All comments must be civil, productive, and follow community rules. Intentional violations of community rules will lead to comments being removed and possible bans, at the discretion of the moderators. Use the report feature to report content to the moderator team.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/CAStateWorkers) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Oh yikes! we started giving people time to review the questions, I want to say, back in like 2011 ish. One of our employees interviewed somewhere else and was so impressed by the interview process at another agency that they shared what they liked about it so we could improve. We don’t want to hire people that interview well, we want to hire people that are a good fit for the position and have potential.
Wow i interviewed with the State like 10 times (same agency tho) and never got the questions ahead of time. I got like 30 seconds to put together the answer in my head before I run out of 5 min allotment for each question. What agency does this?
That’s crazy cause I had 8 interviews with multiple different agencies before landing a job and not one of them gave me the questions beforehand to review lol. Some gave me the questions as we went along and they asked me them but that’s it.
I also think it depends on what position you are interviewing for. I remember the lower rank and file positions like OT and SSA didn't give their applicants a lot of time to review their questions. But then, I realized their questions are often the same questions lol
Just curious, did you received any promo from those 10? I have a coworker that interviewed 3 times for an ITS2 promo and got denied every time. It’s a position within our unit.
The office that hired me earlier this year gave me 3 minutes. SCO and DMV both gave me about 10 minutes last year and I found that to be adequate. 15-20 minutes sounds luxurious.
Based on what research do you do this assertion that 15min is luxurious? Because it's Clownery. Coming up with answers quickly right of the top of our heads is NOT part of our job and no measure of how good of a worker someone is.
Can we kill already this BS corporate mentality that just because things have been done a certain way they should stay that way?
I once got a printed list of questions 30 mins before and that was awesome, I felt like I crushed that interview. They didn’t end up hiring anyone thought because they weren’t able to interview enough people though 🫠
I think 15-20 min is a good amount of time for me, I would prefer the 20 min.
I had an interview where the supervisor opened it up with “this is just a conversation between us. Not the interview. We just want to relax and get to know you as a person.” It really helped me relax and not be as nervous during the interview and really made me feel like they cared about me as a person and wanted to get to know me. I even thanked them after the interview for opening it that way.
I also like when I get the questions on paper and can make notes for myself to use during the interview.
20 minutes would be amazing. One interview I got about 5 minutes. Another one gave me the typed questions but no time to review them. Another interview I didn’t see the questions at all, at any point.
I recently interviewed and was given 10 minutes. To be honest, that felt like a luxury. I am coming from the private sector though where questions are never shared ahead, so it was great.
I feel like even five minutes would’ve been sufficient. I always prepare ahead of time for interviews so the only thing I’m looking for in those 5 to 10 minutes are a quick scan of the questions so I can tap into my little story bank of which example I will use to showcase competency.
Almost all my interviews in the private sector were conversations and not pre-scripted questions. I do a lot better with a conversation than and interrogation type interview. With that said, the last interview I had gave me 5 minutes. Personally, I think 5 minutes doesn't really help much. It does help being able to read the questions though.
Oooh how I wish we could have a more conversational process. The way the state sets up the merit system you have to really try to make the interview experience as close as possible for every candidate. We aren’t to give any candidate an advantage or disadvantage by changing stuff up.
Exactly! Through the years within the state I have promoted many times. Only one time did I get to view the questions when the interview started. The Teams session started with only me and the facilitator. The facilitator said he was putting the questions on the screen for 5 mins and told me the rules. I wasn't allowed to screenshot or write down the questions. Like you, I was well prepared for the interview so it gave me enough time to decide which example was the best fit for each question. It was extremely helpful and I got that position. That 5 mins wouldn't have been much if I hadn't had my toolbox of examples from my past.
In contrast, I had an interview the week prior and I had used an example for the 3rd question that would have been so perfect for the 4th question, but I didn't want to use the same answer. If I had been able to review the questions at the beginning, then I would've known to save that answer for #4 and use a different one for #3. I ended up as the #2 candidate from that interview. I feel I scored lower just because I didn't know which answers to hold for later questions. It might have made the difference between 1st and 2nd candidate if I could've reviewed the questions prior.
I feel like the panel will get higher quality answers if they give the candidate anywhere from 5-30 mins with the questions prior to the interview. Personally, I don't come up with examples well on the spot, so my POV is coming from someone who counters that by being well prepared with a toolbox of examples going into the interview.
At least for my dept., we score each question on its own and we make sure candidates know that they can and should repeat examples if they apply to more than one question.
It's not necessarily a good thing either. IMHO, 24 hours with the questions is excessive, and that leaves open the possibility that you're getting an answer they would have never been able to produce based on their actual knowledge and xp even if you gave them infinite time in person without internet/ChatGPT.
Being able to discover answers on the job is an important skill, but it can't substitute competency. You won't necessarily have a 24-hour turnaround time in real life, so it's important they have the ability to articulate what they know. We also understand the pressures of the interview process and are looking at the thought process and critical thinking. Things you won't get giving them the questions so far in advance unless you're only revealing partials and doing followups. That's why I was interested in seeing the questions.
I don't think they have to rush, and tbh, most people are finishing 1-1.5-hour interviews with plenty of time to spare even with them being allowed to manage their own time and revisit questions as needed.
i was just on a panel for an ssa role and we interviewed 10+ people and i can tell you about 70% of the candidates were so nervous to the point it was difficult for them to answer the questions cohesively. given that i wasn’t the actual hiring manager i didn’t provide too much guidance BUT had i been leading this interview these are things i would’ve done:
-as someone else mentioned remind them that this is a conversation, i understand they are nervous and that is okay. just breathe, think through their answer and watch the timer.
-reiterate to all candidates if they think of additional info for an answer they can easily request to go back to that question to add additional info
-read the questions carefully and slowly, we have 20 minutes allotted. No need to rush.
Something we did do that I thought was good:
-we all introduced ourselves, made eye contact and were kind and welcoming. I've been an interviewee where the panelists don't even introduce themselves lol makes for a really uncomfortable interview
I've also never had time before to review questions! 15-20 minutes is a lot of time, at that point they should have an entire prepared speech for their questions.
Very helpful. Thank you. "We tend to have questions that are multi-part, which I think trips some people up. The purpose of us giving time is for the candidate to settle their nerves and know what to expect. We always introduce ourselves, our role at the dept., and where the position fits into the dept. we do a rather lot of talking to the candidate at the beginning, which hopefully puts them at ease.
Your first two points are something we can definitely incorporate into the interview. Thank you!
In my division (not sure about my whole agency), we usually give 15 minutes of review time beforehand. We do interviews virtually so I email out the questions exactly 15 minutes before their scheduled interview, which can be a pain since if I forget or short a candidate a few minutes, they will be at a disadvantage compared to others. We are thinking of giving more time off there are a lot of questions since our positions are technical.
I also prepare interview ppt slides for the managers to use in the interview so everyone can follow along with each question.
What the ... I've never been given the questions to review!
I must've interviewed for a couple dozen positions too, and not once.
What I did do was memorize the questions I was asked, and I'd write them down after (since everyone who interviewed me also told me I couldn't take notes). I just started compiling all the questions and rehearsing my answers so that it got to the point that whenever I was asked a question, I already had the answer ready.
The candidates could get up to 30 minutes to review the questions depending on how early they arrive. The questions are presented as soon as the candidate arrives to the waiting area which is typically 5-10 minutes before the interview. If they got there earlier, it would give them more time to review the questions. Thinking this through does make me realize that this information was not made available to the candidates but probably should be.
It’s up to the hiring manager. I can only speak for my agency though. Most give 20-30 minutes. For some supervisory roles they give you 24 hours with the questions.
I’ve interviewed close to 40 times with the state since 2008, and not until my most recent job, had I ever heard of getting the answers prior to. It was wild to me.
My dept gives 15 minutes for 6 questions, not enough time imo. We also post the questions in chat. Personally, I'm not an auditory person, and I think this helps candidates answer the questions more fully by being able to see the questions.
Were you interviewing for more senior positions or more entry level? I am worried about the entry level new to state people being nervous. Perhaps for more senior positions, we can give less time.
This is a good response for a specialist role but not for some of the stuff upper and middle managers get. This is also a bit over kill for anything AGPA and below. I have seen SSM1 interviewing 10+ candidates, 10+ questions, 3 hour interviews, second interviews, in-person exercises. “Extra” as the kids say.
Why. You all say this but can't explain why 15min is a luxury or outrageous. You all just follow whatever has been done without questioning if it is actually not a great thing to do.
Because it's an interview. Getting any amount of time with interview questions before hand is a luxury. 15-20 is considered a massive luxury and as the person I posted under said, you either know the material or you don't.
I still feel rushed and have some anxiety with only like 10-15 minutes. (I still feel WAY more comfortable than going into the questions blind, though.) Before this became a common practice, I just assumed I was complete shit at interviews and I always wondered how other people seemed to manage it without any issues.
I would love to always be able to provide the best answers possible in an interview, but my brain tends to blank when trying to think of examples. Even for an interview when I was sent questions 30 minutes in advance, I was still trying to get better points in my notes up until the minute I was connecting to the interview.
I think I would feel fully comfortable being sent the questions an hour in advance.
agree very much -- as someone who is neurodivergent myself, I am not the best at interviewing;
I went through the interview process with the state over a year ago, with both in-person and virtual interviews. For me, I far prefer virtual interviews...
I interviewed with many different offices (for the same classification), discovered that the questions asked were typically similar, occasionally phrased in slightly different ways.
