Interview advice

[Beveridges]

In corporate interviews for rail jobs they often ask a rather difficult question such as describe a time you worked under pressure. This is often followed by a question I hate more,"how well do you think you coped?". It is an extremely common interview question these days and I never do well on it.
Now this is the part I don't know how to best answer. If you say you coped perfectly well and would not do it any way different next time, you could fail for not showing that you can evaluate your performance and find better ways of doing things.
If you answer it by saying you coped well but something could have been done better, you are highlighting a weakness, so will probably fail again.
So what's the best way to answer it?

 

[S19]

In corporate interviews for rail jobs they often ask a rather difficult question such as describe a time you worked under pressure. This is often followed by a question I hate more,"how well do you think you coped?". It is an extremely common interview question these days and I never do well on it.
Now this is the part I don't know how to best answer. If you say you coped perfectly well and would not do it any way different next time, you could fail for not showing that you can evaluate your performance and find better ways of doing things.
If you answer it by saying you coped well but something could have been done better, you are highlighting a weakness, so will probably fail again.
So what's the best way to answer it?

I wouldn't be too scared by these questions. It's standard content in a lot of interviews outside of the rail industry

You had feedback after the event or task in an informal post-job brief. You coped well. However, there is always room for improvement in any task and there were a couple of things that you could improve for next time.

You are an individual that always strives to improve your performance and skills. With this feedback you were able to go back into the work place, with a better understanding next time the job/event/task occurs. You are always wanting to develop!

Every day is a school day...

 

[TDK]

In corporate interviews for rail jobs they often ask a rather difficult question such as describe a time you worked under pressure. This is often followed by a question I hate more,"how well do you think you coped?". It is an extremely common interview question these days and I never do well on it.
Now this is the part I don't know how to best answer. If you say you coped perfectly well and would not do it any way different next time, you could fail for not showing that you can evaluate your performance and find better ways of doing things.
If you answer it by saying you coped well but something could have been done better, you are highlighting a weakness, so will probably fail again.
So what's the best way to answer it?

The only answer to this question is an honest one. I was asked this and my reply was:

I worked under pressure on a job that had time penaties if the job was not finished by a certain time, although it was a stressful time I coped well by calling on extra staff to ensure the job was completed on time as the cost of the extra manpower was a lot less than the fine that would have been put on the company.

I passed the interview and have been in the grade for 11 years, this was an honest answer and impressed the interviewers.

 

[strange6]

In ANY interview, railways or not, you should always be positive and NEVER negative, no matter what. You are there to sell yourself. Do that and be confident and you'll be there or thereabouts. Good luck!

 

[Beveridges]

So if they ask what would you do differently next time you say that as it worked so well last time, you would do it the exact same way?

 

[Toots]

Yes,and add how you think it's important to be well prepared for such events by keeping up to date with relevant publications and the rules and regulations.

 

[Rjhsteel]

So make it up?

I didn't to my knowledge make any mistakes and it went well. But they don't want to hear that?

 

[TDK]

So make it up?

I didn't to my knowledge make any mistakes and it went well. But they don't want to hear that?

Dangerous ground making things up - I attended 2 courses on interview techniques and one of them included a day about body laguage using actors, my wife hated it after I did that course

 

[S19]

Dangerous ground making things up - I attended 2 courses on interview techniques and one of them included a day about body laguage using actors, my wife hated it after I did that course

Lying in interviews gets you nowhere. Unless on the odd occasion you come across what I call Professional Interviewees who seem perfect for the role but are chocolate fire guards

 

[Beveridges]

The thing is, if you say that you wouldn't change anything next time, they will fail you as it's like they WANT to know what you would change if faced with the situation again. They are looking for evidence that you are willing to continue to learn and improve. But if you do not have any way of doing it better next time, you cannot answer the question. If you did make mistakes and have room for improvement however, it could fail you for showing you did not follow a rule or lost concentration or whatever reason it was for not getting it right in your example!!
It seems like a question you cannot win and I fail on this question time and time again!
Been thinking about it for months and cannot for the life of me come up with a good answer to this question that satisfies *both* the main part and the probing part of the question.
It's similar to that other common question "Describe a time when you made a difficult decision" followed by "What would you do differently next time".
Why would you do anything differently next time if you made the right decision??? If you didn't make the right decision you wouldn't use it as an example in an Interview???
It's frustrating as it's not like I'm being asked these questions on the spot and getting "caught out", I've been thinking about them for months.

 

[S19]

Personally I think you're trying to think too hard about it (if that makes any sense)

There are always ways to improve ANY task. It's why you should always review your work.

