Wacky job interview questions mostly useless |

Wacky job interview questions mostly useless

A survey of hiring managers dredged up these examples of questions they like to ask candidates in job interviews:

What kind of animal would you be?

How many flavors and what toppings would you make in an ice-cream sundae?

Use an ad slogan to describe yourself.

There were more off-the-wall and, in my mind, mostly useless questions claimed as favorites by the interviewers in a survey sponsored by the staffing firm Accountemps. These are the kinds of queries that make qualified applicants stumble and take a stab with no idea if “a cat” or “a dog” was the right response in the interviewer’s mind.

Some human resource practitioners defend these questions as ways to explore creativity and the ability of applicants to think on their feet. I’d suggest that time is better spent finding out whether a candidate truly wants and is qualified for the specific job.

Here’s what I’d ask first: Why do you want to work here? Or why are you interested in this position?

If the answer is “I need a job,” “I need a paycheck” or something that reveals little familiarity with the job or the organization, it’s a sign of wishy-washy commitment and lack of preparation.

I would have scoured the applicant’s resume to find past experience that appears to qualify the person for the job, and then I’d probe beyond the written words. Tell me about what you did in that role. What did you like about that job? What did you dislike about it? Why did you quit? Or, why do you want to change jobs?

To be sure, many competent interviewers ask these questions. And they also know that digging into the applicant’s “soft skills” — personality traits and work habits — is every bit as important as the “hard skills” shown through prior experience.

It’s vital to try to get a measure of attitude, coachability, flexibility and ability to get along with others. Many job hunters have had their candidacies derailed by revealing anger, inflexibility or an over-inflated sense of self.

But good behavioral questions — “Describe a time when you disagreed with your boss and tell how the situation was resolved” — are more effective than asking about ice-cream choices.

Those weird questions are too subject to personal whim. Who’s to say whether a charging bull or an industrious squirrel is the “right” animal? Sure, you can argue that having the applicant defend his or her choice is instructive, but it’s still playing a “what-if” game.

Then, too, if the goal is insight into personality, there are plenty of personality tests (some good, some not) available to administer. Those measures of candidate worth aren’t perfect. I’ve heard from despondent job hunters who were completely undone when told they failed personality tests for a job they wanted.

Job interviews are scary enough. Good candidates spend a lot of time worrying and preparing for expected, relevant questions. It shouldn’t be too much to ask that interviewers prepare the same.

To reach Diane Stafford, call 816-234-4359 or send email to [email protected]. Follow her online at and

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.