10 Red Flags to Watch Out for in a Job Interview

求職面試是一個(gè)雙向選擇的過程——潛在雇主面試你，你也在面試對方。畢竟你不是來者不拒，而是想要一份合適的工作。但調(diào)查顯示，2/3的員工表示自己接受的工作并不適合自己，一半的人在入職半年內(nèi)就辭職了。原因有很多，比如覺得自己被開了空頭支票，或者意識到公司文化不符合自己的價(jià)值觀。求職季正在到來，在面試中注意一些潛在的警示信號，有助于避免找到不合適的工作。

Job interviews are a two-way process — you’re interviewing your potential boss and employer as much as they’re interviewing you. After all, you don’t just want?any?job — you want the?right?job. According to a?CareerBuilder survey, two-thirds of workers say they’ve accepted a job only to realize it was not a good fit, with half of them quitting in the first six months. There are?several reasons?this could happen, including feeling like you’ve been sold a false bill of goods or a realizing that the?culture?is not consistent with your values or even toxic.??Here are 10 red flags to watch out for.

一、不斷調(diào)整時(shí)間，組織混亂

1. Constant rescheduling and disorganization

大家都很忙，而且會碰到意外，調(diào)整面試時(shí)間不足為奇。但如果調(diào)整了很多次，就可能有問題。“如果改了兩次時(shí)間，他們還想再改第三次，那就不行了，太多了，”高管及職業(yè)發(fā)展教練蘇珊·佩珀康說，“這種情況必須要有合理的解釋，因?yàn)槟愕臅r(shí)間跟他們的時(shí)間一樣寶貴。頻繁調(diào)整時(shí)間，傳達(dá)出的信息是你沒有那么重要。而且我覺得現(xiàn)在的雇主必須非常注意快速回復(fù)求職者、清晰地溝通、像對待員工一樣對待他們……否則求職者就會去別的地方?！?/p>

People are busy and things may unexpectedly come up, so it’s not unusual that an interview may at some point need to be rescheduled. Yet, when it happens multiple times, it’s an indication that something is amiss. “If things get rescheduled let’s say twice, and they want to reschedule a third time, that’s it. That’s too much,” said Susan Peppercorn, an executive and career coach. “There has to be some real extenuating circumstances that get explained to you because your time is valuable just as much as their time is valuable. And it’s sending a message that says you’re not that important. And I think employers today have to be extremely conscious about getting back to job candidates quickly, communicating with them clearly, and treating them as if they were employees…because otherwise job candidates are going to go somewhere else.”

高管教練兼領(lǐng)導(dǎo)力策略師卡羅琳·斯托克斯表示贊同，并且補(bǔ)充說，反復(fù)改時(shí)間意味著“他們沒有把人才或職位放在首位，沒有意識到人才戰(zhàn)爭的重要性。一遇到什么事情，他們就很混亂，沒有條理，這絕對是警示信號”。還有他們跟你的交流（或者缺乏交流），“如果招聘人員很長時(shí)間不回復(fù)你，我是說比如有一個(gè)星期沒理你，這也是警示信號?！彼雇锌怂拐f。這表明公司缺乏透明度，缺乏正常溝通的能力。

Caroline Stokes, an executive coach and leadership strategist, concurred, adding that constant rescheduling means “They don’t prioritize the people or the placement. They are not cognizant of the war for talent. If things are scattered, and they’re all over the place or they’re disorganized, it’s absolutely a red flag.” This includes their communication with you (or lack thereof). “If the recruiter or the hiring manager ghosts you for a considerable period of time — and by a considerable period of time, I’m talking a week, that’s a red flag,” Stokes said. It shows a lack of transparency and inability to communicate properly.

