To improve concision and clarity, aim for questions that are open-ended, focused on actions or specific scenarios, and avoid jargon. The STAR method (Situation, Task, Action, Result) is a good framework for candidates to use when answering behavioral questions, and interviewers can adapt their questions to elicit STAR-like responses.
Here are some ways to rephrase interview questions for better concision and clarity, along with explanations:
Instead of: "Can you tell me about a time you had to deal with a difficult coworker and how you navigated that interpersonal challenge, ensuring team cohesion and project success while also maintaining a professional demeanor?"
Consider: "Describe a situation where you encountered a conflict with a colleague. What actions did you take, and what was the outcome?"
* Why it's better: This version is more direct and focuses on the candidate's actions and the result. It encourages a structured answer without being overly prescriptive. It also avoids jargon like "interpersonal challenge" and "team cohesion."
Instead of: "Walk me through your thought process when you're faced with a complex problem that doesn't have an obvious solution, and how you go about breaking it down, analyzing potential approaches, and ultimately arriving at a resolution."
Consider: "Tell me about a time you solved a complex problem. How did you approach it, and what was the resolution?"
* Why it's better: This is shorter and uses simpler language. It still asks for the thought process but in a less wordy way. Using "Tell me about a time..." is a classic behavioral interview prompt that encourages storytelling.
Instead of: "In your previous role, how did you contribute to fostering a positive and productive work environment, and what specific initiatives did you undertake to enhance team morale and collaboration?"
Consider: "How have you contributed to a positive team environment in past roles?" or "Share an example of how you improved team morale or collaboration."
* Why it's better: These options are much more concise. The first is a broad question, while the second asks for a specific example, which is often more effective in getting concrete information.
Instead of: "What are your greatest strengths and weaknesses, and how do you leverage your strengths to achieve professional goals while actively working to mitigate the impact of your weaknesses on your performance?"
Consider: "What are your key strengths, and what is one area you're actively working to develop?"
* Why it's better: This is a common interview question. This version keeps it concise while still addressing both aspects. It rephrases "weaknesses" as "areas to develop," which has a more positive connotation and focuses on growth.
General Tips for Clarity and Concision: