• One of the biggest parts of preparing for a job interview is running through practice questions.
• We asked recruiting pros for their top interview questions and how a candidate should answer them.
• Here's what they told us.

When you're preparing for a job interview, one of the first things you can do is research what previous candidates have shared about their own interviews with that employer. Some of the most helpful information to glean, if you can find it, is what interview questions you might expect to be asked.

To help job seekers who might not be able to find common questions asked by a specific company, we asked five recruiting professionals for their favorite questions to ask in job interviews.

They also broke down how candidates should answer and what the answers can reveal about them. Of course, the slate of questions asked in an interview can vary based on the recruiter's personal preferences, the role, and other factors — but these go-to questions from recruiters are a good place to start.

Here's a look at questions recruiters love to ask that they say can be particularly telling about a candidate.

'Tell me a time when you found a way to improve a process, made something more efficient, or otherwise introduced an improvement when you weren't asked to do so.'

Kyle Samuels, who spent 20 years in senior-level executive recruiting and is now CEO of executive search agency Creative Talent Endeavors, said he likes this question because it helps identify "proactive leaders who are willing to answer difficult questions and drive business results."

He recommends candidates use the STAR method — focusing on the situation, task, action, and result — to answer this question and really highlight their "initiative and drive."

"I'm also looking for candidates who can stand up to additional questioning well and describe specifics within each example or story they share when responding," he said.

He shared with us one example of how a STAR-formatted answer to this question might look:

• Situation: "Our SaaS solution isn't cutting it."
• Task: "I was assigned to fix the problem."
• Action: "I spoke to other CTOs to get recommendations, found a final list of five, and then evaluated them against the incumbent so we could make the right hiring decision."
• Result: Explain the end result and what happened after taking the actions described.

'Tell me about a time when something went terribly wrong with a project.'

This question shows a candidate's "ability to take responsibility for mistakes, solve problems, communicate effectively, and collaborate with others," said Lauren Monroe, who leads the creative practice group at Aquent, a staffing agency for creative, marketing, and design roles.

An ideal answer would "name the specific challenge faced, acknowledge the mistakes made, and identify the actions taken, lessons learned, and solutions implemented to solve the problem," she added.

'What key elements need to be in your next role, and what would be a dealbreaker for you?'

Amri Celeste, a recruitment manager and interview coach, likes this question because it gets at "what a candidate is really looking for in a role and whether the role we're discussing matches what they expect in their next role."

"It's also an opportunity to open up a more honest dialogue about their values, work style, and career goals, which helps me learn about not only how well they suit the role, but also how well they might suit the team and management style of the manager," she said.

'Tell me about yourself.'

It's a tried-and-true interview question, and Andrew Fennell, a former corporate recruiter and the founder of the résumé-builder website StandOut CV, leans on it to set the tone in interviews.

"After introducing myself and explaining how I've arrived to the point of this interview, I ask the candidate to do the same," he said.

"It relaxes the atmosphere a bit, makes it a bit more conversational, and allows the candidate to give a well-rounded summary of their experience and skills," he added.

'Tell me about the greatest impact you made at a company and what helped you achieve that impact.'

Tessa White, a former head of HR, is the CEO of The Job Doctor and the author of "The Unspoken Truths for Career Success."

Besides asking about a candidate's achievements, White also tries to gauge their ability to problem-solve by asking questions about challenges they've encountered in the past.

She'll ask, for example, "Tell me about a time you were at odds with someone or a department and you were able to successfully move through it."

Other times, she might say, "Tell me about a time when an initiative or project you were leading wasn't going the way you hoped. How did you handle it and what is your philosophy for addressing obstacles?"

For all of these questions, she said the ideal answer should be "authentic and real." If it's not, a recruiter can "sniff it a mile away," she said.

"I'm not looking for the answer you think I want to hear," she said. "I'm looking to see an imperfect person that has insight into their strengths as well as someone who understands how to learn from previous mistakes."

• Companies are cracking down on job applicants trying to use AI to boost their prospects.
• 72% of leaders said they were raising their standards for hiring a candidate, a Workday report found.
• Recruiters say standards will tighten further as firms themselves use AI to weed out candidates.

AI was supposed to make the job hunt easier, but job seekers should expect landing a new gig harder in the coming years, thanks to companies growing increasingly suspicious of candidates using bots to get their foot in the door.

Hiring managers, keen to sniff out picture-perfect candidates that have used AI to augment their applications, are beginning to tighten their standards to interview and ultimately hire new employees, labor market sources told Business Insider.

Recruiters said that has already made the job market more competitive — and the selection will get even tighter as more companies adopt their own AI tools to sift through applicants.

