In the last fifteen years, I have conducted thousands of interviews for a variety of positions and seniority levels. For a while, I was following the conventional approach of using scripted questions that tapped into candidates’ ‘soft skills,’ such as ‘Can you talk about a time when there was a disagreement with another team?’ While it’s reasonable to follow a mainstream interview process for junior-level positions, a few years ago I realized that for senior positions (both in the IC track and the organizational leadership track), a traditional interview that elicits conventional answers and paints a rosy picture of reality does not truly help us understand the candidate’s strengths and weaknesses.
For example, a common question in many behavioral or leadership interviews is about escalation. Almost all candidates have prepared a polished story about how they handled an escalation flawlessly, following step-by-step instructions from a framework like STAR. They describe how they avoid conflict resolution issues by empathizing with the other party and bringing different perspectives to the table.
However, as senior leaders in any organization, we know that we deal with conflict and escalation regularly, and many long-standing conflicts don’t fit into the textbook model of conflict resolution through simple empathy, situation, task, etc. As a result, a few years ago, I began taking a different approach, one that ‘pushes’ candidates outside the norm. I started reversing the questions and exploring areas that are often uncomfortable to discuss.
For instance, I now ask:
- Can you give an example of a premature escalation that you initiated?
- Can you share a conflict where you were wrong?
- Do you have an example of a time when you later realized you made an emotional decision?
Of course, answering these questions can be uncomfortable and feels like walking a fine line. Admitting to being wrong or making mistakes is not easy especially in interview setup. However, the details in their responses and their ability to accept their mistakes reveal a lot about a candidate’s self-reflection, character, and capacity for self-improvement—qualities that are far more important in senior leaders.