In the last few weeks I have been on a variety of interview panels; some for internal posts where I was interviewing colleagues I know well, and others for a new administration post. What has surprised me across all of these interviews were the common patterns that kept coming up; so the following is a list of things to think about whenever you are approaching your next interview.
I was surprised by how challenging it was to interview colleagues I know well; setting aside all of the contextual information you have in order to judge the interview answers and prepared documents was surprisingly challenging. One of the advantages of having a panel is ensuring that diverse perspectives can discuss the different strengths of the candidates and come to a considered decision. While your first interviews may be intimidating – I once went for a lectureship where there were 8 individuals on the panel and it felt like a scene from a James Bond film – it is for good reasons.
In terms of the things to think about
- Fit with the post. In each of the interview panels, the decision was tight as each of the candidates brought something different to the table. This is true of any interview process – sometimes you end up not being selected not because you weren’t a great choice, but because the panel decided to pursue a different angle.
- Answer the question asked, rather than talk around the general topic. The interview questions are carefully designed and thought through – if you are not answering that specific question, you are not giving the best accounting of yourself that you can. Specific examples are essential as generalities again do not answer the question posed. In my experience, policies are in a process of change across UK academia in terms of the release of interview questions in advance. Some places will release the questions to everyone, some will release them to all candidates if any candidate requests them, and some will release them for equity and inclusivity reasons. Having sat on the panels, I would now advise candidates to always ask if the questions can be released in advance; I can see little downside in requesting, and the upside is that you can target your preparation and present your best possible case. I expect the public release of questions to become the norm for institutions over time.
- Those candidates who performed better presented a broader understanding of the external environment, whether that related to funding, government policy, Office for Students policy, accreditation bodies, or more beyond. For post-doc posts, these are less relevant, although still worth paying attention to. For lecturers, an awareness of where you research fits with UKRI’s strategic priorities (if it does); that the teaching gaps you’ve identified in the curriculum that you could teach are important to the QAA; that BCS accreditation requires your specialist knowledge – these are all things to drop into interview. This is not so much because the panel can’t work that out (although highlighting it can’t hurt); but more to demonstrate that you have that broad strategic view, which will serve you and the institute well.
- Don’t just identify concerns, but propose solutions. This is much easier said than done; identifying concerns – be that research expertise in a certain area is lacking, that a certain piece of curriculum needs developing, that a funder is under-applied to – is much, much, much, easier that doing anything about it. If you have a proposed solution; highlight it; it could make you stand out from the crowd. The panels I’ve been on easily identified those candidates who talked in generalities (not ideal) or proposed concrete ideas that were infeasible, too expensive, or impossible to achieve (also not ideal). Those who proposed achievable plans gained a great advantage.
As I’ve said before, any hiring process is tough, and few candidates are hired for the first interview they go for. You have to view each interview as an opportunity to refine your message, and do the best that you can.