Great Interview Question... Who is your favorite person in history?
CDarklock last edited by
IMO the problem with a team of three that is that it will quickly lead to the situation where one gets overruled by the others and gets the feeling that they have allied against him.
I don't think a larger team actually fixes this, except in that it discourages the complainer from speaking up - "two people ganged up on me" sounds reasonable; "twelve people ganged up on me" sounds paranoid. I think the end effect on a larger team is likely to be a long-term problem that impacts productivity a lot more before anything is done about it, and there's no real difference in the eventual solution.
fennec last edited by
Congratulations. We're up to THREE PAGES and over a HUNDRED REPLIES on this topic. WTF? Who would have thought?
Guest last edited by
and the original poster never came back and posted the wrong answers.
zlogic last edited by
I would say, "I've never been good at history. What about math? Can I give you my favorite whole number instead?"
I know, I know! The Ultimate Answer to Life, the Universe and everything is 42!
CDarklock last edited by
We're up to THREE PAGES and over a HUNDRED REPLIES on this topic.
The real WTF is that there is no real WTF.
Kind of like this spoon.
Or how I've got tea and no tea at the same time.
Phoenix127 last edited by
I think that's a great question, but there isn't a wrong or right person, just a wrong or right reason.
I would answer Francisco Pizarro, because he conquered his situations, pushed towards his goals, and never gave up: achieving greatness.
jimlangrunner last edited by
Euler. I'm a math guy, and who thought that you could have so much fun mispronouncing a name?
RaspenJho last edited by
I work in a team of three. It is normal to disagree on many topics, and is normal for two people to have a "majority" opinion on matters; if the SAME person keeps getting singled out, then:
You've got the wrong team.
bekbyers last edited by
Personally, I would be pretty pissed off if I spent hours or days preparing for and attending an interview only to be asked irrelevant questions. When I interview, I expect to ask/answer meaningful questions relating to the position, not take a psych exam
I have to agree. I tend to go into interviews expecting one 'killer' question. A recent one I had for a reporter job, however, asked me who I'd most like to interviw from history, followed by who I'd like to be stuck on a desert island with, what film I'd like to take with me (and why) and what music. By this point, not only had I run out of answers, I was a bit fed up that all my research had come to nothing and that the interviewer never once picked up my portfolio. I think that the question is interesting in seeing how the candidate copes with being put on the spot, but quite pointless otherwise.
morbiuswilters last edited by
Did you happen to notice the dates on the posts you were replying to? This thread has gone for over a year without any activity. Be more careful in the future.
MasterPlanSoftware last edited by
quite pointless otherwise.
Something else that is pointless: resurrecting a year old, dead thread.
EDIT: Yeah, morb beat me to it. Bastard.
ammoQ last edited by