The promise and peril of self-promotion

How would you respond to the standard interview question, “Why are you the best candidate for the position?”  (Let us assume we are discussing a fairly senior position, too.)

As a younger candidate, I would have had my arguments carefully prepared in advance to highlight the relevance of my background and achievements to the position at hand, concluding that I was indeed best qualified for the role.  Of course, there is the risk with this approach that you go overboard and seem to be singing your praises too long and too hard so  that the interviewer feels you may have an exaggerated self-opinion.  If that happens, then the initial neutrality that the interviewer may have possessed can switch violently into a negative perspective and move the focus of the interview to discovering other reasons not to consider you as a candidate for the position.

So, it’s a fine line.

Today I might instead try for a more balanced tone, saying, “Well, I do not know the other candidates, nor do I really know the challenges your firm faces, other than what you have so far told me, so you will have to be the judge.  However, I have highly relevant experience and achievements that you may wish to consider…”

Additionally, to promote engagement with your interviewer, I might use questions to answer the question.  For example, “Would you consider building a business unit from the ground up to $100 million in sales over four years as relevant to this position?”  This approach allows you to test the relevance of specific achievements or experience before you launch too much into the details.  It also keeps the interviewer involved as you throw out successive accomplishments  for feedback, instead of watching his or her eyes glaze as you spew a stream of prepared examples that may or may not seem relevant to the interviewer.

Self-confidence is fine, but it can also be the kiss of death if it feels at all that you think you know more than your interviewers.  I know because I have made this mistake.

Once I was applying for a regional C-level position with a firm involved in plastics.  I knew virtually nothing about the industry, though I did understand the sales channels and go-to-market side of the equation pretty well.  So I studied plastics to the point where I could fluently differentiate between the composition and appropriate usage of PVC versus PET, etc.  When I interviewed with the owners of the company, unfortunately, I let this knowledge show (too much).  The executive recruiter who obtained the interview for me called me later with a clearly perplexed tone of voice and said, “They think you know too much about the subject and would be too involved in the details instead of delegating that to your team of specialists.”

Wow.  That was a shock!  Who else has ever been turned down for knowing too much?

But it wasn’t the knowledge, of course, it was the way I delivered it that caused the disruption.  Today I would probably be more judicious and only let it show a bit at the margins, but isn’t that the way life is?  We also gain experience by making mistakes.  As long as you learn from them (and no one is hurt), then such errors can be deeply instructive.

There is another side to this balance of self-promotion, too, and that has to do with reading your audience.  Some people are adept at reading facial expressions, tones of voices, and nuances in the questions or responses others utter.  For those of us who are not so good at this, first, work on it.  It is a critical skill.  And second, consider using the active listening approach.  Show interest in the feelings and thoughts of your audience.  Ask questions.  Solicit feedback.   Don’t just assume that because you are talking what you are saying is interesting.

The other extreme can also be deadly, particularly in an interview: only answering questions when they are asked, for example, a common issue for introverts, leaves you without the opportunity to deliver key points that highlight the relevance of your experience and skills.

I’ve always seen such conversations as a kind of choreography, more like a dance than a linear script.  In one column I suggest you prepare an outline of the questions that are likely to come up as you prepare for an interview and then in a separate column, perhaps using only keywords, plan how you will respond to the question.  Using this technique, regardless of when in the conversation a subject comes up, you will have an idea as to what to say in response.  Also, if certain key points do not come up, this way you will know when to insert them.

We have all known people who simply liked to talk about themselves, and few of us really appreciate this behavior [read Talk At Me Some More], so I suggest you plan on leveraging the promise of self-promotion while avoiding the peril.

And if I can help, let me know.