 Downloads...
Career
Resources...
Technical
Resources
About me
|
MAIN LIST
1. Familiar Questions asked in the Interview
2. Nine tips for team interviews
3. Group Discussion
Familiar Questions asked in the Interview
Do these sound familiar?
- Tell us something about yourself
- What do your friends say are your good & bad points?
- What makes you different from other candidates for this job?
- Why should we hire you?
- What is your greatest weakness?
- Describe your most challenging experience
- What did you dislike most about your last job?
- What brings job satisfaction to you?
- What do you think it takes to be successful in this field?
There will most often be role-plays, situational questions and many questions that are unrelated to the job. Answer them carefully
and honestly, as this is to test your behavior under various circumstances.
Nine tips for team interviews by The JobsAhead Team
When you are facing a panel of interviewers, make your best moves
Whether you are searching for jobs, looking for career avenues or climbing
the corporate ladder, you can't escape team interviews these days. The
problem is that such interviews don't have a pattern to them. They come in
different forms. You could be facing your prospective team members. Or you could be up against the
top brass—HR vice-president, the section head, the operations chief. Or you
could also be sent to a recruitment assessment centre for multi-parametric evaluation (psychological tests for pressure-handling
abilities, team-player skills and so on).Try these ten tips for surviving,
and scoring, in a team interview.
Give variety to your answers
Remember you might be interviewed by different panels. Don't give a stock
answer to all of them. They'll be comparing notes. Repackage your skills so
that they sound different. If you're showcasing project X as your major
achievement in your present job before one team, talk about project B before
another interview panel. A technical team will tune in to techie talk; an
HR team would rather hear about your interpersonal skills.
Fine-Tune Interpersonal Skills
Pull out the stops on your group management and group presentation skills.
Interviewers are people after all. Look for the personality type underscoring
each interviewer. Then try and connect with each one of them without getting
personal. Usually the best way to make contact is to project values that you
feel you can share with your interviewers.
Don't quake in your boots
Interviewers are not ogres. They are looking for excuses to hire you, not
spill your guts. Don't be obsequious. That conveys low self-esteem.
If you face your interviewers with fear in your eyes, they won't like what
they see. They are NOT sadists.
Prepare for stress
You'll be up against a time crunch in a team interview. In one-on-ones, the
interviewer might be taking notes, allowing you little breathers. No such
luck with four people firing questions at you. Use stress control techniques
to soothe your nerves. You might even use the extra adrenaline to sharpen
your responses.
Showcase the important things
List seven important things that fit the job description of the advertised
post. Prepare to present skills that fit such traits. It helps to talk to
friends familiar with the job description. You can even ask them to prepare
tests that you can take from them.
Rehearse well
Put together three family members or friends with diverse personality traits.
Recreate the formality of a team interview situation and ask them to fire
nonstop questions at you. That will serve as a useful practice session. Ask for serious feedback, especially about weak areas in your answers. Questions about qualifications
and work experience are usually generic, so what your mock team asks you is
bound to be pretty close to the real stuff.
Create a mental picture of yourself
Boost your self-confidence by seeing yourself as star performer who's a cut
above. See yourself answering with elan the questions you expect. Then
replay your answers and ask yourself these questions:
- How interesting were your observations?
- Did most of your responses begin the same way?
- Did you use 'we' often, suggesting team-player attributes?
- Are there traces of humour in your responses?
Ask good questions
Research is integral to a good interview performance. Find out as much about
you can about the company concerned. Browse the Net, check company reports,
put together news clips. Armed with your background brief, ask relevant
questions about the company. If you think you have a bright idea about any
ongoing activity, try this: "Did the company consider this option ..."
Look beyond the obious
Your interview team has some core queries about you. It's these they want
you to address. Try and look beyond the upfront questions to decipher their
exact intent. Then respond to fill in what the team is really looking for.
Flesh out your answers to focus on the team's concerns. If they ask you about
your perception of the company's ESOP policy, they want you to present your
expectation from a stock option plan. Answer in sync with the general tenor
of the interview. If your work involves individual research besides team
work, don't go overboard about team-player abilities. Balance your answer.
Mention how sometimes individual work is more productive though team work is
needed to put into action ideas generated by individual research.
Group Discussions
- In a group discussion what should my objectives be and how should I achieve them?
- Is it wise to take a strong stand either in favour or against the topic right at the start of a Group Discussion ?
- Is it a good strategy to try and be the first speaker on the topic in a GD?
- In an interview how does one handle the question "Tell us about yourself?".
- In the MBA entrance interview how do I justify my decision to pursue the MBA programme?
In a group discussion what should my objectives be and how should I achieve them?
In order to succeed at any unstructured group discussion, you must define what your objective in
the group is. A good definition of your objective is - to be seen to have contributed
meaningfully in an attempt to achieve the right consensus.