二、不尊重他人

2. Disrespecting others

每個(gè)組織都會面臨不同部門之間天然的緊張關(guān)系或挫折，比如銷售部門和工程部門。你在面試中遇到的人是能以建設(shè)性的方式與其他利益相關(guān)者討論難題或矛盾，還是會表現(xiàn)出輕蔑和無禮？如果是后者，這就是一個(gè)警示信號，不僅預(yù)示著該組織可能高度封閉，也說明組織內(nèi)的氛圍容易讓人沒有心理安全感。

Every organization has some natural tensions or frustrations between different departments, such as sales and engineering. Are the people you’re meeting with during the interview process able to talk about challenges or tensions with other stakeholders in a constructive way, or do they do so disparagingly or disrespectfully? If it’s the latter, this is a red flag, not only indicating that the organization may be highly siloed, but also that there may be low?psychological safety.

斯托克斯指出，如果你參加小組面試，有兩個(gè)及以上面試官，這是觀察他們之間互動狀態(tài)的好機(jī)會。這幾個(gè)人如何互動？是否經(jīng)常打斷其他人？是否有一個(gè)人主導(dǎo)對話，讓其他人閉嘴？他們的肢體語言和微妙的表情表達(dá)了什么？在線面試也可以觀察這些跡象。

Stokes points out that if you participate in a panel interview, with two or more interviewers, it’s a good opportunity to observe the dynamics between the panelists. How do they interact with each other? Do they interrupt each other regularly? Does one person dominate the conversation, shutting the others down? What does their body language, including subtle micro-expressions, say, even if the interview is on Zoom?

三、價(jià)值觀沖突

3.?Values conflict

價(jià)值觀不合是一個(gè)重要的預(yù)警信號。在面試前明確自己最重要的價(jià)值觀，準(zhǔn)備一些問題用于評估公司文化、公司價(jià)值觀是否與你最堅(jiān)定的價(jià)值觀相符，以及你在工作中能否表達(dá)自己的價(jià)值觀。

A values mismatch is a big red flag. Get clear on what your most important values are before you start the interview process and have questions ready that will allow you to assess the company’s culture, the extent to which the organization shares your most deeply held values, and how well you’d be able to express your these values on the job.

舉例來說，如果你有包容的價(jià)值觀，面試的公司自稱秉持這一原則，那么他們用以保證工作場所包容性的具體措施是什么？如何衡量工作場所的包容程度？該組織是言行一致，還是只做表面文章？斯托克斯說，“如果你想找個(gè)穩(wěn)健的好環(huán)境工作幾年，就必須仔細(xì)考察面試公司的價(jià)值觀。”

For example, if you have a value of inclusion, and the company you are interviewing with says they are committed to this principle, what are they doing to ensure the workplace is, indeed, inclusive? How are they?measuring it? Is the organization walking the talk or is it just lip service? “If you really are looking for a good, strong environment to commit to for the next few years, you need to be diligent about the values aspect,” Stokes shared.

同樣，如果重視自主權(quán)，你可以問上司，“你希望哪些事情由我自己決定，哪些決策交給你？”即使他們給出了你想聽到的答案，也要保持“信任但要查證”的態(tài)度。問問其他向這位領(lǐng)導(dǎo)者匯報(bào)的同事，了解他們有多大的自主權(quán)和決策權(quán)。倘若無法獲得可信的答案，就要提高警惕了。

Likewise, if you have a value of autonomy, you might ask your boss a question like, “Which decisions would you expect me to make, and which decisions would you want me to escalate to you?” Even if they tell you what you want to hear, take a “trust but verify” approach. Ask others who report to this leader what their experience has been in being given autonomy or to what extent have they been empowered with decision-making authority. A lack of convincing answers is a red flag.

四、回答你的問題不明確或不一致

?4.?Lack of clarity or consistency in answers to your questions

你在面試中提出的問題所獲得的答案是否清晰準(zhǔn)確？面試官是給出了泛泛的含糊回答，還是給出了具體的例子？“如果你覺得自己沒有獲得具體直接的答案，這就是一個(gè)警示信號?！迸彗昕嫡f。你要繼續(xù)追問，直到獲得足夠具體的回答。

As you ask questions throughout the interview process, how clear or precise are the answers you are given? Are the answers you receive vague or general statements, or does the interviewer give you tangible examples — the same as they’d expect from you? “If you don’t feel that you’re getting specific and direct answers, that’s a red flag,” said Peppercorn. You should ask follow-up probing questions until you feel like you’ve be given the specificity you need.

