Well now THIS was an interesting way of interviewing!

[sondra_finchley]

I would like to know if anyone else out there has had this experience- or some opinions from you HR folks out there-

Today I went to an interview for a large insurance company about 2 hours from where I presently live. This was an in person interview with an HR specialist for an analytical position requiring either a masters or a bachelors and 5 years experience. I have a masters and 3 years heavy analytical experience/client and project management. ( just a smidge of background I guess). I sat down with the HR lady and she explained that they interview using situational/behavioural questions and I needed to respond to each question with a specific incidence of what happened and what the outcome was. She had ELEVEN pages of these questions- apparently she was looking for certain types of behaviour, they would assign a point score based on the behaviours present in my answers- and these behaviours were required for this position (which seemed odd to me). This took about an hour and a half of me trying to dredge up the last 7 years of work experience for different examples of how I built relationships, did analytical thinking, performed strategically, solved a problem, presentation skills, etc. It was, to say the least, exhausting. I did have a copy of my resume in front of me, though she did not. No questions were asked as to my exact level of analytical capabilities, if i had worked on similar projects to what would be required of me in that position, if i had the computer skills required to pick up where they needed it done. I took it for what it was, answered my best ( and thought I explained my varied background quite well), and figured one way or another was no big deal as it wasnt the exact sort of company I have been looking for.

I got home tonight to find she had already emailed me to tell me that they had found more qualified applicants. I was, admittedly, a little frustrated. It seems as though in an attempt to be impartial that a whole bunch of other variables come into play specifically- did I say the exact words they were looking for in order to get the right points? Even if i did have the background and experience and didnt choose the best example then did I screw myself over?

So- was wondering if anyone else has been through an entirely behavioural/situational interview and if they felt it was good style of interviewing or not.

[AG_47]

Yes, I've been through this type of interview. I HATED it!! I had been out of work for a year and a half and had only held two six month temp jobs before that. I didn't have much to base the questions on and had a hard time answering them. They asked five pages worth of questions. One question was "Explain a time when you went against company policy" I, being stupid, told them about the time I skipped work without calling in to go to a concert. I knew I didn't get the job as soon as I said that. They didn't even call me to tell me I didn't get the job :rolleyes: . I would've been perfect for the job too. I think that companies should interview people more on their skills and less on their behavior. Also, if they don't require experience then they shouldn't ask questions about the canidates previous experience.

[TinyDancer]

While I HATE being on the other side of a behavioral interview, it's definitely a good tool to use in drawing out people's experience. (For most jobs) It's very difficult to get at a person's skills without seeing them in a job. This is why this style of interview is the next best thing (outside of simulations and assessments).

It may seem subjective, but if it's done well, it's a really fair way a judging someone. It's certainly a lot more effective than just doing a freeform interview.

Behavioral interviews are the way of the world, my friend! I have never interviewed with a company that didn't use them.

If you're interested, I'll email you this weekend with some things that might help you to prepare and just to give you more background on this style. Let me know.

Keep your head up, girl. . .

[CityGal]

The behavioral interview tactic seems a bit out there for me and I am certainly glad I have never experienced it. Honestly, I doubt you said or did anything wrong because you really couldn't have. They wanted to know about you and nothing about you is wrong. Those jaded tests need to be revamped. The interview tactic they pulled on you seems like those damn standardized test for schools. Don't stress it. In my opinion, companies that run those kind of tactics are not worth it because they are not after the individual and what they can provide for them.

[Spinney]

Quite a few of the interviews I've done have had questions like this, but they were only maybe 4 or 5 questions at the most. The rest of the interview was pretty standard stuff, getting to know personalities etc.

I can't imagine doing questions like that for over an hour! It's hard enough to recall examples for just 5 questions. Especially examples that can be easily explained and apply perfectly to what the interviewer is asking.

[crystal_dance]

I work on Wall street and most invesment banks grill you with behavioral questions. I've had close to 20 interviews with behavioral q's so I don't mind em too much anymore. They are draining and sometimes you do get q's that sneak up on you but with practice you get the hang of it. Good luck!

[Ciderhillnh]

Ive been through this type of interview as well.

I actually like them better than the standard ask 2 questions about your resume and talk at you about the job for 45 minutes style.

This interview style of behavioral questions allows me to flex my knowledge and show the company what I can do for them.

[workaholic?]

i've been on both sides of this type of interview. they actually taught it to us in school, and it just so happened that it's the method my company uses for interviews. the interviewer is actually looking for three things in your answer...a situation/task, the action you took, and the result. It's called STARs interviewing. in fact, even if they're not doing that type of interview, it's still a good method of answering questions. it forces you to give clear, complete answers. a lot of people give vague answers in an interview, and using STARs resolves that issue and impresses the interviewer.

[sondra_finchley]

It was the STAR method- she explained it to me at the beginning and I think that I followed it as best I could. I had practiced a few behavioral questions beforehand ( and have had a few thrown at me in other interviews for another place) and felt comfortable with them, but I dont think I was ready for this many of them. They DO force you to be concise and expain what happened, the action taken, and the result, but after a while you feel you lose sight of why you are there because everything gets lost in what you did in your past, not what you can do in the future ( though obviously past performance is supposed to indicate future performance) for this firm. At least its better than the dreaded "tell me about yourself" question!

After a while I felt like I was at either a spelling bee or a beauty pagent being tested on poise!

[spokes]

i have been trhough it and i find it just as enjoyable as any other type of interview.

[Barella]

Believe me, it could be worse. You could be drilled for an hour and a half, asked to answer to the most ludicrous "real life situations" for a 10$/an hour job spent all day long in a basement (happened to me) or you could get a series of three interviews, one of which consists of playing legos with a group of other interviewees (also happened to me).

[cache]

Believe me, it could be worse. You could be drilled for an hour and a half, asked to answer to the most ludicrous "real life situations" for a 10$/an hour job spent all day long in a basement (happened to me) or you could get a series of three interviews, one of which consists of playing legos with a group of other interviewees (also happened to me).

I used to do that...ask the most insane, advanced questions for entry level positions. Thinking back on it, I'd have to say it was because I was ~22, and felt the need a)to prove myself and b)to assert my authority(read:superiority) over the candidate. What a foolish kid I was...

[spiritedaway]

I have been to this type of interview before. I found it pretty amusing, actually. It was for this competitive leadership development program at this company and they have a list of standard questions.

The interviewer asked me a question and I obviously gave a non-standard answer. He tried again and tried to steer me to the answer that he was looking for. I knew what I was saying and didn't change my answer. He later gave me a tip that I should have answered "....".

I looked at him, half amused and half surprised because the whole thing was utterly ridiculous. I want to answer the way I want, not to fit the mold that they're looking for.

All my other interviews worked out really well though. :huge: