Have you ever been to an interview only to be faced with less interesting questions? Have you ever been to an interview only to be asked uninspiring and invalid questions? Putting psychology into test, are these questions related to the job description?

Job search could be considered as a tedious task until you get that cherished invite. Then that tedious-thought is transferred to preparing for the interview. The apprehension, expectations amongst numerous other factors pushes Smart people to make a lot of research about the hiring company to an impressive extent. The prospective candidate wait patiently, ready, armed with information that deals with problems a company is either facing or needs to eliminate. The smart chap thinks, "oh! yes intelligence would write-me further in the employee register.
Unknowing to him the company isn't actually opened to problem identifying factors that endanger the reputation and existence of the establishment. Of course this will be proved as you read on.
The smart candidate thinks to himself "The Human Resources (the agency) interviewing me might consider a candidates opinions as a negative criticism even when it's an innovative and innocent observation proposed towards solving perceived problems." Then he thinks through crafty, sensible and ingenious way to answering technical questions. He is expecting questions that would challenge his prerogative decision making.
Take for instance, a small scale soap manufacturing company may want to make massive sales and hence hire a well experienced sales Executive. During the interview, if the candidate has researched and noticed the distribution chain is overstretched as against the available sales staff, he isn't expected to be brute with the truth. If the above was an answer to a management questions, the candidate would have been the best choice for the job. Now herein lies the irony! The bone of contention is this, The HR digrese from job description related questions and asks "if you were an animal which animal would you be"? Isn't this a question that is totally off key? What has it got to do with being a sales executive or management ? It's like asking for a fish where glasses are sold. Without the doubt, pick an amateur from the labour market and he will affirm It's an obvious case of "smart people and dumb interviews" that just just happened.


As a job seeker, how do you move on from such questions? The creative mind expresses it's self with insurmountable ease. But what happens when the questions aren't related in anyway to the job specification ?

Smart people also know There are mild ways to express truth so as to massage the ego of the prospective hiring establishment. Unless of course you were invited for a specific job opening and being interviewed for another position you never applied for in its entirety. This was my personal experience in early 2019.

I had applied for the post of a Classroom Teacher but got the rude shock that I was going to be interviewed for the post of a Lab Technician. As a smart young chap it was obvious the hiring team did a shabby job of handpicking jobseekers without scrutinizing. Doesn't this show they were inorganised and dumb? This automatically pops up a red flag like a serpent coming out of a hole. I mean, who invites applicants without properly analysing their CV
Have you ever been to an interview only to be faced with less interesting questions? Have you ever been to an interview only to be asked uninspiring and invalid questions? Putting psychology into test, are these questions related to the job description?
Job search could be considered as a tedious task until you get that cherished invite. Then that tedious-thought is transferred to preparing for the interview. The apprehension, expectations amongst numerous other factors pushes Smart people to make a lot of research about the hiring company to an impressive extent.
The prospective candidate wait patiently, ready, armed with information that deals with problems a company is either facing or needs to eliminate. The smart chap thinks, "oh! yes intelligence would write-me further in the employee register. Unknowing to him the company isn't actually opened to problem identifying factors that endanger the reputation and existence of the establishment. Of course this will be proved as you read on.
The smart candidate thinks to himself "The Human Resources (the agency) interviewing me might consider a candidates opinions as a negative criticism even when it's an innovative and innocent observation proposed towards solving perceived problems." Then he thinks through crafty, sensible and ingenious way to answering technical questions. He is expecting questions that would challenge his prerogative decision making.
Take for instance, a small scale soap manufacturing company may want to make massive sales and hence hire a well experienced sales Executive. During the interview, if the candidate has researched and noticed the distribution chain is overstretched as against the available sales staff, he isn't expected to be brute with the truth. If the above was an answer to a management questions, the candidate would have been the best choice for the job. Now herein lies the irony! The bone of contention is this, The HR digrese from job description related questions and asks "if you were an animal which animal would you be"? Isn't this a question that is totally off key? What has it got to do with being a sales executive or management ? It's like asking for a fish where glasses are sold. Without the doubt, pick an amateur from the labour market and he will affirm It's an obvious case of "smart people and dumb interviews" that just just happened.
As a job seeker, how do you move on from such questions? The creative mind expresses it's self with insurmountable ease. But what happens when the questions aren't related in anyway to the job specification ?
Smart people also know There are mild ways to express truth so as to massage the ego of the prospective hiring establishment. Unless of course you were invited for a specific job opening and being interviewed for another position you never applied for in its entirety. This was my personal experience in early 2019.

I had applied for the post of a Classroom Teacher but got the rude shock that I was going to be interviewed for the post of a Lab Technician. As a smart young chap it was obvious the hiring team did a shabby job of handpicking jobseekers without scrutinizing. Doesn't this show they were inorganised and dumb? This automatically pops up a red flag like a serpent coming out of a hole. I mean, who invites applicants without properly analysing their CV resume and qualifications?
When the interview began, the head of the hiring team who was a lady started by asking what my name was, academics... Then she followed it up with the "tell me about yourself" question. It wouldn't have been absurd had it been she didn't question if it was my wife that brought me to the interview! She saw my marital status on my CV to be single. Being a smart young man I replied, "no! I am single, I even indicated it on my CV and I believe it wouldn't hinder my performance as a Teacher". She figured the message I was trying to convey. I applied for the position of a Teacher and ought to be interviewed in the same line. I was hoping the questions thrown at me will be meant to test my innovative and quick thinking abilities. I was disappointed.
It's the responsibility of the HR to act on behalf of the employer and design questions meant to test job Seekers decision making. This will help to determine the kind of candidate needed for a job .
But the best candidates dig deeper and find lateral thinking. This "lateral thinking" according to the Oxford Dictionary is the solving of problems by an indirect and creative approach, typically through viewing the problem in a new and unusual light. Most employers are never ready to entrust their establishment to a mere prospective employee's suggestions no matter how geniune, enticing and juicy your proposed "unusual light" might be glittering.
One would think these days, the labour market is meant for the best candidate. But it's ironic new and uncommon ideas maybe seen as a threat by the interviewer. The recruiter might have the false conception that a wild-thinking candidate is an unskilled joker. Hence the best candidate loses out as a result of his weighty insight into the company's modus operandi.
A situation whereby innovative thinking and prospect is meant to win the job hunt, a "less-thinker" wins the challenge. So before going for that interview, no matter how deep you have dug, understand the management wants the truth to be watered down. resume and qualifications?

When the interview began, the head of the hiring team who was a lady started by asking what my name was, academics... Then she followed it up with the "tell me about yourself" question. It wouldn't have been absurd had it been she didn't question if it was my wife that brought me to the interview! She saw my marital status on my CV to be single. Being a smart young man I replied, "no! I am single, I even indicated it on my CV and I believe it wouldn't hinder my performance as a Teacher". She figured the message I was trying to convey, "I applied for the position of a Teacher and ought to be interviewed in the same line".

I was hoping the questions thrown at me will be meant to test my innovative and quick thinking abilities. I was disappointed.

It's the responsibility of the HR to act on behalf of the employer and design questions meant to test job Seekers decision making. This will help to determine the kind of candidate needed for a job .

But the best candidates dig deeper and find lateral thinking. This "lateral thinking" according to the Oxford Dictionary is the solving of problems by an indirect and creative approach, typically through viewing the problem in a new and unusual light. Most employers are never ready to entrust their establishment to a mere prospective employee's suggestions no matter how geniune, enticing and juicy your proposed "unusual light" might be glittering.

One would think these days, the labour market is meant for the best candidate. But it's ironic new and uncommon ideas maybe seen as a threat by the interviewer. The recruiter might have the false conception that a wild-thinking candidate is an unskilled joker. Hence the best candidate loses out as a result of his weighty insight into the company's modus operandi.

A situation whereby innovative thinking and prospect is meant to win the job hunt, a "less-thinker" wins the challenge. So before going for that interview, no matter how deep you have dug, understand the management wants the truth to be watered down.