

    July 21, 2010 at 11:25 am

    RT @GayleHoward: #Jobseekers Interviewers cite vague, theoretical, future-oriented & incomplete answers as being top of annoyance list. http://bit.ly/a8fKOE

    Reply
  8. Angus One Ltd. says

    July 21, 2010 at 9:25 pm

    RT @GayleHoward: #Jobseekers Interviewers cite vague, theoretical, future-oriented & incomplete answers as being top of annoyance list. http://bit.ly/a8fKOE

    Reply
  9. CrossroadsCareer says

    July 21, 2010 at 11:32 am

    Interviewers cite vague, theoretical, future-oriented & incomplete answers at top of annoyance list. http://bit.ly/a8fKOE (via @GayleHoward)

    Reply
  10. CrossroadsCareer says

    July 21, 2010 at 9:32 pm

    Interviewers cite vague, theoretical, future-oriented & incomplete answers at top of annoyance list. http://bit.ly/a8fKOE (via @GayleHoward)

    Reply
  11. Gayle Howard says

    October 13, 2010 at 12:53 am

    #Jobseekers Interviewers cite vague, theoretical, future-oriented & incomplete answers as being top of annoyance list. http://bit.ly/a8fKOE

    Reply
  12. Gayle Howard says

    December 29, 2010 at 7:20 am

    #Jobseekers Interviewers cite vague, theoretical, future-oriented & incomplete answers as being top of annoyance list. http://bit.ly/a8fKOE

    Reply
  13. Jacob Share says

    December 29, 2010 at 2:14 pm

    RT @GayleHoward Interviewers cite vague, theoretical, future-oriented & incomplete answers as being top annoyances http://bit.ly/a8fKOE

    Reply
  14. Lisa Wiley Parker says

    December 29, 2010 at 8:50 pm

    RT @GayleHoward: Interviewers cite vague, theoretical, future-oriented & incomplete answers as top of annoyance list. http://bit.ly/a8fKOE

    Reply
  15. Gayle Howard says

    March 26, 2011 at 9:45 pm

    #Jobseekers Interviewers cite vague, theoretical, future-oriented & incomplete answers as being top of annoyance list. http://bit.ly/a8fKOE

    Reply

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Your dream job awaits. Let’s get started

You can dream about it, or you can take action. You can move up the ladder, or you can stand still. The choice of course, is yours—but life’s way too short to be going nowhere.
Get Started

Footer

Subscribe & Get Our Free Job Search Ebook

  • We maintain a strict Privacy Policy.

Learn More

  • Our History: It Began in 1990
  • Awards and Credentials
  • Business Milestones
  • Training: Write it yourself
  • We Recommend

Resume Packages

  • Resume Writing Training
  • Terms and Privacy
  • Order a Resume Package

Copyright © 2021 Gayle Howard · Packages · FAQ · How we work · Our Terms

DMCA.com Protection Status