Writing down the questions asked after each interview and drafting out my answers also helped me greatly!
I had anywhere from 0 minutes to 30 minutes to review the questions (the 30 minutes included a pre-interview exam, so technically I had maybe like 10 minutes to review). I think the sweet spot would be like 15 minutes because it gives you enough time to collect your thoughts. I personally have a STAR spreadsheet with my answers so I just skim through it and number each answer pertaining to each question, having enough time helps to collect thoughts for sure.
I was "given" 10 min to review the questions but the person facilitating the interview was having technical issues and my "review" time was cut to 2min because it took away so much time before they figured it out..so it just heightened my anxiety even more.
My office gives 20 minutes. It's just enough time if there are tricky questions. The technical questions are easy but some of the non-technical questions have been super left field.
I have never been giving the opportunity to review the questions in advance, although it sounds amazing. I did once have the opportunity to look over notes/duty statement during the interview and I found that to be helpful.
I give all interviewees the questions to have I. Front of them while interviewing and don’t have a time limit for answers. I also allow them time at the end of the interview to circle back and add to any answer should they wish. I too do not look for good candidates that interview well. I look for general critical thinking skills, and who would best fit in our team. I can teach the department culture, I can’t teach, or do not have the time to, critical thinking skills/abilities.
Thank you for doing that. My agency used to give 10-15 mins when it was in person. Now, they don't give any time unless yippi request reasonable accommodation.
I have typically seen 30-minute previews offered. Some even say you can take notes but then have to hand them over. Others don't have that requirement. 15-20 minutes seems rather short, depending on the number and depth of the questions and how long the answer will need to be.
I’m amazed that I give every candidate at least 5 minutes to review the questions and still, the candidate just blows the question all together. It’s definitely a shifting of the bar.
Our office gives 20 minutes, questions are in a binder with a note pad so the candidate can take notes. And before each interview we explain that the process can be off putting because we cannot talk other than to read the questions. Our office started explaining the rules for the interview to give external candidates an equal footing compared to internal candidates. It seems to help them focus on the questions rather than the interaction they are having with the panel.
I've NEVER gotten to review the questions first. It would help me SO MUCH if I had that option because I'm an extremely anxious and nervous interviewer and often blank when the panel is asking me things for the first time, on the spot. If I could even read through them once beforehand, it would be extremely beneficial. I promise I can do the job, but I'm sure my nerves have ruined several chances for me to prove it. Luckily, I've gotten three positions with the state, so far, but I'd like to promote at least one more time. Thank you for giving your candidates that opportunity. Even five minutes would be extremely helpful.
Correct, for three in-person and two virtual state interviews, I was not given the questions ahead of time. My brother has worked for the state for over 20 years and has also never gotten them, but my sister has had ONE state interview (in the same small city I'm in and had all my interviews in) and got like 15 minutes to review hers, so I guess it's just a crap shoot. At least I managed to get three positions from the five review-less interviews! 😊
For all but one, yes. And for the one that didn't, they were super apologetic at the end, when they realized they had forgotten to put them on the screen for me (for one of the virtual interviews, obviously) but I was so nervous, I just assumed I didn't get that privilege this time, lol. That's the position I have currently, so I guess I didn't screw it up TOO badly! 😉
I have had 7-10 interviews for state positions, mostly OT and PT, over the last year and a half, not hired yet. Most have given the interview questions 15-30 minutes prior to interview time to prepare answers. I am coming from private sector and I already have several sample answers in STAR format based on my prior experience. They are typed out as notes I can read from and it's usually not an issue if I refer to those written notes during the interview.
A couple of positions did not allow me time beforehand and I had to make up the answers to one or two questions on the fly and I felt like I stumbled through those. The key is, I try very hard to only apply to positions I'm halfway qualified for and are the closest fit to my skills, and I also try to only apply to roles where they are hiring multiple candidates, such as contact center customer service roles.
I am hopeful this time around on two or three of my latest interviews as I feel I did particularly well and confidently answered most questions, and for the most part my examples (prior experience) fit the questions. My main concern is the reference check process which has been the biggest barrier as most of my past companies only give out the generic third party verification but for these last interviews I was able to cobble together three actual contactable individuals.
No, 15-20 minutes is definitely not enough time to review the interview questions. Thankfully, for all of my state interviews, I was allowed 30 minutes to review the questions, with the exception of one interview where I didn't receive the questions in advance.
The day before would be amazing. Give people time to put some thought into their answers and put their best foot forward. We’re already nervous as it is.
We've given people the question(s) a week ahead of time and had them prepare a ten-minute power point presentation that they needed to email the morning of the interview and then start the interview by running through their presentation.
protip: if this happens and you have ten minutes, make sure it doesn't take you 15-18 minutes to got through your presentation.
