As soon as you sit down in the interviewer's office, you're air game. That's right. The interviewer will be working on you with two objectives in mind: (1) to establish a trusting relationship, and (2) to gain facts about you. The reason for the first objective is to create at atmosphere in which you'll want to open up, so the interviewer will have an easier time achieving the second objective.
Most applicants will only reveal about 20 percent of themselves; the other 80 percent will remain below the surface. Don't expect the interviewer to take your responses at face value; chances are, he or she will be too aware for that. What the interviewer will be doing is continuously making and testing assumptions about you. Thesis one of the most important techniques used in interviewing. It's frequently called hypothesis testing. Here's how it works. The interviewer formulates a hypothesis about you. It can be based on something in your resume' or something on your application or something you may have said.
Let's assume that you're applying for an administrative position that requires a great deal of contact with people outside the firm. Further, as part of your job, you will have to put pressure on these people in order to get results. The interviewer may formulate a hypothesis that says, "This candidate does not like to contact outside people; further, this candidate is too shy to exert the pressure needed to be successful in this position."
Now, then, the interviewer will construct an entire line of questions, the answers to which will provide the evidence to support or deny the hypothesis. The interviewer will come at you from every angle with questions dealing with your attitude, ability, experience, and desire to perform the task of contacting outside people. Hypothesis testing can, and usually does, form the basis for all questions that are asked during an interview. It is widely used, because the concept is sound and because it facilitates the direction and scope of questioning. Once the interviewer assumes a condition or forms a hypothesis about anything, then it becomes a relatively minor chore to bombard an applicant with questions. On the surface, you may not know what's going on; but if you understand this concept, then you'll be able to recognize what's behind the interviewer's line of questioning,
Let me give you another example. Frequently, I've encountered female college graduates applying for secretarial positions. Because professional positions are scarce, these applicants believe they should compromise their goals, take a crash course in steno and typing, and position themselves as secretaries. But, I for one don't like to place any college graduates in nonprofessional jobs. First of all, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission takes aim view of companies that have qualified women in positions lower than equally qualified males. Secondly, once such a graduate is hired as a secretary, she soon becomes bored with the work and becomes a morale problem or turnover problem. Whenever a college graduate applies for a secretarial position, my immediate hypothesis is that she's looking for a way to get her foot in the door until something better comes along. To prove or disprove that hypothesis, Till ask her questions dealing with short- and long-term career objectives, salary expectations, job challenge, capacity for routine and repetitious tasks, tolerance for working under people who may not be as bright as she. Finally, till probe for the motivation behind her seeking lower-level position than she appears capable of handling. If she answers all my questions in a manner that leaves no doubt in my mind that she really wants to be a secretary and nothing else, then Td probably hires her. If, however, I get a clue that indicates otherwise, she'll be rejected. To hire her would only result in disappointment and disillusionment further down the road if and when that better job doesn't materialize.
When you sense a line of questioning that focuses on one or two specific areas in your background, experience, or qualifications, you'll know that the interviewer has assumed something about you and that he or she is trying to prove or disprove that assumption or hypothesis. Armed with this knowledge, you should be sure that your answers to any and all questions support your objective!
The interviewer will work on getting the facts
During the interview, a tremendous amount of information will be exchanged. The interviewer will be confronted with trying to separate fact from fiction. The ease with which this can be accomplished depends on how much information you provide on a certain subject and how much of that information is real or made up. If there's reality in a statement, then it's a statement of fact. It can be observed, it's certain, and it can be proven. If, on the other hand, you leave something open to interpretation on the part of the interviewer, then it's an inference. It was not certain, and it could not be proven. Before the interviewer can move from inferences to facts, he or she has to make assumptions. This means that the interviewer will try to get more and more information regarding particular data about you and gradually will move from the inference level to the fact level. Let me show you how this works.
Let's say your résumé lists three colleges in six years. The interviewer could infer that you flunked out of the first two schools and finally ended up at a collegiate 'country club.' So, he or she will check this out by asking you questions. Perhaps in your freshman year, you came down with mononucleosis and had to drop out. When you went back to college, you chose a school closer to home. Then your father got transferred to the west coast; and when your family moved, you did, too. Your third college was small liberal arts school in California. Despite setbacks, you persevered and got that diploma. What's the point? Just this: The interviewer didn't know the facts pertaining to the three colleges listed on your resume. If he or she had inferred that you flunked out of two schools, it would have been to your disadvantage. On the other hand, by revealing the true circumstances behind your attending three colleges, you have alerted the interviewer to strength, instead of uncovering a weakness. That strength is the perseverance you exhibited in getting your degree.
Be prepared to deal with any weaknesses in background. Turn them into strengths. I'll have more today about this technique later. Also, if you feel that the interviewer can or does infer anything negative in any information that you provide, you must ensure that you clear it up and leave very little doubt as to what the true facts are. Interviewers know that their own perceptions of you will be distorted. They also know that it's difficult to obtain an accurate insight and analysis of anyone in a short period of time. They will listen carefully to every word you're saying, and then interpret that information as they separate the facts from the insights. In order to do this and to acquire the kind of information needed, interviewers have to ask questions. And that leads us into the subject of questioning techniques.
