Interview enlightenment

I AM: surprised, and a little disappointed

It turns out that all that interview technique advice - "it's not so much what you say as how you say it" et al - really is true!

I was on the other side of the table for the first time today, running mock medicine entry interviews at a local school. I've come home astounded by how much more impressive the same answers sound coming from a well presented, eloquent candidate. Interview technique really is as or more important than the content of your answers. The caveat is that your answers have to be average or better - if they're bad then that's what will be remembered. If they're average, but your presentation is excellent, it might just not matter. It's not fair, but having now seen both points of view, it's absolutely true.

I was working with another medical student, and it was facinating how stereotypical our responses were to each sixth former we saw. The one who was late and flustered surprised us when she came up trumps with excellent answers to our questions. The only candidate who dressed in a smart shirt and tailored skirt, and who spoke slowly and clearly, was the best of the morning, despite not having all the best answers.

I'm sad to say I also caught myself demanding the impossible from these teenagers. We lamented that the first few hadn't prepared enough, then when one came in who had an answer ready for everything we asked, complained she sounded too rehearsed to be sincere. Urgh. I hate that it really is such a fine line. My approach to advice about this in the feedback we gave was to suggest they spend some time writing bullet point lists for each obvious question they could think of (what qualities do you think are important in a doctor? etc etc), but not write a script. That way, it's in their heads but not in formed sentences, so they can sound simultaneously sincere AND like they've given it some thought previously. Really hope i'm right...

The one exception to not rehearsing is "why do you want to be a doctor?". It's the easiest question to ask, and the hardest one to answer. I should know, I've been trying and failing most of my life. My take on this is that you have to be sure of your reasons if you're going to convince someone who's never met you, and I reckon the best way to do it is try to explain it to everyone you know. Maybe I ought to take my own advice, because I'm not sure I could do it...I definitely want to be a doctor (bloody good job after all this effort!), but my reasons now aren't what they were before I started medical school, and aren't even something I've thought about recently. Hmm.

Anyway, to get back to the point in hand. A friend of mine, D, recently went through a series of interviews for terribly grown up jobs (she settled on one with 'director' in the title, which I guess means she did pretty well). Now, D is a girl who believes that almost anything can be learned from a book, as testified by her many overflowing bookcases. But that's beside the point. She told me about some research she'd read whose conclusion was that people are hired for jobs, not for their qualifications, their references, their experience, their interview technique, or even their appearance. Apparently, without realising they're doing it, managers choose their employees for LIKEABILITY. After a bit of thought, I find this completely intuitive. If you're choosing a new colleague, of course you want someone you like! Stands to reason, eh? Course, that doesn't make it fair to those less 'likeable' but perfect for the job on paper.

So, today I have learnt:
Next time I have to sit in the hotseat, i'm going to make doubly sure my shoes are shiny, my shirt is tucked in, I take a second to consider my answers, I take note of my interrogators' names, and I walk in with a smile on my face, because the little things can tip the balance more than I'd care to admit...