Interviewing:? Discussing “Weaknesses”

For a good three or four year period of my sixteen year recruiting career, I stopped asking candidates to talk about their “areas of professional development” (weaknesses).  Why?  Because I was so often embarrassed for both the candidates and myself when I received the carefully concocted, well-rehearsed answers.  I appreciated that they were prepared for the question.  But, the answers were almost always too formulaic - some strength recast as a weakness (e.g., “too passionate”, “too perfectionistic”, “too career-focused”, “too detail-oriented”).

Yes – many of these answers were indeed both strengths and weaknesses and, I’m sure most were truthful, well-intended, and given based on poor interview advice.   And, depending on the role, some could be worthy of further exploration/discussion (e.g., you may not want your Chief Medical Officer to be constantly down in the weeds but, you certainly want your Case Manager to be).  Regardless, I was genuinely interested in getting to know what candidates did particularly well and that which they had to work on.  More importantly, I was seeking insight and self-awareness.

Self-awareness is a critical attribute for any successful executive and a key pillar of emotional intelligence – an essential trait of effective leadership.  This is where these canned answers left me disappointed.  We all have professional strengths and weaknesses (flat sides, areas for development).  And, as we progress in our careers, we should develop a keen self-awareness of the things that come naturally to us as well as those that require more energy/effort/attention.

If you’re having trouble identifying your weaknesses, look to your past performance reviews or simply, reflect on the elements of your current role that energize you (often, these are “strengths”) as well as those that seem to sap your energy or prompt you to procrastinate (“weaknesses”).

We are all “works in progress”.  And, to me, and, I bet most talent acquisition and hiring managers, a bigger flaw than any particular weakness is a lack of self-awareness of one’s strengths and weaknesses.

Interviews really shouldn’t be games of cat and mouse.  They should be respectful, honest, open, and candid discussions in which both sides provide realistic assessments of themselves and, in which both sides are truly trying to assess fit.  Too much selling - or withholding of pertinent information - on either side (interviewer or interviewee) is a bad sign and will likely lead to a negative outcome (poor fit, short tenure, performance issues, mutual disappointment).  I understand that not all hiring managers and talent acquisition leaders share this point of view.  But, I assure you, the ones that do, make better hires.

So, don’t fear the “areas of professional development” (or some variant) question.  Instead, use it as an opportunity to demonstrate your self-awareness, integrity, and, while we’re at it, your areas of development.  Candor tends to be reciprocated – perhaps your openness will be rewarded with an even more realistic portrayal of your prospective employer’s organizational challenges.  At the very least, you’ll have effectively demonstrated a key characteristic of emotional intelligence that good leadership demands.

Thanks, as always, for reading.  I'd love to hear your feedback at [email protected]. 

? Steve McGovern and McGovern Executive Search Insights, 2016. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this blog’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Steve McGovern and Executive Search Insights with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.

Disclaimer:  The views and opinions expressed in these articles are solely those of the author.