Meet the team interview advice?
Discussion
It's what some might refer to as a chemistry meeting.... the job is all but yours unless the team think you're a jerk! 
Rule of thumb (in my experience) is to ask lots of questions and look genuinely interested in the lives of others - rather than blabbering on about yourself. Also be cautious about stating strong opinions - you never know!
There are hundreds of questions you could ask new colleagues to get the ball rolling.
Rule of thumb (in my experience) is to ask lots of questions and look genuinely interested in the lives of others - rather than blabbering on about yourself. Also be cautious about stating strong opinions - you never know!
There are hundreds of questions you could ask new colleagues to get the ball rolling.
45 minutes can be quite a long time and if any of the 5 are your potential direct reports they’ll expect you to lead the conversation. Have a brief summary prepared about yourself and have lots of open ended questions about
Your predecessor
The team / your role
What they enjoy about work
What irritates them
Imhe the two key things are building a rapport and ensuring there are no uncomfortable silences.
Your predecessor
The team / your role
What they enjoy about work
What irritates them
Imhe the two key things are building a rapport and ensuring there are no uncomfortable silences.
Very much depends on whether you are on the same level with all of the 5 or whether any are above or indeed below you in how you structure your input.
You only get one chance at first impressions.
Is someone else ( HR maybe ?) also joining the call / meeting ( is this in person btw ? ) in which case you can gauge from their opening how perhaps to play it.
You only get one chance at first impressions.
Is someone else ( HR maybe ?) also joining the call / meeting ( is this in person btw ? ) in which case you can gauge from their opening how perhaps to play it.
There will need to be some nuanced differences in the specific answers, but the main themes will remain the same whether the co-workers you'll meet are going to be your direct/indirect reports or others at your level: The obvious objective being that you need to demonstrate that you're willing to be part of the team and you're the ideal candidate to fit into that team.
If being interviewed by your reports, you need to demonstrate to them that you're going to be interested in them as people and you're personally invested in their futures, their development and their careers. They need to know that they can rely on you when they need help and advice, that you're not going to steal their glories when they do a good job but be ready to throw them under the bus when things go wrong. They need to be convinced that you'll treat them with fairness, respect, honesty and without prejudice. They also need to know that you actually can do your job.
Slightly different approach if being interviewed by same/similar level co-workers. They'll need to be convinced that you'll pitch in equally with the team's responsibilities and general workload, be ready to share your knowledge, especially if you have any specialist experience, but also be ready to learn new skills, be willing to be part of the team, and committed to hitting the team's targets/KPIs, and treat everybody with respect.
For either scenario, there will be a "company values" or similar document somewhere, which HR should be able to provide you with. Make sure that you're familiar with the expected bahaviours in that document and your answers reflect and reference those expected behaviours.
I'm currently recruiting for a relatively senior role with management responsibilities who reports to me, and both their reports and equivalent level co-workers will get the chance to interview the candidates who make it to the final stage. The above are exactly why I'm getting them involved; the teams who are already here are very valuable to me and the company, so any newcomer has to fit with our values and how we work.
If being interviewed by your reports, you need to demonstrate to them that you're going to be interested in them as people and you're personally invested in their futures, their development and their careers. They need to know that they can rely on you when they need help and advice, that you're not going to steal their glories when they do a good job but be ready to throw them under the bus when things go wrong. They need to be convinced that you'll treat them with fairness, respect, honesty and without prejudice. They also need to know that you actually can do your job.
Slightly different approach if being interviewed by same/similar level co-workers. They'll need to be convinced that you'll pitch in equally with the team's responsibilities and general workload, be ready to share your knowledge, especially if you have any specialist experience, but also be ready to learn new skills, be willing to be part of the team, and committed to hitting the team's targets/KPIs, and treat everybody with respect.
For either scenario, there will be a "company values" or similar document somewhere, which HR should be able to provide you with. Make sure that you're familiar with the expected bahaviours in that document and your answers reflect and reference those expected behaviours.