In the first half of the year, 72% of business leaders said they were raising their standards for hiring applicants, according to a report from Workday. Meanwhile, 77% of companies said they intended to scale their use of AI in the recruiting process over the next year.

63% of recruiters and hiring decision makers said they already used AI as part of the recruiting process, up from 58% last year, a separate survey by Employ found.

Jeff Hyman, a veteran recruiter and the CEO of Recruit Rockstars, says AI software is growing more popular among hiring managers to weed through stacks of seemingly ideal candidates.

"Ironically, big companies are using AI to go through that stack, that AI has brought first place, and it's becoming this ridiculous tit-for-tat battle," Hyman told BI in an interview. "I would say human judgment … is what rules the day, but certainly, we use a lot of software to reduce a stack from 500 to 50, because you got to start somewhere," he later added.

Tim Sackett, the president of the tech staffing firm HRU Technical Resources, says some firms are beta-testing AI software that can allow companies to detect fraud on résumés — a development he thinks will make the job market significantly more competitive. That technology could become mainstream as soon as mid-2025, he speculated, given how fast AI tech is accelerating.

"It's just going to get worse," Sackett said of companies being more selective of new hires. "I mean, if more candidates become really used to utilizing AI to help them match a job better, to network better, it's just going to happen."

The interview-to-offer ratio at enterprise companies declined to 64% in July of this year, according to Employ's survey, which indicates companies are interviewing fewer candidates before making a hiring decision.

"Recruiters are scrutinizing candidates more closely," Hyman adds. "My candidate interviews have become longer and more in-depth, designed to truly test a candidate's abilities beyond a polished résumé."

Inundated by AI

Employers aren't big fans of AI as a tool for candidates to get a leg up. That's partly because it's led to hiring systems being flooded with applications sent using AI, Sackett and Hyman said, which has made hiring decisions way harder.

Workday found that job applications grew at four times the pace of job openings in the first half of this year, with recruiters processing 173 million applications, while there were just 19 million job requisitions.

Having too many candidates for a position was the third most common problem recruiters faced in 2024, Employ added.

Hyman estimates the number of applications he reviews has doubled over the last year. Some of the more lucrative job postings are seeing close to 1,000 applications, he said, whereas they would have attracted 100-200 applications before the pandemic.

"I mean, a stack so big, that you can't even go through it, it's just not even possible to spend that kind of time," he said.

Candidates sending in applications spruced up with AI has also made it harder to determine who can actually do the job.

Sackett says he's seen an increase in "false positive" hiring, where a worker is hired and is quickly let go of their position when it becomes clear they're unable to do the job.

"I think what hiring managers are concerned about: Is this CV real when I'm talking to this person? Am I talking to the real person or are they using AI in the background?" Sackett said. He recalled one client he worked with who realized multiple candidates responded to interview questions in the same way, likely because they were using AI to write their responses. "So I think people just want to know that I'm getting what I think I'm getting."

• The STAR and PARADE methods of answering behavioral interview questions are both popular.
• They can help when you're asked about a time you faced a challenge or made a mistake at work, for example.
• Career experts shared with BI their advice for how and when to use each method.

Share an example of a challenge you've faced at work. Describe a time you had to make a difficult decision in your role. Tell me about a mistake you've made on the job.

We've all probably heard some variation of these behavioral interview questions before. Though they're pretty common, it can still be difficult to know the right way to answer them.

Two well-known methods, STAR (Situation, Task, Action, and Result) and PARADE (Problem, Anticipated consequence, Role, Action, Decision-making rationale, End result), are commonly suggested as means to craft your response.

While the two are both ultimately designed to guide candidates with their answers, which structure is more effective?

We asked career experts to break down the difference between the two, and which one may work best for you.

The STAR method

The widely used STAR framework is a personal favorite recommendation of Amri Celeste, a recruitment manager and interview coach.

"The pros are that the STAR Method structure automatically arranges an answer into a story format," she said. "And we tend to remember information in story format much easier than plain data or information, so it automatically makes answers memorable."

The straightforward format is broken down into four simple steps:

1. Situation: Set the scene by providing context on the challenge you faced.
2. Task: Explain your role in that situation.
3. Action: Describe what actions or steps you took to tackle the situation.
4. Result: End with the outcome of your actions and how you grew from the experience.

Andrew Fennell, a former corporate recruiter and founder of résumé builder website StandOut CV, said that the STAR method's structured approach is especially effective at exhibiting "measurable achievements" and "clear problem-solving skills."

"It helps candidates organize their responses by focusing on a specific scenario, their responsibilities, the actions they took, and the outcomes they achieved," he said.

However, Fennell said that the framework may sometimes feel "rigid" and responses could seem "overly rehearsed." Additionally, he said that candidates using the STAR method sometimes are not able to "highlight softer skills or adaptability in more abstract scenarios."

