21–30 of 151 posts
I’ve given technical interviews to people in China who barely speak english, just understand a bit, and I can’t speak one word of Mandarin. But we could communicate through a live coderpad and it actually worked.
Preparation. Anyone who has done public speaking knows that it's a lot of work to be a good speaker. Neil DeGrasse Tyson says you have to be 10x more prepared than you need to be. He calls it his Batman utility belt. You anticipate every question you'll get and do your research. One interviewer asked Neil whether it was worth the $3B mission to Saturn. He brought up that it's $3B over 12 years and that it's how much…
But some people seems so at ease with spontaneity, dealing with dynamic, emergent conversations, and even the ability to direct it to particular directions or narratives. I doubt all of it is preparation.
For big presentations, I put in practice time equivalent to 10-20x the time of the talk. For a one hour presentation, I'll practice for 10 hours at least, if not substantially more.
For high-stakes conversations with Important People, I think to myself, in advance: what do I want to achieve from this conversation? What do I need to say or ask in order to achieve those things? This is true even if the conversation is "just a chat." The goal might be as simple as: build credibility and familiarity with Important Person. Pro tip: plan up front what you're going to ask/say if there's awkward silence. It happens even to the best conversationalists. Better to be prepared than to be caught flat footed.
2. Specifically to your question about proper narrative, people often recommend the STAR (Situation -> Tasks required of you -> Actions that you took -> Results that you achieved) framework for answers. It can definitely sound a little robotic if over applied, but I think it's relatively useful especially for new people. It's also helpful to start by taking a moment to gather your thoughts ("I would love to take a brief moment to think of an example"), and work backwards from the Results you want the interviewer to remember.
I can’t speak to this directly, but I’ve heard from a few people in my company that joining their local Toastmasters group really helped them out. Could anyone speak to that?
No reasonable interviewer is going to hire you or not hire you simply due to your fluency during the interview alone. With that in mind - relax! Imagine you are explaining things to a friend rather than being examined. Build you answers up, step by step, starting with the basic. Explain how you are reasoning around a problem as you go. Do not just describe how things are or what you would do: clarify why one solution…
> With that in mind - relax! Imagine you are explaining things to a friend rather than being examined.
+1 to this. This is why I recommend that people take the time to go through the interview process every 6 months or so, even if (or especially if) they aren't actively looking to switch jobs. Being relaxed is a huge part of performance. Interviewing when you're not looking to switch means less pressure, which can lead to better performance in those interviews, in turn which can build confidence in one's interview abilities down the road.
Preparation. Anyone who has done public speaking knows that it's a lot of work to be a good speaker. Neil DeGrasse Tyson says you have to be 10x more prepared than you need to be. He calls it his Batman utility belt. You anticipate every question you'll get and do your research. One interviewer asked Neil whether it was worth the $3B mission to Saturn. He brought up that it's $3B over 12 years and that it's how much…
But some people seems so at ease with spontaneity, dealing with dynamic, emergent conversations, and even the ability to direct it to particular directions or narratives. I doubt all of it is preparation.
One such preparation happens at school when you prep for debates and speeches. This may not be apparent at that time but I see those who are very coherent in interviews have had some debate prep in their schools or colleges. Just quoting an example. Any public speaking prep actually helps in stitching together multiple ideas as you are talking and as you converse and do it in a coherent way.
I really wish many people had these skills. Most of the meetings I sit in, people take 30 mins to convey what should ideally take like 10 mins. 20 mins is just blabber.
The other counter intuitive prep that personally helped me was GMAT verbal. What started as pure hatred turned into a treasure trove of brevity and coherence. Especially the reading comprehension aspects. A month or two you spend through that exercise really helps in the long run. You get pretty good at communicating your ideas coherently.
I can’t speak to this directly, but I’ve heard from a few people in my company that joining their local Toastmasters group really helped them out. Could anyone speak to that?
This, or even a community college "speech" class, can do wonders. You basically just do speeches and get feedback.
One approach I used when I first started interviewing was to apply to a few jobs I wasn't really interested in pursuing to use as an opportunity to practice interviewing.