In an interview, how can you tell if a person has real skills?

Other people's husbands and wives have known people for decades but don't know their hearts! Do you expect to see a person in person? An interview can only judge a person approximately!

As for the ability to investigate! Ask for expertise! Just asking how to sell a comb to a bald man or something like that will waste the interview, and you won't be able to screen out people with real skills!

During the interview, it is inevitable that the candidate will make some embellishments and exaggerations of his experience, and even rehearse the common questions to create a shrewd and capable image for himself. However, some job seekers are really capable, while others don't have real skills and are just bluffing and deceiving the interviewer. We can understand that most people want to put their best foot forward in an interview, but we will never tolerate fabricating key information, so how can we see through this kind of fake and empty person at a glance?

First, look at the appearance. Nervous interviewers are generally more introverted when they fidget, clasp their hands together, rub them back and forth, and sometimes play with their hair all the time. If you suddenly make these moves during an interview, you are most likely lying.

Leg shaking is done to ease tension and anxiety, and shaking leg during an interview may indicate that the interviewer is not able to cope with the questions asked.

Second, let the interviewee talk more, gradually go deeper, and grasp the details. We can start by chatting about family life and relax the interviewer's vigilance. Then ask key questions, such as describing what project the interviewee has accomplished, asking him what role he has in the project and what work he has done.

What difficulties did you encounter in this project? What are the reasons for these difficulties? Is it finally solved?

How was it solved? Or ask some detailed questions about the data. It's hard to make up details of a field of expertise that you haven't done or won't do at all.

In addition to this, you can also reverse the card and ask him what his shortcomings are? You can also examine his understanding of the company's current situation and what ideas and suggestions he has for the company's development direction. If the candidate has no knowledge of the company, at least it can be proved that he did not really want to work for your company, or maybe he just cast a wide net and did not do his homework, then it is doubtful that even if he is hired, he will be able to take on the position.

In addition, you can ask more questions that do not have standard answers to test the interviewee's adaptability. For example, what kind of people do you think are the most difficult to work with at work? In this case, what methods do you use to successfully work with such people?

What kind of role do you play in your home?

All in all, whether a person is bluffing or having real material, you can clearly feel it in the interview communication.

1. Look at small actions. As soon as a person lies, his psychology will be nervous, and the person's ** will become sensitive, and he always feels as if ** is a little itchy. So sometimes you suddenly ask a question, and the candidate starts to scratch his head, or wipe his nose, or grab his hand, or touch his neck, or even start rubbing his thighs inexplicably, which means that he suddenly becomes very nervous, and the probability of lying is higher at this time.

2. Look in the direction of the eyes. I've heard the theory that when a person speaks, his eyes look at the **, and it has something to do with whether he is telling the truth or not. When you look to the left, you use your logical thinking, and when you look to the right, you use your abstract thinking.

So you can try to turn your eyes to the left and right, which is more difficult to lie, I feel that when you look to the right, your thoughts are wild, and when you look to the left, you can't tell a lie. Of course, if the candidate stares into your eyes the whole time, whether he brags or not, there is a high probability that he has the ability.

3. Ask questions about key details. I'll give you an example, when I was working in a vertical e-commerce platform, I once recruited a purchasing director, and the director was calm in all aspects, but I always felt that she was a little problematic, she kept describing her management is very good and strict, and she wants to leave the boss how to retain her. Then I think since you talk about management, then let's talk about the details of management.

I asked her how to design the performance of her subordinates, what are the quantifiable indicators, one of her indicators is loyalty, I listened to the puzzled, I said loyalty can be quantified? She said yes, and then there was no more. <>

Examining a person is nothing more than three aspects, one is experience, the second is ability, and the third is character.

Do you have a clear understanding of your strengths and weaknesses?

In modern life, interviews have become one of the necessary processes for people to find a job. However, whether the interview situation can show a person's true level is a matter of opinion, and I personally think it is not difficult.

In the interview in real life, the interviewer's personal preferences, professional level, the interviewer's own performance status, physical condition, and many other things will affect the interview, whether the interview result is fair and whether it can prove the interviewer's true level, this is a difficult question to evaluate.

To take the simplest example, the personnel interview workshop director, because of the relative lack of technical knowledge, personnel can only be based on the candidate's personal resume.

and some shallow Q&A to determine whether the candidate is suitable for the position.

However, judging whether a person is suitable for the position of workshop director is not only based on his management ability.

To judge, but also to judge their professional ability, and even to a certain extent to judge their professional status and professionalism, just from the resume and the two sides of the conversation, it is actually difficult for personnel to judge whether the candidate meets the needs of the position, and this often affects its judgment due to the personal preferences of personnel.

Recruit grass-roots employees to see their ability, and recruit middle-level employees to see ideas. While it's hard to gauge a person's true level in an interview, it's relatively easy to tell where they are.

In real life, there are a lot of people who talk about war on paper. This group of people often performs well in interviews, but it is difficult to give satisfactory answers to the company in practice, and it is difficult for inexperienced interviewers to identify.

Therefore, it may be feasible to judge a person's true level through an interview, but this requires the interviewer to be very experienced and the interviewee is not out of order.