面試過程中，你會遇到多個(gè)對于你在這個(gè)職位上的成功有重要意義的利益相關(guān)者。準(zhǔn)備一組問題，了解他們每個(gè)人的觀點(diǎn)，關(guān)注他們回答的一致性——或許更重要的是不一致的地方。理想狀態(tài)下，他們的回答應(yīng)當(dāng)大體一致，某一個(gè)人給出的不同答案可以與其他人的回答互補(bǔ)，為你展現(xiàn)出職位或環(huán)境的全貌。可以預(yù)料每個(gè)人的回答會有一定程度的差異，沒有問題。但如果同一個(gè)問題獲得的幾個(gè)答案之間存在直接的矛盾或不一致，那你就要注意了。

Throughout the interview process, you’ll be meeting with various stakeholders who will be important to your success in this role. Have a core set of questions that you ask each person to understand their perspective, as well as notice where there is alignment in their answers and, perhaps more important, where there is not. You’ll want to see that there is a fair degree of consistency in their answers from one person to the next. A different answer from one person may still be consistent and complement others’ responses, painting a fuller picture of the situation, role, or environment for you. Some variance is okay and is to be expected. It’s when you hear answers to the same question that are in direct conflict — or inconsistent — with others’ answers, that it’s a red flag.

五、偷梁換柱

5. Bait and switch

如果你面試的工作聽起來與最初吸引你投簡歷的職位描述大不相同，就是警示信號。誠然變化是常態(tài)，但如果招聘負(fù)責(zé)人不明確強(qiáng)調(diào)變化，可能說明他們未能有效地向內(nèi)部和外部的關(guān)鍵利益相關(guān)者傳達(dá)變化，或未能妥善管理變化。

When the job for which you are interviewing starts to sound very different from the initial job description that prompted your application, this is a red flag. To be sure, change is constant. Yet, if the hiring manager doesn’t explicitly highlight or call out the change, it can be an indication that they don’t communicate or manage change well with key stakeholders, both internally and externally.

同樣，如果這份工作的變化讓你沒那么感興趣了，也要注意一下。“可能是他們變得太快，來不及向求職者解釋‘我們的職位描述的確是這樣寫的，但這30天里我們的需求發(fā)生了變化……所以我們現(xiàn)在需要應(yīng)聘者關(guān)注另一個(gè)領(lǐng)域’，”佩珀康說，“這樣（缺乏溝通）會讓我有點(diǎn)擔(dān)心，這個(gè)組織知道自己在做什么嗎？”

Likewise, if the change in the scope of the role suddenly makes the job less interesting to you, this is well worth noting. “They may be moving so quickly that they haven’t stopped long enough to be able to explain to job candidates well that ‘Yes, we said this in our job description, but over the past 30 days, our needs have changed…so we really need the person to focus in this area instead of that area.’,” Peppercorn said. “That [lack of communication] would make me a little concerned about does the organization know what they’re doing?”

六、不恰當(dāng)?shù)膯栴}或評論

6. Inappropriate questions or comments

講述優(yōu)步崛起及其毒性領(lǐng)導(dǎo)的電視劇《超蓬勃》（Super Pumped）中，公司狂妄的“兄弟會文化”在特拉維斯·卡拉尼克的第一個(gè)面試問題里就體現(xiàn)出來：“你是混蛋嗎？”如果當(dāng)時(shí)你想在那里獲得一份工作，唯一的正確答案就是“是的”。沒有比這更明顯的警示信號了。你可能不會被問到這么明目張膽的問題，不過很可能在面試中聽到極為不當(dāng)乃至違法的問題或評論。

In the limited Showtime series?Super Pumped?that chronicles the rise of Uber and its toxic leadership during that time, it is no surprise to anyone that the hubris-filled “bro-culture” was revealed immediately by Travis Kalanick’s first interview question, “Are you an a**hole?” The only correct answer to this question (if you wanted a job there at the time) was “Yes.” There is no brighter shade of scarlet than that particular red flag. While you may not be asked a question as crude or blatant as this one, it’s entirely possible that an interviewer could ask a highly inappropriate or even illegal question or make an inappropriate comment.

