What questions did you ask the last candidate you tried to hire? What expectations did you have about what they would bring to the table and the types of leadership and results you expected to see? What were the things that made you want to choose the person you actually hired?
Now ask yourself, are you performing at the level that you expect or hope for in your job candidates? Are you expecting something from a new hire that you aren’t even doing yourself?
No, I don’t mean the actual tasks that are being performed by that new person, because it doesn’t mean that you should just take on more tasks. Didn’t you focus on more than just task execution in your interview?
Maybe it’s time to interview yourself.
One of the best ways to improve anything is to find the right and hard questions to work on addressing. The toughest part of that strategy is identifying what those hard questions are. Too many times the person that needs to address that question is so bogged down in the actual thing that wants/needs to be improved that they are blind to what the hardest questions are.
Instead of a suggestion box, we need hard question boxes.
What if the group/person/organization had a way to specifically ask for insight into what those hard questions could be from reputable sources?
Suggestions mean that the person submitting thinks they know the answer, a hard question box gives the actual owner(s) of the thing being addressed the chance to see the areas that could be addressed then decide what/how to address them. Of course, they could always open up for suggestions, too.
How else could you identify the hardest things to work on, because chances are those are the most important as well.
**This is related to the The Question Recorder
You can tell a lot about a group from the questions they ask each other and/or ask others outside the group.
Think of the power of uncovering insights based on the ability to document every question ever asked by or to a group/brand/person/etc and tracking all the context and meta data attached to it. Being able to record the solution as well would make it even more powerful.
The potential builds off of the data–like an automatic FAQ creator or a prioritized list of focus areas based on number or type of questions–would be incredibly valuable as well.
At the end of the day, the questions we ask of ourselves determine the type of people that we will become.
What else could we do with this data?
Did you ever get the type of interview question that asks for your opinion on what that company could do better or what you would change about XYZ product?
As I’ve asked that question to someone I’m interviewing and have been asked that question as the person being interviewed, I’m always interested to see whether the answer comes across as positive or negative.
And I still debate in my head about which one is “better”.
Don’t get me wrong, when I’m interviewing someone I don’t want them to be all pie-in-the-sky and disingenuous and say everything is perfect and we should just keep doing what we’re doing (too positive), but when I’m answering the question and going into detail about things I would change I can’t help but to feel like I’m too negative.
Once, an interviewer from Amazon asked me how I would change a particular category at Amazon. Instead of commenting on the actual things that were implemented (both ideal and not ideal), I described how I would try to make the category better through entirely new services and offerings. In this case I felt like it was a win-win because I wasn’t necessarily critiquing something that existed but it was something to improve overall. Maybe it wasn’t perfect, but it seemed to work at that moment.
What’s your strategy when answering those types of questions? What do you prefer to hear when you’re asking those questions?