I work in the nuclear industry. At my site if someone said there is no way a task can be improved they'd get laughed at. There is always something that can be changed to improve the way a task is done, in any industry (even if it's the slightest thing)

 

[Beveridges]

But if its an industry where your working to strict rules and procedures, there is only normally one correct way of doing something. At least in the cases I can think of in my examples.
You could say things like you would do something a little faster next time the event occurs (due to the experience gained from the first time) but thats about it.

 

[S19]

But if its an industry where your working to strict rules and procedures, there is only normally one correct way of doing something. At least in the cases I can think of in my examples.
You could say things like you would do something a little faster next time the event occurs (due to the experience gained from the first time) but thats about it.

I work in the nuclear industry. Everything has strict rules and procedures, and are highly regulated (for obvious reasons) You can't scratch your backside without following a procedure.

This doesn't mean the procedures can't be improved. If you think there's a better way of doing something, highlight it to your supervisor and someone investigate it. After all, these procedures could be years old and things change over time.

 

[Vandal]

The thing is, if you say that you wouldn't change anything next time, they will fail you as it's like they WANT to know what you would change if faced with the situation again. They are looking for evidence that you are willing to continue to learn and improve. But if you do not have any way of doing it better next time, you cannot answer the question. If you did make mistakes and have room for improvement however, it could fail you for showing you did not follow a rule or lost concentration or whatever reason it was for not getting it right in your example!!
It seems like a question you cannot win and I fail on this question time and time again!
Been thinking about it for months and cannot for the life of me come up with a good answer to this question that satisfies *both* the main part and the probing part of the question.
It's similar to that other common question "Describe a time when you made a difficult decision" followed by "What would you do differently next time".
Why would you do anything differently next time if you made the right decision??? If you didn't make the right decision you wouldn't use it as an example in an Interview???
It's frustrating as it's not like I'm being asked these questions on the spot and getting "caught out", I've been thinking about them for months.

Was there ever a situation where you had to make a difficult decision, and there was two or maybe three possible options, each better than the next, and all within the parameters the interviewers are looking for?

Now, say you chose the best solution, which for arguements sake was option C, and that was it, job done, no room for improvement, or at least no 'obvious' room for improvement.

Would it not be an option then when asked this question you said you used plan B, which still had the desired result, but then left you with the better alternative in C, (the one you actually used) which you realised through 'hindsight', and therefor you'd do the next time?

I'm not saying this is what you should do, only using it as an example of looking at it from a slightly different perspective.


Hope that makes sense.

 

[TDK]

Was there ever a situation where you had to make a difficult decision, and there was two or maybe three possible options, each better than the next, and all within the parameters the interviewers are looking for?

Now, say you chose the best solution, which for arguements sake was option C, and that was it, job done, no room for improvement, or at least no 'obvious' room for improvement.

Would it not be an option then when asked this question you said you used plan B, which still had the desired result, but then left you with the better alternative in C, (the one you actually used) which you realised through 'hindsight', and therefor you'd do the next time?

I'm not saying this is what you should do, only using it as an example of looking at it from a slightly different perspective.


Hope that makes sense.

Interesting direction to follow, if you are set a task and the desired outcome is say for instance is to stop your train smoothly at the 4 car mark, what is the most important factor, to stop at the 4 car mark or stop smoothly? If you over run the 4 car mark by 2m say, the train is still on the platform and there is not a safety issue, if you stop at the 4 car mark and have to use a lot of brake at low speed you have actually stopped where required but not smoothly, now, what would be the correct thing to do? It is a personal choice.

The outcome of this scenario could actually be someone falls and injures themselves due to the heavy braking, so the smooth stop would have been the desired choice, but, if someone fell between the door and the plaform because of the curvature of the platform stopping at the 4 car mark with heavy braking would be the desired choice, this may seem irrerevant but if I asked this question at interview I would expect an answer containg both these factors and what would in the interviewees opinion be the preferred action. There is not a correct answer except really to ensure that whne driving a train you try your best not to be in this situation of making a choice on what is the best option due to an error.

A trainee asked me a question, I just cannot seem to get a smooth stop at the plaform with my DI no matter how hard I try, I asked him what options he had on ensuring he did stop smoothly, he said aim to stop just short and then release the brake at a slow pace to stop smoothly, I said try it, he came back and told me he had sussed it and now can stop smoothly.

This is why some sort of questions and certain aptitude tests are used, the driver used his common sence to answer his own question with a solution if fact this is him using his aptitude is it not.

Questions at interview are not there to catch you out but to see what common sence and aptitude levels you have, bear that in mind when answering questions and you should do well

 

[Mojo]

I think the best advice should be tailored to the job in hand. If the job requires team work, then maybe you could mention assistance from colleagues. If it is project based, then be more flexible and willing to put in those extra hours, etc.

 

[Mojo]

I think the best advice should be tailored to the job in hand. If the job requires team work, then maybe you could mention assistance from colleagues. If it is project based, then be more flexible and willing to put in those extra hours, etc.