Welcome to the Science of Leading. I’m Claire Monroe with Edwin Carrington—and I want to start with a line that stuck with me because it kind of reframes the whole interview dynamic. An interview question isn’t just for the applicant. It’s a diagnostic tool. Like, if someone asks, “What would a typical day for me in this role look like?” they’re not just gathering info—they’re forcing the company to reveal how it actually thinks when nobody’s performing. That’s exactly right, and it’s a distinction most people miss. Interviews are usually treated like theater. The candidate is presenting, the company is presenting, and both sides are trying to appear coherent and impressive. But the best questions interrupt that script. They do two things at once: they help the candidate evaluate the role, and they force the interviewer to simulate that specific person in the job. Once that simulation starts, it tends to stick. So that one word—“me”—is doing more work than it looks like. Because “What does a typical day look like?” feels harmless, but it’s basically asking for a polished summary. The moment you say “for me,” it gets… personal. It shifts the question from description to simulation. Now the manager has to imagine you in the role. What meetings would you be in, what decisions would you own, where would you struggle, where would you contribute quickly. That’s no longer abstract. That’s operational thinking. And once that image forms—even briefly—they’re not evaluating a CV anymore. They’re thinking, “Would I actually work with this person on Tuesday morning?” That feels like a very different mental process. It is. Personalized questions reduce ambiguity. And if you step back, that’s really what good hiring is—systematically reducing ambiguity until a decision becomes clearer. Okay, so let’s make this useful. If you’re a hiring manager, or even a candidate who just wants better signal, what kinds of questions actually reveal something real? Not just… polished answers. There are a few categories that consistently surface useful information. First, the first 90 days. Ask, “What would you want me to accomplish in the first 30, 60, and 90 days?” If that answer is vague, the role likely is too. Second, performance metrics. “How is success measured?” Not general impressions—specific indicators. Third, bottlenecks. “What’s currently slowing the team down?” That reveals where the pressure actually is. Fourth, decision rights—who owns what, and where do handoffs break down. And fifth, surprises. “What usually catches new hires off guard?” That last one—“what catches people off guard”—that’s… dangerously good. Because that’s where people stop performing a little bit. That’s where you hear things like, “Well, the role is more chaotic than people expect,” or, “The priorities shift constantly.” Exactly. Surprises expose hidden operating conditions. And those hidden conditions are where most mis-hires originate. So a strong question isn’t about sounding impressive. It’s about making the future more visible. If it doesn’t help you picture what the job is actually going to feel like, it’s probably not a great question. That’s a good way to frame it. And for employers, there’s a parallel insight. If your interview process never helps you visualize the candidate doing the actual work, then you’re not assessing fit. You’re assessing conversational performance. Which explains why people who interview well don’t always perform well. Different skill entirely. Precisely. And this is where structured assessment becomes important. If you care about hiring quality, team fit, and long-term contribution, you need something more reliable than instinct. And then there’s culture—which everyone talks about, but mostly in very… decorative ways. Like values on a wall. Yes, culture tends to be described aspirationally. But in practice, culture is revealed through behavior—how people are onboarded, how they’re supported, how they’re corrected, how they’re promoted. And the right questions expose that. So questions about onboarding, collaboration, learning paths—those aren’t soft questions. They’re actually pressure tests. Exactly. Ask, “What does onboarding look like in the first few weeks?” A well-run organization can answer that clearly. Ask, “Which teams does this role rely on most?” Now you’re learning whether collaboration is functional or political. Ask, “How do people here continue learning?” or “What paths have others taken from this role?” Now you’re testing whether development is real or just messaging. That “others” part is key. Because now you’re asking for evidence, not promises. If they can’t point to a real example, that tells you something immediately. It does. Less mature organizations speak in intentions. More mature ones speak in patterns and examples. What about the end of the interview? Because that’s where things tend to… unravel. People either freeze or suddenly ask something that feels off. That’s often where judgment shows up most clearly. Compensation is important, but asking too early can signal poor prioritization. Strong closing questions tend to create openness. For example, “What am I not asking that I should?” That invites the interviewer to surface what’s missing. Or, “Is there anything in my background you’d like me to clarify as you think about fit?” That shows awareness without being presumptuous. That first one is clever. People don’t like leaving things unsaid, so if you give them an opening, they’ll usually fill it—with the thing they’re actually thinking about. Exactly. And there are a few practical habits worth noting. Have two or three key messages you want remembered. Tailor your questions to the role, because a product manager should not sound like a sales candidate. And bring notes. Notes don’t signal weakness—they signal preparation. That’s interesting, because there’s still this weird expectation that interviews are memory tests. But bringing notes basically says, “I prepared, I listened, and I care about getting this right.” It signals seriousness. And from a leadership perspective, the broader takeaway is this: the questions a company invites—and the ones candidates feel comfortable asking—reveal the actual culture. Not the stated culture. The operating one. And if you’re hiring, that’s exactly where better systems come in. Because if you want stronger hiring decisions—not just impressive interviews—you need tools that give you clearer signals around performance and team fit. That’s where something like OAD becomes useful. Yes. Because the goal is not simply to fill a role. It’s to understand how someone will think, adapt, contribute, and influence the people around them. And if you’re looking for a practical way to apply that, you can test OAD’s tools—like behavioral assessments—for free at o-a-d-dot-a-i. Which is probably a better starting point than just hoping your instincts get it right. Thanks for listening to The Science of Leading.
Audio Coursesby Jellypod