The Initial Interview: Fight, Flight, or Fit

Restored from the Empower Network archive (2011–2017), lightly edited to meet our current advertising standards. Views are the original author’s.

The Initial Interview: Fight, Flight, or Fit

Originally Written by Jeff Fischer

If you were to Google “common interview questions” you would see everything from the standard, “Tell me about yourself,” and, “Why do you want to work here,” openers to those dreaded questions spawned by the “science” of behavioral interviewing (e.g. the “tell me about a time that you”… questions). MBAs in particular love to practice behavioral interviewing and spend countless hours coming up with answers to questions such as, “Tell me about a time that you showed leadership,” and “Tell me about a time that you overcame a major obstacle.” Your Google search would also reveal many experts offering to provide “smart” answers to these common questions and help you “sound good.”

The problem with this approach is that it overlooks the way human beings make decisions.

Before we go any deeper into the discussion of interviewing, let’s take a short detour and look at brain science.

When we think of the brain, we often think of intellect and smarts. When talking about brain power we are in fact talking about the cerebrum, which is the part of the brain that is responsible for, amongst other things, thinking, intellect, higher cognitive functioning, and rational decision making. The Cerebrum is the largest part of our brain and it is also the newest structure in the terms of brain evolution. It is that part of the brain that elevates us above our more primitive ancestors and it gives us what many believe defines the essence of modern humankind. Remember the French Philosopher Rene Descartes – Cogito ergo sum – I think therefore I am. When we answer interview questions intelligently, we engage in a rational argument to prove our merit. To rephrase Descartes – I think (and answer well), therefore I am good enough.

But is the initial screening interview really a rational process? I would argue that it is not.

In the first round “screening” interview, the interviewer is the gatekeeper who controls future access to other members of the hiring company. The stakes for the interviewee are clear – no matter how you frame it, the first interviewer is an obstacle that must be overcome. He or she can’t give you a job but they can stop you from meeting the person who can. What many people don’t realize is that the stakes for the interviewer are also high. The screening interview is often conducted by a junior person or HR representative who must endorse or reject the candidate – a risky play because if the wrong person is let through then a bad candidate will then meet more senior people. That can reflect poorly on the interviewer. On the flip side, if a “good” candidate is inadvertently rejected, no one else will know and the interviewer is safe.

When it is on the margin, it is better to say no than risk being perceived as having poor judgment or wasting the time of more senior people.

The screening interview is largely a veiled (and sometimes not so veiled) challenge. The candidate needs to “get by” the interviewer by proving worthiness and the interviewer must determine if endorsing a candidate is worth the reputational risk. I have worked with many hiring companies and it is common for the screening interviewer to take satisfaction in the ability to weed out the wrong candidates. Comments like, “You have to be pretty good to get through me,” are quite common and first round interviewers to take pride in their ability to accurately “test the metal” of the applicants and let only the best ones through.  Similarly, I have debriefed hundreds of MBAs after interviews and they often use language like, “I got beat up,” or, “I got pounded, but I got through.”  Simply stated, the initial screening interview is about survival.

So how do we make survival decisions?

Survival is the stuff of primitive man. In general the deeper you go into the brain (and the closer to the top of the spinal cord) the more “animal” the function. While our intellectual information processing occurs in the cerebrum, our reactions to threat are buried much deeper (and lower) in a far more primitive brain structure called the Limbic System. Deep within this system is the amygdala, the part of the brain that drives many of our emotions and motivations, especially those associated with survival, fear, anger and pleasure. The amygdala is also believed to control the storage and location of memories – especially those memories associated with intense emotional events. When we are threatened, it is believed that the amygdala “checks” our memory to determine if the threat warrants a reaction and if it does, the reaction is usually primitive.  Daniel Goleman, in his 1996 book Emotional Intelligence, used the term amygdala hijack to describe what happens when you encounter something in the moment that, although apparently benign, triggers a much stronger more visceral response.

At this point, your emotional brain hijacks your intellectual brain and more primitive forces take over. And the most important factor – this hijack is really fast and the amygdala processes and decides in tiny fractions of a second.

This drives the immediate knowing – the fight, flight, or freeze reaction that gives us that instant “safe or not,” “right or wrong,” sensation that is both primal and preverbal.

When you need or want a job, the stakes are indeed high and there is an element of survival in the screening interview that is quite real – you do want the next interview. In interviews, amygdala hijack usually takes the form of sweating, freezing up, defensiveness, or in rare occasions, responding aggressively.  On the surface, we all know that succeeding or not in an interview is not the same as surviving or not in life; the problem is that in the moment, it can feel like they are one and the same

How can we avoid “fight or flight” in the screening interview?

The trick is to enter the situation differently. Let’s return to the example of the MBA practicing behavioral questions. Typically, this individual has spent countless hours preparing for battle. They enter the interview armed with their leather folder stocked with resumes printed on bonded paper and girded with well practiced answers. They then wait for the opening salvo and engage in battle. Best case scenario, they hold up well under pressure, win the first round, and advance to the next stage. Worst case, they fail to perform, and exit the interview defeated. In either case, it is about winning or losing.

But there is another way. Imagine what would happen if the candidate had absolute clarity as to who they are, what they do naturally, what they love to do, and what they plan to do next. Suppose also that they were able to articulate this in a professional manner in the language of the interviewer and that their attitude was one of genuine curiosity as to whether or not this position is the right place for them.

Now suppose also they were able to open the interview with an attitude of genuine interest and credibly convey the message, “This is who I am and what I want to do and based on everything I have learned about the company, I would like to explore the possibility of doing it here,” or even better, “I would really value your input as to whether or not I would be a good fit.” Then imagine that, if asked, they could provide heartfelt examples of how they had used their gifts in their life to date (work, school, etc).

This style sets an entirely different tone; one that is collaborative, genuine, curious, and open. The odds of this approach triggering a hostile situation are very low.

Is this really possible?

You bet! Every interview opens with the chance for the applicant to speak. That’s why people practice the “elevator pitch.” The opening can be as simple as “hello” or may take the form of a question, “So tell me about yourself.” Either way, the door is open for the candidate to openly express who they really are and why they are there. The trick is to recognize the door and walk through it honestly. There is nothing wrong with practicing before an interview – it just depends on what you chose to practice. Sounding good or being right is armor; being real and ringing true much harder. It is quite doable; the catch is that you have to have done the hard work first – looking within and clarifying who you are at the CORE requires courage and exploring where you might fit takes patience and effort.

In my practice, I help people discover what drives them and what they love to do. I help them to articulate what they do naturally in credible language that people will understand. We work together to seek out those places where who they are and what they do is needed and find the people with whom they will resonate. The good news is that when you achieve resonance with the right person, the interview is over. There may be additional questions but once you have “clicked,” the rest is a formality.

For more tips and resources visit my fanpage on facebook.