如果你在面試中聽到了含有年齡歧視、性別歧視、種族歧視或其他冒犯性的問題或評論，就要注意這個(gè)組織不僅培訓(xùn)不到位，還可能容忍不當(dāng)行為，或者是在包括招聘在內(nèi)的人才管理中放任無意識的偏見。

If you receive a question or comment that is?ageist, sexist, racist, or equally offensive, it is an obvious red flag that this organization not only has poor training, but also likely?tolerates bad behavior?— or just as bad, has not addressed?unconscious bias?in its talent management practices, including recruiting.

七、缺乏連接感

7. Lack of connection

好的面試是雙方都積極投入的交流，讓雙方都感到激動，期待今后共事的可能性。如果缺乏熱情或連接感，面試官不積極、沒有笑容、心不在焉，像念稿子一樣機(jī)械地提問，并不嘗試了解你，這不是什么好的信號。“如果你發(fā)現(xiàn)對方不專心，可能這個(gè)職位已經(jīng)有了確定的人選，面試只是走過場，”佩珀康說，“如果在面試你的時(shí)候已經(jīng)選中了別人，他們可能就會表現(xiàn)得比較冷淡?！?/p>

A good interview is an engaged two-way conversation that leaves both parties feeling energized and excited about the possibility of working together. When there is a lack of energy or connection and the interviewer doesn’t seem engaged, is not smiling, seems distracted, and/or is robotically asking questions as if following a script and not really trying to get to know you, that is not a good sign. “If you notice that the people that you’re talking to don’t seem engaged… it could be that they’re going through the motions because they already have somebody else lined up for the position,” Peppercorn said. “So, if somebody’s interviewing you, but they know that they’ve found the person that they want, they’re likely not to be so enthusiastic during the interview.”

還有，兩輪面試可能會突然出現(xiàn)“溫差”。斯托克斯說，她的一位客戶在第二輪面試后說，“第一輪面試真的很好，有那種化學(xué)反應(yīng)……第二輪面試就不行了，沒有化學(xué)反應(yīng)，沒有溫度?！彼犃肆⒖滔氲剑八麄兪强瓷蟿e人了?！彼f，這種突然的溫差說明他們中意其他候選人，卻不想取消面試，因?yàn)橐M(jìn)一步確認(rèn)找到了合適的人。她補(bǔ)充道，“這也表明他們不會有效溝通?！?/p>

Likewise, there can be a sudden shift in the energy or engagement from one round of interviews to the next. Stokes shared that a client of hers said after a second round of interviews, “The first interview was really great. You know, there was great chemistry….The second interview, not so great. There was no chemistry there. There was no warmth.” She immediately thought, “Yeah, because they like somebody else.” Stokes said that the sudden shift in enthusiasm was a red flag that they’d found another candidate that they preferred, and they just didn’t want to cancel the interview because they wanted to make sure that they their hunch was right. She added, “It’s also a sign that they don’t know how to communicate effectively.”

八、抗拒改變（即使聲稱希望改變）

8. Resistance to change (even if they say they want change)

出現(xiàn)空缺職位，是因?yàn)榻M織需要有人來改善當(dāng)前狀況——打造更好的產(chǎn)品、提升運(yùn)營效率、吸引新客戶、改善部門績效等。實(shí)現(xiàn)改善需要改變。我的客戶戴維受聘于上一家公司去改善客戶支持部門，要實(shí)現(xiàn)改變，挽救這個(gè)部門，然而上司的上司并不希望改變，還覺得受到了威脅。因?yàn)橛羞@樣的掌權(quán)者，戴維的工作進(jìn)展很不順利。我問他在面試中是否注意到警示信號，他說那位上司對他說了一句，“幾年前我在這個(gè)部門干過，對這方面的工作有我的看法?！?/p>

Open positions exist because an organization needs someone to improve the current situation — to build better products, create operational efficiencies, attract new clients, improve departmental performance and the like. Making improvements in the business requires change. A client of mine, “David,” was hired by his last employer to improve the organization’s customer support function. While he was hired to turnaround the department and create change, his boss’s boss ultimately didn’t want change and felt threatened by it. Since she was the one with the power, it didn’t turn out so well for David. I asked him what red flags there were in his interviews, and he noted that she had said to him, “I may have opinions about this [function], since I used to do this years ago.”

