Advertisement
Advertisement

Now, don't get me wrong: it's not OK to lie in an interview

Alan Alanson

When I suggested last week that lying was acceptable in job interviews, I think my advice may have been misconstrued. Judging by the bulk of the e-mails I received, there is a large population of job applicants out there who are looking for an excuse to make things up and who were buoyed by my condoning of the practice.

So let me say a few things by way of clarification. When asked brainless, inappropriate or just plain rude questions, lying is not only acceptable but should be encouraged.

So when asked, 'How much do you weigh?', 'Do you plan on having children?' or 'Do you have any webbed toes?' you are entitled to make up whatever you like. Daft questions do not deserve sensible answers.

Intelligent questions, however, like, 'Do you know how to drive a fire engine?' require a truthful answer. This example is, of course, only sensible in the circumstance of a job interview for a fireman. If you are interviewing for the position of bank teller, this would again fall into the category of silly questions.

Of course, even though a truthful answer is necessary to the question, 'Do you know how to drive a fire engine?', even this simple answer requires the important job-interview finesse.

There is an unspoken covenant between interviewer and interviewee that governs the interview process. And that unspoken agreement is that exaggeration, embellishment and cherry-picking are expected.

So although 'Yes, I can drive a fire engine' is correct, the real answer that the interviewer is expecting is, 'Yes, I can drive a fire engine, and I was one of the best fire engine drivers at my previous station. It's a skill I really enjoy'.

Applying the same rules in the finance context, the answer to 'Are you confident with financial modelling?' might be 'yes', but that's not going to get you the job. The necessarily embellished answer is, 'Oh absolutely. I really enjoy the challenge of complex and difficult financial models. There's nothing like that sense of achievement one feels after spending a week checking formulas and linkages to ensure the product is perfect'.

No one sensible enjoys financial modelling, and the interviewer knows that, but a certain level of surprising enthusiasm is unfortunately required.

But that's about the limit when it comes to relevant factual questions. Any questions about what you have done and can do, you better be correct in what you say. And the one place where this is really important is your r?sum?. You can embellish general statements about how great you are, but as to what you have actually done, you want to be pretty straight.

There's nothing more annoying as an interviewer than to select a candidate for interview on the basis of what their r?sum? says only to find out that it's not true.

Quite recently I met a young man named Charles who had applied for one of our newly opened positions. He had a good handshake, was very personable, laughed at my jokes and was doing very well. Then I asked about one of the deals he had listed on his r?sum?.

'So you were involved in the Birncroft deal then, were you?' I asked him referring to one of the transactions he had quoted.

'Yes, I was practically running it for my previous firm. It was an excellent experience,' he said.

This was a large error on his part. I didn't ask about the Birncroft deal randomly. Like all interviewers, I asked about it because I was involved in that deal and so have some knowledge about it. One of the things I happen to know about the deal is that Charles was certainly not running any part of it.

I assumed he had the deal on his r?sum? because he'd helped on the model or something, but now I doubt even that. Someone who was quite a promising candidate suddenly became a time-waster. If Charles got caught in one lie, who knows how many other lies are sitting there on his r?sum?.

'Charles, I was involved in that deal and I don't remember seeing you,' I said.

'Oh, right. Well I wasn't really running it I suppose. But I did work on some of the key issues,' he said.

'Oh really,' I said looking at my watch, 'which ones?'

'Umm. Well. There were so many. I can't think of one right now,' he said.

And that was about it. Charles will never get a job at the bank. It's one thing to embellish, to exaggerate, but it's quite another to just make stuff up. His file will reflect that no one ever needs to ask him that banal interview question: sum yourself up in one word. I have already done it for him: 'Liar.'

Alan Alanson is an investment banker who writes under a pseudonym. Contact him at [email protected]

Post