The PARADE method

While the STAR method can offer succinct, informative answers, the PARADE method is a more detailed structure that examines the decision-making process and its broader impact in greater depth.

"This is particularly useful for leadership or strategic roles where the reasoning behind actions is just as important as the outcomes," Fennel said.

The PARADE method is broken down into a slightly longer structure:

1. Problem: Lay out the challenge or situation you faced.
2. Anticipated consequence: Explain the potential consequences or impacts that could occur if the problem remained unsolved.
3. Role: Define the role or position you played in resolving the situation.
4. Action: Describe what specific actions you took.
5. Decision-making rationale: Explain the reasoning behind your actions and why you chose those steps as opposed to other ones.
6. End result: Finish with the outcome of the situation.

Although both the STAR and PARADE methods provide examples that illustrate how candidates can achieve jobs, Tessa White, CEO of The Job Doctor and author of "The Unspoken Truths for Career Success," said that she finds the PARADE structure "more powerful."

"It gives greater context — how big was the problem? Why was it a problem? How do I know I created impact?" said White.

However, Fennel said that candidates might find it more difficult to prepare the PARADE method due to its level of detail.

"It risks leading to lengthy or overly complex answers if not handled carefully," he said.

Which is better? It depends on the question or role

Although both structures are effective in showcasing a candidate's ability through an example, Fennel said that the STAR method is particularly useful for "standard competency-based interviews" that need "concise and focused" answers.

"Its straightforward structure works well for roles that prioritize technical expertise or clear problem-solving," he said.

Celeste recommends using the STAR method for questions that require an example, such as ones that begin with "Describe a time when" or "Give an example of." In contrast, the structure is less suitable for questions like "Tell me about yourself" or "Why should we hire you?"

However, for questions focused on problem-solving and critical thinking, Celeste suggests using the PARADE method. This includes prompts like "Can you walk me through a situation where you needed to adopt a new strategy?" or "Describe a complex problem you faced at work."

She also said the PARADE method is better suited for mid to senior-level roles because of its detailed format, which results in longer and more complex answers that "may not be needed for a first-level position."

In the end, however, what's most important is telling a compelling story that demonstrates what you've accomplished and what you can do in the new job.

"I've sat through thousands of interviews, and the person who can clearly share how they solved a problem or created impact is rare," says White. "Most individuals focus on what they can do, but not how they can do it. I'm looking for proof points, and both methods do just that."

• Job seekers may face 'love-bombing' from hiring managers during interviews.
• Love-bombing involves excessive praise to keep candidates interested without real intent.
• Experts advise setting expectations and keeping options open to avoid being manipulated.

If a hiring manager is excessively complimenting you and telling you you're the top candidate during an interview, you may be being "love-bombed."

The term originated as a way to describe the manipulative tactics some toxic people employ in romantic relationships to hook in their victims, showering them with affection, gifts, and promises for the future, only to later flip the script and show their real selves.

But the same pattern may apply to the workplace, too. Many job seekers complain of inconsistent behavior from hiring managers, CNBC reported, being flattered and praised one minute and ghosted the next.

"Love-bombing during job interviews happens all too often when recruiters or hiring managers want to keep you interested in them while they figure things out behind the scenes," Renee Barber, the global director of recruiting for TYR Talent Solutions who has over 20 years of experience in the recruitment industry, told Business Insider.

"They may overhype your chances to keep you interested," Barber said. "Especially if they're not ready to make a decision or they need to buy time without being direct about the actual situation."

Janine Chidlow, the managing director of EMEA at the global talent firm Wilson, told BI that love-bombing not only disrupts a candidate's career expectations "but also raises questions about organizational integrity and employer branding."

"This phenomenon isn't new," she said. "But its frequency and impact have surged."

How to recognize love-bombing

It's looking like the job market may see a boost next year. But white-collar hiring is still in a slump, with tech jobs being hit the hardest.

Love-bombing may serve as a "morale-booster" for both candidates and interviewers, Chidlow said.

Amanda Fischer, an executive leadership and career coach who is the founder of AMF Coaching & Consulting, said that some recruiters and hiring managers want everyone they are interviewing to feel optimistic about the role so they don't lose out on the best candidates.

They may also want to create a strong connection so the candidate to make them less likely to negotiate further.

"In this particular instance, that is a highly manipulative move," Fischer said.

It may not always be a scheme, though, and some recruiters and hiring managers may be love-bombing without realizing it.

"They could genuinely be excited about a candidate and might not see how the excessive compliments could backfire," Barber said.

There are plenty of ways to recognize love-bombing during the interview stages.