The key words in this definition are 'seen', 'meaningfully', and 'attempt'. Let us understand what
each of these imply in terms of action points :
The first implication is that merely making a meaningful contribution in an attempt to achieve
consensus is not enough. You have to be seen by the evaluator to have made a meaningful
contribution in an attempt to build the right consensus.
In other words you must ensure that you are heard by the group. If the group hears you so will
the evaluator. You must get at least some airtime. If you are not a very assertive person you will
have to simply learn to be assertive for those 15 minutes. If you get cowed down easily in an
aggressive group, you can say goodbye to the business school admission.
Many GD participants often complain that they did not get a chance to speak. The fact of the
matter is that in no GD do you get a chance to speak. You have to make your chances.
The second important implication is that making just any sort of contribution is not enough. Your
contribution has to be meaningful.
A meaningful contribution suggests that you have a good knowledge base, are able to structure
arguments logically and are a good communicator. These are qualities that are desired by all
evaluators.
Many GD participants feel that the way to succeed in a GD is by speaking frequently, for a long
time and loudly. This is not true. The quality of what you say is more important than the quantity.
Don't be demoralized if you feel you have not spoken enough. If you have spoken sense and have
been heard, even if only for a short time, it is usually good enough. You must have substance in
your arguments. Therefore, think things through carefully.
Always enter the room with a piece of paper and a pen. In the first two minutes jot down as many
ideas as you can. It pays to think laterally. Everybody else will state the obvious. Can you state
something different? Can you take the group ahead if it is stuck at one point? Can you take it in a
fresh and more relevant direction? You may like to dissect the topic and go into the underlying
causes or into the results.
One way of deciding what sort of contribution is meaningful at what point of time is to follow two
simple rules. First, in times of chaos a person who restores order to the group is appreciated.
Your level of participation in a fish market kind of scenario can be low, but your degree of
influence must never be low. In other words you must make positive contributions every time you
speak and not speak for the sake of speaking. The second rule is applicable when the group is
floundering. In this situation a person who provides a fresh direction to the group is given credit.
The third implication is that you must be clearly seen to be attempting to build a consensus.
Nobody expects a group of ten people, all with different points of view on a controversial subject
to actually achieve a consensus. But did you make the attempt to build a consensus?
The reason why an attempt to build a consensus is important is because in most work situations
you will have to work with people in a team, accept joint responsibilities and take decisions as a
group. You must demonstrate the fact that you are capable and inclined to work as part of a
team.
What are the ways that you can try to build consensus?
First, you must not just talk, you should also listen. You must realize that other people also may
have valid points to make. You should not only try to persuade other people to your point of
view, but also come across as a person who has an open mind and appreciates the valid points of
others.
You must try and resolve contradictions and arguments of others in the group. You must
synthesize arguments and try and achieve a unified position in the group. Try to think of the
various arguments of your's and others' as parts of a jigsaw puzzle or as building blocks of a
larger argument for or against the topic.
Try and lay down the boundaries or the area of the discussion at the beginning. Discuss what the
group should discuss before actually beginning your discussion. This will at least ensure that
everyone is talking about the same thing.
Try and summarize the discussion at the end. In the summary do not merely restate your point of
view; also accommodate dissenting viewpoints. If the group did not reach a consensus, say so in
your summary.
You must carry people with you. So do not get emotional, shout, invade other people's private
space. Do not bang your fist on the table except in extreme circumstances.
If you have spoken and you notice that someone else has tried to enter the discussion on a
number of occasions and has not had the chance to do so maybe you could give him a chance the
next time he tries. But do not offer a chance to anyone who is not trying to speak. He may not
have anything to say at that point and you will just end up looking foolish.
The surest way of antagonizing others in the GD as well as the examiner is to appoint yourself as a
de facto chairperson of the group. Do not try to impose a system whereby everyone gets a
chance to speak in turn. A GD is meant to be a free flowing discussion. Let it proceed naturally.
Do not ever try to take a vote on the topic. A vote is no substitute for discussion.
Do not address only one or two persons when speaking. Maintain eye contact with as many
members of the group as possible. This will involve others in what you are saying and increase
your chances of carrying them with you. Do this even if you are answering a specific point raised
by one person.
One last point. You must not agree with another participant in the group merely for the sake of
achieving consensus. If you disagree, say so. You are not there to attempt to build just any
consensus. You have to attempt to build the right consensus.
Is it wise to take a strong stand either in favour or against the topic right at the start of a
Group Discussion ?
In theory yes. If you believe something why shouldn't you say so? If we are convinced about
something our natural response is to say so emphatically.
However in practice what is likely to happen if you take a very strong and dogged stance right at
the beginning of the interview is that you will antagonise the people in the group who disagree with
you and will be unable to carry them with you and convince them of the validity of your argument.
