Use this guide to understand how candidates think, decide, relate, and learn at work. Each question includes suggested follow‑ups and what strong answers often include.

Self‑Awareness & Reflection

Tell me about feedback that stung—and what you changed afterward.

Follow‑ups: What was the context? Who were the stakeholders? What options did you consider? How did you measure impact? What would you do differently?

What good looks like:

• Owns the feedback without blaming; explains why it mattered
• Describes specific behavior changes and results
• Shows an ongoing system for getting feedback (1:1s, surveys, retros)

What energizes you at work? What drains you? How have you shaped your role accordingly?

Follow‑ups: What was the context? Who were the stakeholders? What options did you consider? How did you measure impact? What would you do differently?

What good looks like:

• Clear patterns linked to strengths and values
• Proactive boundary-setting and job-crafting where possible
• Acknowledges trade-offs and team impact

Motivation & Work Ethic

Describe a situation where you went above expectations—why did you do it?

Follow‑ups: What was the context? Who were the stakeholders? What options did you consider? How did you measure impact? What would you do differently?

What good looks like:

• Not heroics by default; tied to mission or customer impact
• Balances effort with sustainability and team norms
• Measurable outcome or learning

What does a ‘good day’ look like for you? How do you create more of them?

Follow‑ups: What was the context? Who were the stakeholders? What options did you consider? How did you measure impact? What would you do differently?

What good looks like:

• Concrete routines/rituals
• Focus on outcomes rather than busyness
• Shows self-management and prioritization

Integrity & Ethics

Tell me about a time you had to say no for ethical reasons.

Follow‑ups: What was the context? Who were the stakeholders? What options did you consider? How did you measure impact? What would you do differently?

What good looks like:

• Identifies principle at stake and stakeholders
• Explains path taken and consequences accepted
• Demonstrates courage and documentation

How do you handle gray areas where policy is silent?

Follow‑ups: What was the context? Who were the stakeholders? What options did you consider? How did you measure impact? What would you do differently?

What good looks like:

• Seeks counsel and diverse perspectives
• Applies values and long-term trust lens
• Documents rationale and communicates transparently

Collaboration & Empathy

Share a time you changed your mind after hearing a teammate’s perspective.

Follow‑ups: What was the context? Who were the stakeholders? What options did you consider? How did you measure impact? What would you do differently?

What good looks like:

• Listens actively; summarizes the other view fairly
• Adopts the better idea or blends solutions
• Acknowledges the teammate and measures impact

How do you include quieter voices in group settings?

Follow‑ups: What was the context? Who were the stakeholders? What options did you consider? How did you measure impact? What would you do differently?

What good looks like:

• Uses structured rounds, async input, or written briefs
• Watches for dominance patterns; invites dissent
• Follows up to close the loop

Communication Style

How would your peers describe working with you in three adjectives? Give examples.

Follow‑ups: What was the context? Who were the stakeholders? What options did you consider? How did you measure impact? What would you do differently?

What good looks like:

• Candid and specific; provides evidence
• Balances strengths with areas to watch
• Consistency across audiences

Tell me about a communication miss and what you changed.

Follow‑ups: What was the context? Who were the stakeholders? What options did you consider? How did you measure impact? What would you do differently?

What good looks like:

• Owns the miss; clarifies the misunderstanding
• Adapts channel/level of detail
• Shows improved outcomes afterward

Resilience & Stress Management

Describe a setback you took personally. How did you recover?

Follow‑ups: What was the context? Who were the stakeholders? What options did you consider? How did you measure impact? What would you do differently?

What good looks like:

• Names emotions and coping strategies
• Seeks help appropriately; protects team
• Extracts lessons and applies them later

What habits help you stay effective under pressure?

Follow‑ups: What was the context? Who were the stakeholders? What options did you consider? How did you measure impact? What would you do differently?

What good looks like:

• Proactive planning and recovery
• Risk buffers; escalation early
• Healthy boundaries; supports others

Adaptability & Learning Mindset

Tell me about a time you had to learn something fast to deliver.

Follow‑ups: What was the context? Who were the stakeholders? What options did you consider? How did you measure impact? What would you do differently?

What good looks like:

• Sets a learning plan; uses mentors/resources
• Builds a prototype/pilot to learn quickly
• Shows measurable outcome and reuse of learning

What’s a belief you’ve updated recently? What changed your mind?