當(dāng)時(shí)戴維并沒有慌亂，因?yàn)榇蟛糠止芾碚叨加凶约旱目捶?。但只要再追問一句或許就能捕捉到預(yù)警信號，比如“如果別人有不同意見，你會如何應(yīng)對？”他或許能從上司對這個(gè)問題的回答和肢體語言中獲得更多有用的信息，還可以從與她共事的人那里了解她處理不同觀點(diǎn)的方式。很可惜，不聽她的就必須走人。更糟糕的是，結(jié)果證明這位上司在那個(gè)部門工作是幾十年前的事了，現(xiàn)在情況與她了解的大為不同，而且她也不熟悉現(xiàn)在用的技術(shù)。她不接受戴維的改善建議，堅(jiān)持上世紀(jì)80年代就淘汰的方法，拒絕戴維提出的更有效率的方法和技術(shù)。戴維很沮喪，每天都感到挫折，像是面對一場阻力重重的戰(zhàn)斗。

At the time, her answer didn’t really faze him, since most managers are going to have an opinion. But a simple follow-up question might have raised an important red flag, such as, “How do you deal with others who have different opinions?” He may have gotten more useful information here from both her words and body language, and from those who worked with her to see what their experience was of how she handles conflicting points of view. Sadly, it was her way or the highway. Even worse, as it turned out, she had worked in that function?decades?prior and much had changed since then, including the technology that she was woefully unfamiliar with. She overrode my client’s improvement recommendations in favor of outdated practices that hadn’t been used since the 1980s versus more efficient methods and technologies he proposed. It was frustrating — every day felt demoralizing and like an uphill battle to David.

斯托克斯說，一些招聘負(fù)責(zé)人“根本沒有要改善的想法。他們太守舊，只想保持原狀……你一定要注意這方面的跡象?！?/p>

Stokes shared that some hiring managers “just don’t have an improvement mindset. They may just be so old school they just want to keep it the way things are…You’ve got to keep your ears wide open on that.”?

九、面試次數(shù)很多，或面試過程拖延

9. Excessive number of interviews or drawn-out interview process

理想狀況下，面試應(yīng)當(dāng)高效且充分優(yōu)化（而不是最大化）利益相關(guān)者的參與性和一致性，不要拖到幾個(gè)月之久。如果面試次數(shù)非常多，流程拉得很長，就要多加注意了。這兩種跡象都可能說明團(tuán)隊(duì)或組織過于靠共識驅(qū)動，缺乏決斷，難以推動事情完成。

In an ideal world, the interview process itself would be efficient and optimize (versus maximize) stakeholder involvement and alignment, and not take more than a few months. A red flag arises when the number of interviews becomes excessive, and the process drags on for an extended period of time. Either (or both) of these can be a sign that the team or organization is overly consensus driven, indecisive, or has issues driving things to completion.

雖然面試次數(shù)和面試流程長度似乎與職位級別正相關(guān)（比如C級高管面試可能比更初級的職位花的時(shí)間更長，因?yàn)楦匾铱赡軙衅渌鸆級高管和董事會成員參與），但佩珀康認(rèn)為，10到12場面試就太多了（她最多見過14場的）。C級職位的候選人或許有必要面試這么多次，董事長則大可不必。佩珀康說，“做決定的應(yīng)該是招聘負(fù)責(zé)人，為什么要面試14次？這說明這個(gè)組織做完一件事情的能力糟糕成了什么樣子？”谷歌等一些公司積極采取措施縮短冗長的面試流程，以在人才競爭中獲得更大的競爭力。