We therefore recommend that after you hear the topic you think about it for a minute with an
open mind and note down the major issues that come to your mind. Don't jump to any
conclusions. Instead arrive at a stand in your own mind after examining all the issues in a balanced
manner. Only then begin to speak. And when you do so outline the major issues first and only
then state your stand. In other words give the justification first and the stand later. If you were to
state your stand first chances are that the others in the group who disagree with your stand will
interrupt to contradict you before you can elaborate on the reasons why you have taken that
stance. In this situation the evaluator will only get an impression of what you think and not how
you think. Remember you are being evaluated on how you think and not what you think.
Is it a good strategy to try and be the first speaker on the topic in a GD?
In most GD's the opening speaker is the person who is likely to get the maximum uninterrupted
airtime. The reason is simple - at the start most other participants in the GD are still trying to
understand the basic issues in the topic, or are too nervous to speak and are waiting for someone
else to start. Therefore the evaluators get the best chance to observe the opening speaker. Now
this is a double edged sword. If the opening speaker talks sense naturally he will get credit
because he opened and took the group in the right direction. If on the other hand the first speaker
doesn't have too much sense to say, he will attract the undivided attention of the evaluators to his
shortcomings. He will be marked as a person who speaks without thinking merely for the sake of
speaking. As someone who leads the group in the wrong direction and does not make a positive
contribution to the group.
So remember speaking first is a high risk high return strategy. It can make or mar your GD
performance depending how you handle it. Speak first only if you have something sensible to say.
Otherwise keep shut and let someone else start.
In an interview how does one handle the question "Tell us about yourself?".
An often asked opening question. Perhaps the most frequently asked question across interviews.
Your opening statement needs to be a summary of your goals, overall professional capabilities,
achievements, background (educational and family), strengths, professional objectives and
anything about your personality that is relevant and interesting. This question represents an
opportunity to lead the interviewer in the direction you want him to go e.g., your speciality or
whatever else you may wish to highlight.
Your intention should be to try to subtly convince the interviewers that you are a good candidate,
you have proved that in the past, and have a personality that fits the requirement.
Remember that the first impression you create will go a long way in the ultimate selection. Keep in
mind, most candidates who are asked this question just blurt out their schooling, college, marks
and qualifications. All this is already there in the CV. Why tell the interviewer something he
already knows?
A final word on approaching this question. Once you have said what you have to say - shut up.
Don't drone on for the sake of speaking for you just might say something foolish. Sometimes
interviewers don't interrupt in order to give the candidate the impression that he has not spoken
enough. This is just a stress inducing tactic. Don't fall for it, if you feel you have spoken enough. In
case the pause gets too awkward for you just add something like, "Is there something specific that
you wish to know about me?"
In the MBA entrance interview how do I justify my decision to pursue the MBA
programme?
When you are asked this for God's sake don't tell the panel that you are looking for a
"challenging job in a good firm with lots of money, status and glamour". That is the first
answer that most candidates think of. Unfortunately it is the last answer that will get you
admission. In the answer to a direct question on this subject you must convey to the interview
panel that you have made a rational and informed decision about your career choice and your
intended course of higher study.
There are broadly six areas which your answer could touch upon :
1.Career Objectives :
You could talk about your career objectives and how the two year MBA
programme will help you achieve them. This implies that you have a clear idea of what your
career objectives are and how you wish to achieve them. For example you may want to be an
entrepreneur and wish to set up your independent enterprise after doing your MBA and then
working for a few years in a professionally managed company. You could explain to the panel
that the MBA programme will provide you with the necessary inputs to help you run your
business enterprise better. But then you must be clear about what the inputs you will receive in the
MBA programme are.
2.Value Addition :
That brings us to the second area that your answer should touch upon. What is
the value you will add to yourself during your two year study of management. Value addition will
essentially be in two forms knowledge and skills. Knowledge of the various areas of management
e.g. marketing, finance, systems, HRD etc. and skills of analysis and communication. You will find
it useful to talk to a few people who are either doing their MBA or have already done it. They will
be able to give you a more detailed idea of what they gained from their MBA.
3.Background :
Remember, there must be no inconsistency between your proposed study of
management and your past subject of study or your past work experience. If you have studied
commerce in college then management is a natural course of higher studies. If you are an engineer
this is a tricky area. You must never say that by pursuing a career in management you will be
wasting your engineering degree. Try and say that the MBA course and your engineering degree
will help you do your job better in the company that you will join. But then you should be able to
justify how your engineering qualification will help.
4.Opportunities and Rewards :
You could also at this stage mention the opportunities that are
opening up in organizations for management graduates. Highlight with examples. At the end you
may mention that while monetary rewards are not everything they are also important and MBAs
do get paid well. You must not mention these reasons as your primary motivators even if that may
be the case.
GO TO MAIN LIST
|
||
Free Softwares |
Model Question Papers |
Space Watch |
Tutorials ||
||
My Home Page |
Contact Me ||
Copyright © 2001, www.blueneck.8k.com
All rights reserved.
|
|
Free Softwares|
Model Question Papers|
Space Watch|
Tutorials|
My Home Page|
Contact Me|