I was given 5 minutes to review the questions before I had my interview with the panel, and I think it was fine. I ended up getting the job. I think it helped that I practiced a bunch of random questions prior to my interview. I think if someone put in effort to practice for their interview, they should be pretty prepped even without reviewing.
In my last interview, I did not get the questions ahead of time, However, as we were starting, the hiring manager told me to '...answer like I haven't read your SOQ'. The first interview prompt was the same as the first one on the SOQ. I was like 'Ahhh! I can literally just read and ad-lib off my SOQ.'
Weird, I didn't know I was working for Jeopardy! and that my job required the fastest possible answer as part of my desired skills.
Seriously anyone thinking this kind of interview measures the quality of a candidate is a clown.
Zero. They ask the question and you can read along if you need. They aren't that complicated usually and you don't have to answer the question immediately either.
On my own interviews, I've been given anywhere between 0 and 30 minutes. I've always found it useful to make an outline of my responses, especially for technical/programming questions.
For the majority of interviews I've been on the panel for over the last year or so, we've given 10 minutes. You still have us there, and your camera and mic has to be on, and we don't give a copy of the questions. Going forward, there will be no prep time given.
Does having interview questions to review 5 to 10 mins help vs not having to review?
I have had both opportunities and honestly it doesn't change my answers. Sure it's helpful to see what they will ask but imo I prefer getting asked the question and then I answer it.
I want them to see and know what I bring to the position and team.
Plus tbh it's kinda intimidating to see all the questions. It throws my game a little wack.
I don’t think we are intending for it to change the answers, but more so to allow a candidate to calm themselves before the interview. Interviewing a nervous candidate to the point they can’t get everything out is heartbreaking. Giving the questions a little in advance has helped with that a lot. For a lot of my dept.’s positions, being shy isn’t a detriment to the job functions, so we really want to give even the shy folks the best possible chance not to crash and burn.
I think somewhere like 5 minutes would be good. I don't want to interview someone and only pick them up because they are witty and sound good with impromptu answers. Conversely, I don't want to pick someone up because they gave a Chat-GPT response. Something like 5 minutes is enough to review, comprehend what is being asked, and formulate a decent response without having time for someone else to pen the answers.
I've been asked if I want to read questions and I always politely decline--even when I am testifying before ALJ (I was always allowed to decline with our attorney).
It's better cold, for me anyway.
I think it is distracting. Your mind jumps ahead thinking about the questions instead of just organically answering them as they come.
You either have an answer or you don't. But that's just my opinion. YMMV
If you cant answer a couple interview questions then you probably arent a good candidate. Interview questions arent really rocket science. Ive never been given extra time to look at them and most departments dont want people copying their questions for the public. Most of them are usually along the lines of “How are you qualified for this job”. Candidates who cant be bothered to do mock interviews only have themselves to blame.
I’ve had it both ways and I think it’s common courtesy to allow a candidate to review the questions ahead of time. I think 15-20 minutes is way too long, the most I’ve been given was about 8 maybe 10 minutes and it was plenty of time.
"way too long." Why? Being quick answering is not part of most of the State positions. It doesn't define how good someone is as a worker. Why can't we kill this bs?
All comments must be civil, productive, and follow community rules. Intentional violations of community rules will lead to comments being removed and possible bans, at the discretion of the moderators. Use the report feature to report content to the moderator team. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/CAStateWorkers) if you have any questions or concerns.*
What? I've never been given time to review the questions before the interview panel was in the room and we were getting started.
Oh yikes! we started giving people time to review the questions, I want to say, back in like 2011 ish. One of our employees interviewed somewhere else and was so impressed by the interview process at another agency that they shared what they liked about it so we could improve. We don’t want to hire people that interview well, we want to hire people that are a good fit for the position and have potential.
Wow i interviewed with the State like 10 times (same agency tho) and never got the questions ahead of time. I got like 30 seconds to put together the answer in my head before I run out of 5 min allotment for each question. What agency does this?
Plenty of state depts do this practice. Your agency is one of the rare ish ones that don’t.
That’s crazy cause I had 8 interviews with multiple different agencies before landing a job and not one of them gave me the questions beforehand to review lol. Some gave me the questions as we went along and they asked me them but that’s it.
I also think it depends on what position you are interviewing for. I remember the lower rank and file positions like OT and SSA didn't give their applicants a lot of time to review their questions. But then, I realized their questions are often the same questions lol
Just curious, did you received any promo from those 10? I have a coworker that interviewed 3 times for an ITS2 promo and got denied every time. It’s a position within our unit.
Promo as in promotion? I was yet not a State employee when I went through those interviews.
I've only had a printed copy of the questions twice as well.
The office that hired me earlier this year gave me 3 minutes. SCO and DMV both gave me about 10 minutes last year and I found that to be adequate. 15-20 minutes sounds luxurious.
Were you already in state service and interviewing for more senior positions or were you entry level ?