In fact, in a normal interview, if a company really needs people and is willing to let you go for an interview after reading your resume, there is a high probability that it will be able to admit you. It's just that in the complex modern society, recruitment has become a form of completing KPIs in many cases, which also makes recruitment more complicated.

Whether it's hiring or interviewing, you need to keep your eyes open.

It is not possible to see the true level of a person during the interview, because if some people with a more introverted personality, they will be nervous when participating in the interview, because of the influence of this emotion, it is likely that they are unable to express their true thoughts, so it will make the interviewer misunderstand that their ability is relatively poor, but in daily life, their ability is good.

I don't think so. Because some people are good at disguise, and some people are more wooden, they don't know how to show their true talents. In real life, there are some people who do well in interviews, but their work skills are not very good.

The interview can really see a person's true level, the interview can understand a person's work experience, as well as the skills that he is good at, and can test the interviewer's reaction ability and logical thinking, I am a personnel, I think the interview can show a person's real level.

The interviewer looks at a person's work ability, interpersonal skills, and a person's ability to innovate and think. Recruiting such people will be very efficient in the work, and only then can it bring great benefits to the company.

They value a person's ability to fight, because such a person is very self-motivated, can work very hard in the company, and sometimes they don't have to pay for overtime.

Pay attention to a person's technical ability, because most of them are in special need for such talents when recruiting, and if this person has skills, he can directly bring benefits to the company.

You can cite some practical things in the interview. If he encounters such a problem at work, ask him how he should solve it. Looking at the solution he solves, you can also see his reflexes.

Look at this by giving an example or letting him into the job and taking on a role. If the solution he proposes is more feasible, then it means that he is still capable, not bragging there, not exaggerating his own ability. Even if he paints a cake in front of you during the interview and says how strong he is, I can only prove how capable a person is when he encounters something.

In the interview, everyone speaks of his strengths, and possibly exaggeratedly. You want to make a good impression on your interviewer, and you want to have a better chance of joining the company. For example, I have heard a story that the interviewer will put some paper balls under the door of the door, and then when the interviewee comes in, he will definitely see these paper balls and observe the interviewer's reaction to determine whether to admit him to the company.

Some interviewees will pick up these paper balls and put them in the trash. In this way, the interviewer's mind will be more inclined to this type of interviewer. There are also interviewers who do not pick up these paper balls for processing, but go in for interviews.

Such interviewers may make the interviewer feel that they are not careful. This is to determine whether the interviewee will be careful in the future work.

During the interview process, you may need to ask the interviewee some questions. Or there are some small tests before the interview to see how the interviewee reacts to these things. By looking at their performance, you can see exactly if they're bragging to you or if they're capable of it.

The first one, of course, is to look at his resume. Although it is said that after the job, you look at the real skills, but you have to admit that a good resume is indeed a stepping stone. From the resume, you can see his diploma and graduate school, awards, some projects he has participated in, and some activities he has organized.

Especially for the awards, the interviewer has seen a lot, whether it is a false name or a certificate full of gold, you can see it at a glance. If you change jobs, you can also know your original work unit and the nature of your job. These are the first impressions of whether the person is really capable or not, and they can also be used as the basis for subsequent more in-depth judgments.

The second one, according to the resume, you ask me to answer. In order to verify whether his resume is exaggerated or 100% true, you can ask him specifically according to some of the projects or activities he has participated in, and let him briefly state what kind of project this is or how you organized the event, and the benefits or results. The keen interviewer can see from the language, expression, and attitude of his on-site statement, whether this person is the main force or only a name, or borrowing the experience of others, if he does not personally participate, then the focus of the narrative will flash by, and more to brag about how hard it is and how difficult it is, if it is a practical participation, it will definitely be very familiar with every process of the project, and the focus will be on things and not on people.

For those who change jobs, you can ask why you left your previous company, and I think you can get a lot of information from this.

Third, professional knowledge questions. If the person recruited for the job is very professional, then you must ask about the relevant professional knowledge to determine whether the person has real skills, and you will not be able to brag about professional knowledge.

It's very simple, it's to ask him about what he said. If a person says what kind of competition he has participated in and what certificate he has received, you can ask him for specific details of the competition, not about the information that can be found on the Internet, such as who hosted the event, or what you learned from the event, etc., all of which can be found or have universal templates.

Generic questions don't distinguish whether he's actually involved or not, and you can ask for small details. For example, what role you played in this event or in your team, what efforts you made to prepare for this competition, or what advantages you felt were in your project, these specific things would not have been made up if you had not participated in them.

The other is that if he says that he has obtained some certificate and what kind of training he has received, the easiest way is to distinguish the authenticity of this certificate, which can of course prove whether a person's ability has reached the level required by the certificate. If you are not at ease, you can come up with a little exam questions, such as computer level, you can come up with some office software-related knowledge, and let him explain how to operate, so that it is clear whether you really have this ability.

In fact, whether a person really has the ability and whether there is goods in the stomach, we can generally know if we carefully distinguish it, and half a bucket of water generally cannot withstand careful questioning. People who are really capable are generally very confident in your questioning, because they have personally participated in it, and it is impossible to answer it while thinking about it. It is also possible to conduct a background check on the candidate, to investigate his relationship with his colleagues and his performance in the company during his previous job, etc.