While the number of interviews and duration of the interview process is likely to be positively correlated with the level of the position (e.g., a C-suite interview process may take longer than a more junior position, as the stakes are higher, and the rest of the C-suite and board members will be involved), Peppercorn considers 10 to 12 interviews to be excessive. (She’s seen up to 14). While this many interviews could make sense for a C-level candidate, it does not for a director. She said, “It should be the hiring manager that makes that decision, so why do you have to have 14 interviews? What is that saying about the organization and its ability to get things done?” Some companies, like?Google, are actively taking steps to shorten drawn-out interview processes to be more competitive in the war for talent.

十、逼迫性的錄用通知

10. Exploding offers

逼迫性的錄用通知期限很緊，超過期限就等于作廢。雖然不多見，但的確會發(fā)生這種事。我的一位客戶曾在周五下午收到一家公司的錄用通知，被告知必須在周一之前決定是否接受。當(dāng)時(shí)他還在面試自己的理想公司，頂不住這家公司的期限壓力，對于獲得一份工作保障的需求壓過了繼續(xù)嘗試?yán)硐牍镜牟淮_定（幾個(gè)月后他收到了理想公司的錄用通知，于是離職，第一家公司因此受到不利影響）。

Exploding offers are job offers that are given with a firm deadline (often on a very tight timeline), beyond which, the offer expires. While rare, these still occur on occasion. One client of mine was given an offer at one company on a Friday afternoon and was told he had until Monday to decide. He was still interviewing with his dream employer and succumbed to the pressure from the first company and the security of having an offer of employment versus tolerating the uncertainty that remained with his ideal company (which incidentally ended up backfiring for the company whose offer he accepted, as he left months later when the job at the dream employer finally came through).

逼迫性的錄用通知相當(dāng)于最后通牒。最后通牒讓人感覺不舒服，對想做出慎重的職業(yè)決定、權(quán)衡今后幾年事業(yè)和生活影響的人很不尊重。這種做法顯示出雇主的僵化、不安乃至霸凌（更不用提他們意識不到這種公司在人才市場中會是個(gè)什么形象）。你是想迫于壓力進(jìn)入一家公司工作，還是真心為能在這里工作而激動？要相信人（或組織）表現(xiàn)出的本質(zhì)。會給出這種錄用通知的公司，不太會尊重你入職后的愿望和需求，而且可能死板僵化、霸凌且專制。

An exploding offer is basically an ultimatum. Ultimatums don’t feel good or show respect for an individual’s desire to make a thoughtful career decision and weigh their options that will affect their career and livelihood for years to come. It shows rigidness, insecurity, and even bullying behavior on the employer’s part (not to mention a big blind spot in their awareness of how the company will be perceived in the talent market). Do you want to join a company because you are under duress to do so, or because you genuinely are excited to work there? When people (or organizations) show you who they are, believe them. Companies that issue exploding offers are not likely to respect your wants and needs once you’re on the job, and are likely to be inflexible, bullying and autocratic.

沒有人能精準(zhǔn)預(yù)測一份新的工作究竟會如何，但在面試中對以上提及的警示信號保持警惕，有助于篩除不理想的職業(yè)選項(xiàng)。在面試中留心觀察面試過程的管理狀況，提出合適的后續(xù)問題，做好公司背景調(diào)查，能夠降低自己做出壞決定的可能性。

While no one can perfectly predict how a new job will turn out, staying alert to the potential red flags mentioned above during the interview process can help weed out suboptimal employment options. Being observant in your interviews as well as attuned to how the process is managed, asking good follow-up questions, and doing your due diligence can help mitigate the chances of making a bad decision.

關(guān)鍵詞：職場

麗貝卡·扎克是領(lǐng)導(dǎo)力發(fā)展公司Next Step Partners高管教練兼創(chuàng)始合伙人。她的客戶包括亞馬遜、高樂氏等高速成長的科技公司。

朔間|譯? ? 周強(qiáng)|編校