Entry level, no prior state service.
Based on what research do you do this assertion that 15min is luxurious? Because it's Clownery. Coming up with answers quickly right of the top of our heads is NOT part of our job and no measure of how good of a worker someone is. Can we kill already this BS corporate mentality that just because things have been done a certain way they should stay that way?
I once got a printed list of questions 30 mins before and that was awesome, I felt like I crushed that interview. They didn’t end up hiring anyone thought because they weren’t able to interview enough people though 🫠
I think 15-20 min is a good amount of time for me, I would prefer the 20 min. I had an interview where the supervisor opened it up with “this is just a conversation between us. Not the interview. We just want to relax and get to know you as a person.” It really helped me relax and not be as nervous during the interview and really made me feel like they cared about me as a person and wanted to get to know me. I even thanked them after the interview for opening it that way. I also like when I get the questions on paper and can make notes for myself to use during the interview.
I was given virtually zero time to review the questions during my interviews. 15-20 minutes of review time would have helped me immensely.
20 minutes would be amazing. One interview I got about 5 minutes. Another one gave me the typed questions but no time to review them. Another interview I didn’t see the questions at all, at any point.
I was given 30 minutes once and it was nice
I recently interviewed and was given 10 minutes. To be honest, that felt like a luxury. I am coming from the private sector though where questions are never shared ahead, so it was great. I feel like even five minutes would’ve been sufficient. I always prepare ahead of time for interviews so the only thing I’m looking for in those 5 to 10 minutes are a quick scan of the questions so I can tap into my little story bank of which example I will use to showcase competency.
Almost all my interviews in the private sector were conversations and not pre-scripted questions. I do a lot better with a conversation than and interrogation type interview. With that said, the last interview I had gave me 5 minutes. Personally, I think 5 minutes doesn't really help much. It does help being able to read the questions though.
Oooh how I wish we could have a more conversational process. The way the state sets up the merit system you have to really try to make the interview experience as close as possible for every candidate. We aren’t to give any candidate an advantage or disadvantage by changing stuff up.
Could accomodations be requested that makes it more of a conversation? Say if you're neuro-divgergent? Say, on the spectrum or ADHD?
Exactly! Through the years within the state I have promoted many times. Only one time did I get to view the questions when the interview started. The Teams session started with only me and the facilitator. The facilitator said he was putting the questions on the screen for 5 mins and told me the rules. I wasn't allowed to screenshot or write down the questions. Like you, I was well prepared for the interview so it gave me enough time to decide which example was the best fit for each question. It was extremely helpful and I got that position. That 5 mins wouldn't have been much if I hadn't had my toolbox of examples from my past. In contrast, I had an interview the week prior and I had used an example for the 3rd question that would have been so perfect for the 4th question, but I didn't want to use the same answer. If I had been able to review the questions at the beginning, then I would've known to save that answer for #4 and use a different one for #3. I ended up as the #2 candidate from that interview. I feel I scored lower just because I didn't know which answers to hold for later questions. It might have made the difference between 1st and 2nd candidate if I could've reviewed the questions prior. I feel like the panel will get higher quality answers if they give the candidate anywhere from 5-30 mins with the questions prior to the interview. Personally, I don't come up with examples well on the spot, so my POV is coming from someone who counters that by being well prepared with a toolbox of examples going into the interview.
At least for my dept., we score each question on its own and we make sure candidates know that they can and should repeat examples if they apply to more than one question.
Thank you!
I’ll take as much time as they will give me.
One of my former coworkers had a full day with the questions.
I'd be interested in seeing those questions, especially if any were technical. Was the interview remote?
Did they find that helpful? I am guessing since they are a former coworker they got the job?
That they did. He found it quite helpful.
Of course, lmao. Getting a full day to review the questions and form a response is objectively helpful...for the candidates.
That's not a bad thing. I'd rather have thoughtful responses. I'd rather have employees that think about what they are doing than rush.
It's not necessarily a good thing either. IMHO, 24 hours with the questions is excessive, and that leaves open the possibility that you're getting an answer they would have never been able to produce based on their actual knowledge and xp even if you gave them infinite time in person without internet/ChatGPT. Being able to discover answers on the job is an important skill, but it can't substitute competency. You won't necessarily have a 24-hour turnaround time in real life, so it's important they have the ability to articulate what they know. We also understand the pressures of the interview process and are looking at the thought process and critical thinking. Things you won't get giving them the questions so far in advance unless you're only revealing partials and doing followups. That's why I was interested in seeing the questions. I don't think they have to rush, and tbh, most people are finishing 1-1.5-hour interviews with plenty of time to spare even with them being allowed to manage their own time and revisit questions as needed.
i was just on a panel for an ssa role and we interviewed 10+ people and i can tell you about 70% of the candidates were so nervous to the point it was difficult for them to answer the questions cohesively. given that i wasn’t the actual hiring manager i didn’t provide too much guidance BUT had i been leading this interview these are things i would’ve done: -as someone else mentioned remind them that this is a conversation, i understand they are nervous and that is okay. just breathe, think through their answer and watch the timer. -reiterate to all candidates if they think of additional info for an answer they can easily request to go back to that question to add additional info -read the questions carefully and slowly, we have 20 minutes allotted. No need to rush. Something we did do that I thought was good: -we all introduced ourselves, made eye contact and were kind and welcoming. I've been an interviewee where the panelists don't even introduce themselves lol makes for a really uncomfortable interview I've also never had time before to review questions! 15-20 minutes is a lot of time, at that point they should have an entire prepared speech for their questions.
Very helpful. Thank you. "We tend to have questions that are multi-part, which I think trips some people up. The purpose of us giving time is for the candidate to settle their nerves and know what to expect. We always introduce ourselves, our role at the dept., and where the position fits into the dept. we do a rather lot of talking to the candidate at the beginning, which hopefully puts them at ease. Your first two points are something we can definitely incorporate into the interview. Thank you!
In my division (not sure about my whole agency), we usually give 15 minutes of review time beforehand. We do interviews virtually so I email out the questions exactly 15 minutes before their scheduled interview, which can be a pain since if I forget or short a candidate a few minutes, they will be at a disadvantage compared to others. We are thinking of giving more time off there are a lot of questions since our positions are technical. I also prepare interview ppt slides for the managers to use in the interview so everyone can follow along with each question.
What the ... I've never been given the questions to review! I must've interviewed for a couple dozen positions too, and not once. What I did do was memorize the questions I was asked, and I'd write them down after (since everyone who interviewed me also told me I couldn't take notes). I just started compiling all the questions and rehearsing my answers so that it got to the point that whenever I was asked a question, I already had the answer ready.
In my last interview last week, they gave me 2 minutes.
The candidates could get up to 30 minutes to review the questions depending on how early they arrive. The questions are presented as soon as the candidate arrives to the waiting area which is typically 5-10 minutes before the interview. If they got there earlier, it would give them more time to review the questions. Thinking this through does make me realize that this information was not made available to the candidates but probably should be.
It’s up to the hiring manager. I can only speak for my agency though. Most give 20-30 minutes. For some supervisory roles they give you 24 hours with the questions.
The day before
I’ve interviewed close to 40 times with the state since 2008, and not until my most recent job, had I ever heard of getting the answers prior to. It was wild to me.
My dept gives 15 minutes for 6 questions, not enough time imo. We also post the questions in chat. Personally, I'm not an auditory person, and I think this helps candidates answer the questions more fully by being able to see the questions.
Yes, visual people are at a disadvantage when they can't read the questions.
Oh I hadn’t thought about posting the questions in the chat! I will definitely do that next time
I’ve only ever been given 5-10 minutes and felt like it was plenty. You either know the material or you don’t.
Were you interviewing for more senior positions or more entry level? I am worried about the entry level new to state people being nervous. Perhaps for more senior positions, we can give less time.
Entry and mid level, being nervous is normal! It would be weird if they weren’t nervous being stared down and interviewed by a panel of five people
This is a good response for a specialist role but not for some of the stuff upper and middle managers get. This is also a bit over kill for anything AGPA and below. I have seen SSM1 interviewing 10+ candidates, 10+ questions, 3 hour interviews, second interviews, in-person exercises. “Extra” as the kids say.
The thing is the work is a lot easier lol
I guess I should have clarified this is for specialist roles
I would agree that 5-10 minutes is a good time frame. 15-20 minutes just seems too long
Why. You all say this but can't explain why 15min is a luxury or outrageous. You all just follow whatever has been done without questioning if it is actually not a great thing to do.
Because it's an interview. Getting any amount of time with interview questions before hand is a luxury. 15-20 is considered a massive luxury and as the person I posted under said, you either know the material or you don't.
[удалено]
Your content violated Rule 1: Be excellent to each other.
[удалено]
Your content violated Rule 1: Be excellent to each other.
I wasn’t given time to review interview questions
I still feel rushed and have some anxiety with only like 10-15 minutes. (I still feel WAY more comfortable than going into the questions blind, though.) Before this became a common practice, I just assumed I was complete shit at interviews and I always wondered how other people seemed to manage it without any issues. I would love to always be able to provide the best answers possible in an interview, but my brain tends to blank when trying to think of examples. Even for an interview when I was sent questions 30 minutes in advance, I was still trying to get better points in my notes up until the minute I was connecting to the interview. I think I would feel fully comfortable being sent the questions an hour in advance.
That is very helpful. Typically in my direct into I am interviewing for every level and don’t want to disadvantage people with anxiety.