According to Barber, some signs are excessive compliments, like being told you're exactly what the company is looking for, or that you're the best candidate being interviewed, or being given unrealistic promises, such as if they talk about you "being a great fit for the team" or "starting soon" before they've actually made a decision.

Fischer told BI that pressure for a quick decision is also "a huge red flag."

"From my perspective, there are very few circumstances where you should accept a role the moment it's offered," Fischer said.

Barber agreed, adding that if there is a long delay or no communication after the interview, "it's a sign that the praise might have just been a way to keep you interested before they made their decision."

What to do about it

Love-bombing during the interview process is symptomatic of deeper issues in recruitment, Chidlow said.

"While it may yield short-term gains in market perception, the long-term costs — disillusioned candidates, damaged reputations, and high turnover — far outweigh the benefits," she said.

"By prioritizing transparency and respect, organizations can foster genuine connections with candidates, ensuring a healthier, more productive recruitment process."

If you think the person on the other end of the interview desk is love-bombing you, it's good to set expectations early, Barber said.

"Before you wrap up the interview, feel free to ask when you can expect to hear back and what the next steps are," she said. "This can help you keep track of the process and avoid getting strung along."

Barber also recommended following up after the interview, sending a thank-you email, and asking for feedback.

"This allows you to gauge whether the praise was sincere and whether the company is genuinely interested," she said.

"If something feels off, trust your instincts," Barber added. "If it all felt too polished or disconnected from your experience, be cautious."

Keeping your options open is also a good move because being in a stronger position yourself makes you less likely to fall for manipulative tricks.

"Don't put all your eggs in one basket," Barber said. "Otherwise, you could be waiting around for a response that might never come."

• Databricks CEO Ali Ghodsi isn't the biggest fan of interviews and "gotcha questions."
• Ghodsi prefers to analyze candidates by testing them with a real challenge within the company.
• He also talks to multiple "back-door" references to try to gain more insight.

What's your greatest weakness? Don't expect Databricks' CEO to ask that during an interview with his company.

Instead, expect to be put to work on a real problem the company is working on — maybe coupled with a morning or evening phone call to talk through it.

That's because Databricks CEO Ali Ghodsi doesn't think interviews have "that much value," he said in an episode of "The Logan Bartlett Show."

"I don't believe in interviews because I think some people interview well, and they might not be good at all," he said. "And some people interview really poorly, but they might be excellent."

Instead of trying to catch applicants with "gotcha questions" that they've likely already researched or practiced, Ghodsi said that he prefers to "actually have them do the job."

Assessments and coding tests are usually part of the hiring process for programmers and engineers, but the Databricks cofounder said applicants for other roles could also be tested by asking them to tackle issues the company is actually experiencing.

"If you're hiring someone for head of marketing, work with them to fix something that's broken in marketing right now," he said. Call them up in the morning or evening and talk through the issue, he said, and "if they could fix those things, they're clearly a good hire."

By having them do basically the job "as if they were already an employee," Ghodsi said that he's able to gauge the candidate's ability and whether they are on "the same wavelength."

Ghodsi isn't the only executive who finds standard interview questions a poor litmus test for potential hires.

Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang said that he likes asking candidates "one in-depth question" to see how they reason through it, as opposed to technical questions that are often shared online. The other questions Huang likes to ask are not directed at applicants at all. The Nvidia founder said in a recent podcast interview that he likes to "go back to reference checks" with questions he would ask candidates.

"You could always make for a great moment, but it's hard for you to run away from your past," the Nvidia CEO said.

Ghodsi similarly looks for five to 10 "back-door references," or former bosses or coworkers that candidates do not provide themselves, in order to understand the candidates, sometimes "better than they know themselves."

"Because you know all the things they went through, and you know the perspective of three, four people that saw that happen to them in the previous job," he said. "They might not actually fully comprehend what everybody thought about that situation."

And while Ghodsi may not view the standard interview approach as the best way to analyze a candidate, that doesn't mean he thinks the process should be scrapped. He said he believes executives should be heavily involved in the interview process — especially newer leaders.

For example, new founders looking for a great chief financial officer, chief revenue officer, or VP of engineering should immerse themselves by interviewing candidates and "doing back doors on everyone," Ghodsi said on an episode of the "A16z Podcast."

Although references can often default to generic positive reviews, Ghodsi said that if he finds one that really "opens up," he asks them to rank how good the candidate is.

"Then you want to go really deep," he said. "Who's No. 1, who's No. 2 on your list — by the way, you go after those as well, of course."

Ghodsi said he likes to "grill" them with follow-up questions on specific situations, almost to the point that "they become uncomfortable," to get a fuller picture of the candidate.

"Like, what did they do well? Tell me something that went wrong; give me a scenario; what was that scenario," Ghodsi said. "Really push the boundary."