I'm currently recruiting for a relatively senior role with management responsibilities who reports to me, and both their reports and equivalent level co-workers will get the chance to interview the candidates who make it to the final stage. The above are exactly why I'm getting them involved; the teams who are already here are very valuable to me and the company, so any newcomer has to fit with our values and how we work.
QuickQuack said:
There will need to be some nuanced differences in the specific answers, but the main themes will remain the same whether the co-workers you'll meet are going to be your direct/indirect reports or others at your level: The obvious objective being that you need to demonstrate that you're willing to be part of the team and you're the ideal candidate to fit into that team.
If being interviewed by your reports, you need to demonstrate to them that you're going to be interested in them as people and you're personally invested in their futures, their development and their careers. They need to know that they can rely on you when they need help and advice, that you're not going to steal their glories when they do a good job but be ready to throw them under the bus when things go wrong. They need to be convinced that you'll treat them with fairness, respect, honesty and without prejudice. They also need to know that you actually can do your job.
Slightly different approach if being interviewed by same/similar level co-workers. They'll need to be convinced that you'll pitch in equally with the team's responsibilities and general workload, be ready to share your knowledge, especially if you have any specialist experience, but also be ready to learn new skills, be willing to be part of the team, and committed to hitting the team's targets/KPIs, and treat everybody with respect.
For either scenario, there will be a "company values" or similar document somewhere, which HR should be able to provide you with. Make sure that you're familiar with the expected bahaviours in that document and your answers reflect and reference those expected behaviours.
I'm currently recruiting for a relatively senior role with management responsibilities who reports to me, and both their reports and equivalent level co-workers will get the chance to interview the candidates who make it to the final stage. The above are exactly why I'm getting them involved; the teams who are already here are very valuable to me and the company, so any newcomer has to fit with our values and how we work.
Firstly thank you for the detailed response. The people i am meeting are the same level as me, interestingly three of them only started in December, If being interviewed by your reports, you need to demonstrate to them that you're going to be interested in them as people and you're personally invested in their futures, their development and their careers. They need to know that they can rely on you when they need help and advice, that you're not going to steal their glories when they do a good job but be ready to throw them under the bus when things go wrong. They need to be convinced that you'll treat them with fairness, respect, honesty and without prejudice. They also need to know that you actually can do your job.
Slightly different approach if being interviewed by same/similar level co-workers. They'll need to be convinced that you'll pitch in equally with the team's responsibilities and general workload, be ready to share your knowledge, especially if you have any specialist experience, but also be ready to learn new skills, be willing to be part of the team, and committed to hitting the team's targets/KPIs, and treat everybody with respect.
For either scenario, there will be a "company values" or similar document somewhere, which HR should be able to provide you with. Make sure that you're familiar with the expected bahaviours in that document and your answers reflect and reference those expected behaviours.
I'm currently recruiting for a relatively senior role with management responsibilities who reports to me, and both their reports and equivalent level co-workers will get the chance to interview the candidates who make it to the final stage. The above are exactly why I'm getting them involved; the teams who are already here are very valuable to me and the company, so any newcomer has to fit with our values and how we work.
I have seen the company values and feel that they align with my personality so hopefully if i am friendly and assertive it will help me land the role.
Interview processes are crazy these days.
Just be your polite work self and see the result.
I’ve sat on the other side of these.
One guy, he was somewhat dismissive of a ‘junior’ and he was rejected for that reason.
One girl she was a bit awkward, but was generally pleasant, no surprises and was hired.
Having said that, the role required a ‘flat structure’ mentality and wasn’t ‘client facing’, so the criteria will depend on the role. It’s as much for you to suss them out, as for them.
I’ve sat on the other side of these.
One guy, he was somewhat dismissive of a ‘junior’ and he was rejected for that reason.
One girl she was a bit awkward, but was generally pleasant, no surprises and was hired.
Having said that, the role required a ‘flat structure’ mentality and wasn’t ‘client facing’, so the criteria will depend on the role. It’s as much for you to suss them out, as for them.
Ask each of them about themselves, what makes them tick/what they enjoy about working there/what they'd change. Big them up and thank them all for their honesty and say things like 'we're really similar' or 'these are really good ideas'.