Follow‑ups: What was the context? Who were the stakeholders? What options did you consider? How did you measure impact? What would you do differently?

What good looks like:

• Evidence-based shift; intellectual humility
• Openly communicates change and why
• Impact on decisions/behavior

Ownership & Accountability

Share a mistake you made that affected others. What did you do next?

Follow‑ups: What was the context? Who were the stakeholders? What options did you consider? How did you measure impact? What would you do differently?

What good looks like:

• No deflection; clear remediation steps
• Communication to stakeholders
• Prevention mechanisms put in place

When do you escalate versus own the problem yourself?

Follow‑ups: What was the context? Who were the stakeholders? What options did you consider? How did you measure impact? What would you do differently?

What good looks like:

• Considers scope, risk, and reversibility
• Keeps stakeholders informed
• Explicit triggers and decision criteria

Decision‑Making & Judgment

Walk me through a decision you made with incomplete information.

Follow‑ups: What was the context? Who were the stakeholders? What options did you consider? How did you measure impact? What would you do differently?

What good looks like:

• States goals and decision criteria
• Frames options and risks; time‑boxes
• Defines what would change the decision later

How do you balance speed and quality day‑to‑day?

Follow‑ups: What was the context? Who were the stakeholders? What options did you consider? How did you measure impact? What would you do differently?

What good looks like:

• Uses reversible vs. irreversible framing
• Sets guardrails and default SLAs
• Measures cost of delay vs. rework

Conflict Style

Tell me about a conflict that escalated. What would you do differently now?

Follow‑ups: What was the context? Who were the stakeholders? What options did you consider? How did you measure impact? What would you do differently?

What good looks like:

• Separates people from problem; seeks interests
• Uses joint fact‑finding and clear norms
• Shows learning and changed behavior

How do you give tough feedback to someone senior to you?

Follow‑ups: What was the context? Who were the stakeholders? What options did you consider? How did you measure impact? What would you do differently?

What good looks like:

• Focus on shared goals and data
• Chooses timing/channel; seeks permission
• Offers help and follows up

Curiosity & Creativity

What’s the last thing you got nerd‑sniped by?

Follow‑ups: What was the context? Who were the stakeholders? What options did you consider? How did you measure impact? What would you do differently?

What good looks like:

• Specific, enthusiastic, and recent
• Shows depth and application to work
• Balances curiosity with priorities

Describe a small experiment you ran that taught you something useful.

Follow‑ups: What was the context? Who were the stakeholders? What options did you consider? How did you measure impact? What would you do differently?

What good looks like:

• Clear hypothesis and measure
• Cheap and safe to fail
• Insight translated into change

Scenario Prompts (Short Exercises)

You notice a teammate withdrawing after a heated meeting. What do you do?

Follow‑ups: What was the context? Who were the stakeholders? What options did you consider? How did you measure impact? What would you do differently?

What good looks like:

• Private check‑in; asks open questions
• Owns part if relevant; agrees on next steps
• Protects psychological safety

A leader pushes for a deadline your team believes is unrealistic. How do you respond?

Follow‑ups: What was the context? Who were the stakeholders? What options did you consider? How did you measure impact? What would you do differently?

What good looks like:

• Reframe to outcomes; propose options with trade‑offs
• Escalate with data when needed; protect team health
• Document decisions and risks

You strongly disagree with the chosen approach but the decision is made. What next?

Follow‑ups: What was the context? Who were the stakeholders? What options did you consider? How did you measure impact? What would you do differently?

What good looks like:

• Voice concerns once more; align on success criteria
• Commit and execute; watch leading indicators
• Raise flags early if risks materialize

Red Flags

• Victim narrative; little ownership or learning
• Values misalignment or ethical gray comfort without guardrails
• Dismissive of feedback or differing viewpoints
• Only abstract answers; no concrete behaviors or results
• Over-index on speed/heroics; burns out self/others

Evaluation Rubric (Anchor Examples)

• 4 – Excellent: Self-aware, principled, collaborative, adaptable; demonstrates learning loops and measurable impact.
• 3 – Strong: Solid behaviors with minor gaps in consistency or measurement.
• 2 – Mixed: Some strengths, but inconsistent ownership, empathy, or follow-through.
• 1 – Weak: Generic stories, low self-awareness, blames others, or poor judgment under stress.