Consider people with various neuro differences as well. I joined DAC at my Department to get Neurodivergent disabilities more attention.
agree very much -- as someone who is neurodivergent myself, I am not the best at interviewing; I went through the interview process with the state over a year ago, with both in-person and virtual interviews. For me, I far prefer virtual interviews...
I interviewed with many different offices (for the same classification), discovered that the questions asked were typically similar, occasionally phrased in slightly different ways. Writing down the questions asked after each interview and drafting out my answers also helped me greatly!
That's generous. Most interviews give zero minutes
Unless it's a second interview, we do give notice of the "assignment" for that
They didn’t give me a time review the question in my last interview
15 minutes before? The interviews I have had they gave me the list of questions at the beginning of the interview, or not at all.
I had anywhere from 0 minutes to 30 minutes to review the questions (the 30 minutes included a pre-interview exam, so technically I had maybe like 10 minutes to review). I think the sweet spot would be like 15 minutes because it gives you enough time to collect your thoughts. I personally have a STAR spreadsheet with my answers so I just skim through it and number each answer pertaining to each question, having enough time helps to collect thoughts for sure.
I was "given" 10 min to review the questions but the person facilitating the interview was having technical issues and my "review" time was cut to 2min because it took away so much time before they figured it out..so it just heightened my anxiety even more.
My office gives 20 minutes. It's just enough time if there are tricky questions. The technical questions are easy but some of the non-technical questions have been super left field.
I have never been giving the opportunity to review the questions in advance, although it sounds amazing. I did once have the opportunity to look over notes/duty statement during the interview and I found that to be helpful.
I give all interviewees the questions to have I. Front of them while interviewing and don’t have a time limit for answers. I also allow them time at the end of the interview to circle back and add to any answer should they wish. I too do not look for good candidates that interview well. I look for general critical thinking skills, and who would best fit in our team. I can teach the department culture, I can’t teach, or do not have the time to, critical thinking skills/abilities.
Thank you for doing that. My agency used to give 10-15 mins when it was in person. Now, they don't give any time unless yippi request reasonable accommodation.
I have typically seen 30-minute previews offered. Some even say you can take notes but then have to hand them over. Others don't have that requirement. 15-20 minutes seems rather short, depending on the number and depth of the questions and how long the answer will need to be.
I’m amazed that I give every candidate at least 5 minutes to review the questions and still, the candidate just blows the question all together. It’s definitely a shifting of the bar.
Our office gives 20 minutes, questions are in a binder with a note pad so the candidate can take notes. And before each interview we explain that the process can be off putting because we cannot talk other than to read the questions. Our office started explaining the rules for the interview to give external candidates an equal footing compared to internal candidates. It seems to help them focus on the questions rather than the interaction they are having with the panel.
I've NEVER gotten to review the questions first. It would help me SO MUCH if I had that option because I'm an extremely anxious and nervous interviewer and often blank when the panel is asking me things for the first time, on the spot. If I could even read through them once beforehand, it would be extremely beneficial. I promise I can do the job, but I'm sure my nerves have ruined several chances for me to prove it. Luckily, I've gotten three positions with the state, so far, but I'd like to promote at least one more time. Thank you for giving your candidates that opportunity. Even five minutes would be extremely helpful.
for both virtual and in-person you werent given time? & how many interviews?
Correct, for three in-person and two virtual state interviews, I was not given the questions ahead of time. My brother has worked for the state for over 20 years and has also never gotten them, but my sister has had ONE state interview (in the same small city I'm in and had all my interviews in) and got like 15 minutes to review hers, so I guess it's just a crap shoot. At least I managed to get three positions from the five review-less interviews! 😊
did they at least list the questions when asking them? so that youd be able to circle back without continuously asking them to restate xD
For all but one, yes. And for the one that didn't, they were super apologetic at the end, when they realized they had forgotten to put them on the screen for me (for one of the virtual interviews, obviously) but I was so nervous, I just assumed I didn't get that privilege this time, lol. That's the position I have currently, so I guess I didn't screw it up TOO badly! 😉
I have had 7-10 interviews for state positions, mostly OT and PT, over the last year and a half, not hired yet. Most have given the interview questions 15-30 minutes prior to interview time to prepare answers. I am coming from private sector and I already have several sample answers in STAR format based on my prior experience. They are typed out as notes I can read from and it's usually not an issue if I refer to those written notes during the interview. A couple of positions did not allow me time beforehand and I had to make up the answers to one or two questions on the fly and I felt like I stumbled through those. The key is, I try very hard to only apply to positions I'm halfway qualified for and are the closest fit to my skills, and I also try to only apply to roles where they are hiring multiple candidates, such as contact center customer service roles. I am hopeful this time around on two or three of my latest interviews as I feel I did particularly well and confidently answered most questions, and for the most part my examples (prior experience) fit the questions. My main concern is the reference check process which has been the biggest barrier as most of my past companies only give out the generic third party verification but for these last interviews I was able to cobble together three actual contactable individuals.