People love being asked about themselves and they'll thrive on the positive angle you've gone for.
People love being asked about themselves and they'll thrive on the positive angle you've gone for.
WY86 said:
So next week i have my 4th and final interview which is a meet the team? Its 45 minutes with 5 potential co workers. I have never done a meet the team type interview and curious if anyone has any experience and what are they like?
Be aware that the ‘junior staff’ aren’t. I have been on both sides of this fence. It’s actually a pretty s
tty way to do things, and I’d be reticent to entertain working for a company that employs this strategy. I’m not sure if it’s still what it was, but it was pretty st way back when.Edited by Dbag101 on Sunday 23 February 15:38
Also, I wouldn’t bother with the company values thing.
It’s just BS. Despite what some HR fluffy might say, stuff like funding vs head count vs expectation and management attitudes count for a lot more. I bet I won’t be the only person who’s seen a perfectly good team ruined by a new head, or budget cut.
I’d play it by ear, go in and take it at face value, on my best work behaviour. If you’ve gotten this far, you’ve basically proven yourself for the HR criteria stuff. They want to know whats going on with you beyond that.
It’s just BS. Despite what some HR fluffy might say, stuff like funding vs head count vs expectation and management attitudes count for a lot more. I bet I won’t be the only person who’s seen a perfectly good team ruined by a new head, or budget cut.
I’d play it by ear, go in and take it at face value, on my best work behaviour. If you’ve gotten this far, you’ve basically proven yourself for the HR criteria stuff. They want to know whats going on with you beyond that.
Edited by wyson on Sunday 23 February 17:11
wyson said:
Also, I wouldn’t bother with the company values thing.
It’s just BS. Despite what some HR fluffy might say, stuff like funding vs work quantity vs head count vs expectation and management attitudes count for a lot more. I bet I won’t be the only person who’s seen a perfectly good team ruined by a new head, or budget cut.
True. A lot of marketing guff, that counts for zero in the real world.It’s just BS. Despite what some HR fluffy might say, stuff like funding vs work quantity vs head count vs expectation and management attitudes count for a lot more. I bet I won’t be the only person who’s seen a perfectly good team ruined by a new head, or budget cut.
Dbag101 said:
Be aware that the ‘junior staff’ aren’t. I have been on both sides of this fence. It’s actually a pretty stty way to do things, and I’d be reticent to entertain working for a company that employs this strategy. I’m not sure if it’s still what it was, but it was pretty st way back when.
I've never been on either side of the desk in one of these scenarios. tty way to do things, and I’d be reticent to entertain working for a company that employs this strategy. I’m not sure if it’s still what it was, but it was pretty st way back when.Edited by Dbag101 on Sunday 23 February 15:38
I'm genuinely interested in why you are so dismissive of the idea. Please expand a bit.
To me the first issue I see is that, as a prospective hire, there's only so much you can ask about the job and the company so the situation would be artificial and conversation stilted.
What did you experience?
CoupeKid said:
I've never been on either side of the desk in one of these scenarios.
I'm genuinely interested in why you are so dismissive of the idea. Please expand a bit.
To me the first issue I see is that, as a prospective hire, there's only so much you can ask about the job and the company so the situation would be artificial and conversation stilted.
What did you experience?
The problem is that this approach is ( or was ) used by organisations that love their own structures / ladders / dogma. If you ( as a candidate ) stumbled into the ‘spiders web’ and didn’t know it, weren’t bothered by it, and seemed happy with it, you were ‘mouldable’ easily manipulated to fit the narrative, and therefore gold. It’s a very old school way of thinking, and I really couldn’t be bothered with it, unless the pay and conditions were way above and beyond the ‘market rate’. Then I could play the game, otherwise, really not worth the ball ache.I'm genuinely interested in why you are so dismissive of the idea. Please expand a bit.
To me the first issue I see is that, as a prospective hire, there's only so much you can ask about the job and the company so the situation would be artificial and conversation stilted.
What did you experience?
Is this real? I am clearly very behind the times.
I cant think of anything more slopey shoulders by management.... so manager... why did the new guy not work out.
No idea boss... interviewed 23 times, approved by the team, cleaner, security guard and my pug - Mr Charlesworth - even liked him.
FFS.
If I had to do this, for 45 minutes, I would be telling my manager that I actually had work to do and that I trusteed their decision on who should be employed or not.
I cant think of anything more slopey shoulders by management.... so manager... why did the new guy not work out.
No idea boss... interviewed 23 times, approved by the team, cleaner, security guard and my pug - Mr Charlesworth - even liked him.
FFS.
If I had to do this, for 45 minutes, I would be telling my manager that I actually had work to do and that I trusteed their decision on who should be employed or not.
gotoPzero said:
Is this real? I am clearly very behind the times.
I cant think of anything more slopey shoulders by management.... so manager... why did the new guy not work out.
No idea boss... interviewed 23 times, approved by the team, cleaner, security guard and my pug - Mr Charlesworth - even liked him.
FFS.
If I had to do this, for 45 minutes, I would be telling my manager that I actually had work to do and that I trusteed their decision on who should be employed or not.
Well technically more than 45 minutes as i have to get into central London and back. I cant think of anything more slopey shoulders by management.... so manager... why did the new guy not work out.
No idea boss... interviewed 23 times, approved by the team, cleaner, security guard and my pug - Mr Charlesworth - even liked him.
FFS.
If I had to do this, for 45 minutes, I would be telling my manager that I actually had work to do and that I trusteed their decision on who should be employed or not.
Seems like it is a popular way of doing hires now.
It is strange as none of the wording suggests its a interview just come in and meet the team and also no agenda has been set where previous ones had an agenda.
We call it an engagement panel. It's used to see how you interact with others with a given scenario.
Panel is usually diverse and of a lower grade. Most of the weighting goes on the formal interview but people can still cock it up on the engagement panel occasionally. Usually it's relevant only if they're struggling to pick between several candidates, a kind of tie breaker round.
A management role would be expected to interact with others so I think it's a good test to use for that.
Panel is usually diverse and of a lower grade. Most of the weighting goes on the formal interview but people can still cock it up on the engagement panel occasionally. Usually it's relevant only if they're struggling to pick between several candidates, a kind of tie breaker round.
A management role would be expected to interact with others so I think it's a good test to use for that.
Seems like a sensible way to filter out the nutters and/or fakers. If all the other interviews were behind a computer screen, this gives the team to check they want you around.
So much communication is through eye contact, body language, micro expressions etc, so that will be picked up on quickly. I think at this stage, it's not all about what you say, but how you interact and the resulting rapport you create.
So much communication is through eye contact, body language, micro expressions etc, so that will be picked up on quickly. I think at this stage, it's not all about what you say, but how you interact and the resulting rapport you create.
Jiebo said:
Seems like a sensible way to filter out the nutters and/or fakers. If all the other interviews were behind a computer screen, this gives the team to check they want you around.
So much communication is through eye contact, body language, micro expressions etc, so that will be picked up on quickly. I think at this stage, it's not all about what you say, but how you interact and the resulting rapport you create.
Are "the team" qualified to assess someone though? I doubt it.So much communication is through eye contact, body language, micro expressions etc, so that will be picked up on quickly. I think at this stage, it's not all about what you say, but how you interact and the resulting rapport you create.
Sounds like BS bingo to me.
I have no idea what industry this job is in but I think after a fourth interview I'd be backing out of this job on the basis they wanted me doing this.
Warning signs aplenty to me.
1. How many people have assessed you already, are they not trusted under the culture of the company
2. Why do you need a team you'll be potentially working with decide if you are suitable, again screams of a culture where you will have nothing but issues getting anything done if this is how they approach decisioning
Like I say, im in a role that maybe different.
Warning signs aplenty to me.
1. How many people have assessed you already, are they not trusted under the culture of the company
2. Why do you need a team you'll be potentially working with decide if you are suitable, again screams of a culture where you will have nothing but issues getting anything done if this is how they approach decisioning
Like I say, im in a role that maybe different.
Gassing Station | Jobs & Employment Matters | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff