What If Your Tongue Has A “Mind” Of Its Own?
Have you ever been in the middle of a conversation and found yourself distracted by the number of times a person separates their thoughts with “umm” or “do you know what I mean?” Slang or conversation fillers (a.k.a. bad speaking habits) have become habitual for some. These fillers oftentimes become prominent and too consistent during times of nervousness, much like an interview. Solution: Become an active participant in critiquing and fixing your own speech. Concentrate on what comes out of your mouth while in relaxed, social settings, for example. That’s when you’ll find the most infractions.Convincement And Its Side Effects
Too often job seekers walk into interviews “cold,” somehow thinking they can talk themselves into the job. Remember, it’s not about how much you speak, but the quality of what you say. Job seekers could learn a lot from successful sales professionals. They will tell you the sales process isn’t dominated by lengthy conversations intended to wear the prospect down so they eventually give in and buy. Overselling yourself can culminate into interview disaster, and job seekers who don’t know when to stop talking, can actually make HR managers run in the other direction (subsequently ruining the job seeker's chances for new employment). Solution: Create a list of potential interview questions and jot down your instinctual answers. Then, treat your instinctual answers as first drafts and proceed to writing more fine-tuned answers. Keep your answers tight, yet thorough. Fine tune your answers several times, if you have to. To help with the process, and to ensure your answers meet the mark with employers, try following a situation, action, result (SAR) formula. For those answers where you can’t identify bottom-line results, highlight achievements generated by your team or department as a whole.“I Could Have Explained That Much Better. What I Briefly Mean Is...”
Even under the best of circumstances, we have all found ourselves in a position where we could have explained something better. It’s perfectly acceptable to revise and consolidate your answer, even shortly after the incident in question — presuming your second stab at an answer is short and sweet, of course. Take this sample Q&A between an HR rep and an interview candidate:HR Rep: “Tell me about your time with ACME Tool Company.”
Interview Candidate: “Well, I joined the company in 1993. I started as a machinist where I stayed for about 18 months. I was then promoted to an interim manager, which required the management of three full-time machinist and two seasonal members. The original manager went on sick leave — the reason I was only an interim manager for a while. I guess they liked me within management, because I was promoted to a full-time shift manager when my predecessor decided to take an early retirement and not come back to the company. I served as manager for about five years, before leaving the company. I left the company because they decided to bring in an outsider for the executive position I applied for.”
Wow, what a mouthful! Do you think this is what the HR rep had in mind for an answer? Could the above we whittled down into something far more concise, yet just as informative? Yes, I believe so, too. How about this instead:HR Rep: “Wow, it sounds like you had quite an adventure over at ACME.”
Interview Candidate: “Yes, let me give you the shorter, less painful account of my time at ACME. I worked within management for five years before moving into my current management position, where I’ve been for the last three years. No doubt, leadership roles are a perfect fit for me. I consistently reduced employee turnover by 3-5% year-after-year; and I had great success as a change agent, which reduced my employer’s dependence on certain vendors for example.”
Better, right? Did you notice how a couple of achievements were strategically placed in the answer?