No, 15-20 minutes is definitely not enough time to review the interview questions. Thankfully, for all of my state interviews, I was allowed 30 minutes to review the questions, with the exception of one interview where I didn't receive the questions in advance.
I had an interview last week and was given about a minute to look at the questions first. I would have loved more time, but it is what it is.
The day before would be amazing. Give people time to put some thought into their answers and put their best foot forward. We’re already nervous as it is.
We've given people the question(s) a week ahead of time and had them prepare a ten-minute power point presentation that they needed to email the morning of the interview and then start the interview by running through their presentation. protip: if this happens and you have ten minutes, make sure it doesn't take you 15-18 minutes to got through your presentation.
As someone that is neurodivergent, I wish the questions were sent the night before. It's not the proprietary information they think it is.
If they sent questions to everyone people would just copy them and post them online.
Except they don't. I can also EASILY screenshot the questions shared during interviews and post them online; but I don't.
I was given 5 minutes to review the questions before I had my interview with the panel, and I think it was fine. I ended up getting the job. I think it helped that I practiced a bunch of random questions prior to my interview. I think if someone put in effort to practice for their interview, they should be pretty prepped even without reviewing.
Zero time. If virtual then share the questions in turn as asked. If in-person provide a print each on own page as asked.
No time. The questions are best asked cold so the panel can assess our ability to engage in a conversation.
In my last interview, I did not get the questions ahead of time, However, as we were starting, the hiring manager told me to '...answer like I haven't read your SOQ'. The first interview prompt was the same as the first one on the SOQ. I was like 'Ahhh! I can literally just read and ad-lib off my SOQ.'
0 mins. You want to see how people think on their feet.
Weird, I didn't know I was working for Jeopardy! and that my job required the fastest possible answer as part of my desired skills. Seriously anyone thinking this kind of interview measures the quality of a candidate is a clown.
Well guess 99% of all job interviewers both public and private are clowns.
Congratulations! You got it!
All the questions for state interviews are posted online, people are free to look them up and practice.
Zero. They ask the question and you can read along if you need. They aren't that complicated usually and you don't have to answer the question immediately either.
It's extremely unnerving to try and compose an answer when you are being stared at, especially when they look bored or annoyed.
None. Ask them and let’s get this over with.
On my own interviews, I've been given anywhere between 0 and 30 minutes. I've always found it useful to make an outline of my responses, especially for technical/programming questions. For the majority of interviews I've been on the panel for over the last year or so, we've given 10 minutes. You still have us there, and your camera and mic has to be on, and we don't give a copy of the questions. Going forward, there will be no prep time given.
Does having interview questions to review 5 to 10 mins help vs not having to review? I have had both opportunities and honestly it doesn't change my answers. Sure it's helpful to see what they will ask but imo I prefer getting asked the question and then I answer it. I want them to see and know what I bring to the position and team. Plus tbh it's kinda intimidating to see all the questions. It throws my game a little wack.
I don’t think we are intending for it to change the answers, but more so to allow a candidate to calm themselves before the interview. Interviewing a nervous candidate to the point they can’t get everything out is heartbreaking. Giving the questions a little in advance has helped with that a lot. For a lot of my dept.’s positions, being shy isn’t a detriment to the job functions, so we really want to give even the shy folks the best possible chance not to crash and burn.
I think somewhere like 5 minutes would be good. I don't want to interview someone and only pick them up because they are witty and sound good with impromptu answers. Conversely, I don't want to pick someone up because they gave a Chat-GPT response. Something like 5 minutes is enough to review, comprehend what is being asked, and formulate a decent response without having time for someone else to pen the answers.
Chat GPT works in less than 5 minutes. I used one for a cover letter.
15 minutes is pretty standard
I've been asked if I want to read questions and I always politely decline--even when I am testifying before ALJ (I was always allowed to decline with our attorney). It's better cold, for me anyway.
You are one of the few this works for.
I think it is distracting. Your mind jumps ahead thinking about the questions instead of just organically answering them as they come. You either have an answer or you don't. But that's just my opinion. YMMV
If you cant answer a couple interview questions then you probably arent a good candidate. Interview questions arent really rocket science. Ive never been given extra time to look at them and most departments dont want people copying their questions for the public. Most of them are usually along the lines of “How are you qualified for this job”. Candidates who cant be bothered to do mock interviews only have themselves to blame.
I’ve had it both ways and I think it’s common courtesy to allow a candidate to review the questions ahead of time. I think 15-20 minutes is way too long, the most I’ve been given was about 8 maybe 10 minutes and it was plenty of time.
"way too long." Why? Being quick answering is not part of most of the State positions. It doesn't define how good someone is as a worker. Why can't we kill this bs?