enter the fray: our reader discussion forum
Search in:
Advanced
View:FlatThreaded
All leaders need to answer hypotheticals
by Rrhain

How is it that the only people who can say, "I'm not going to respond to hypotheticals," and be allowed to get away with it are public officials? Does nobody remember their job interviews?

How would you handle this situation?

If you saw this particular scenario, what would be the appropriate response?

Where do you think you'll be in five years?

Presidential candidates have a lot of leeway with this because they're all doing it. If none of them answer the most relevant questions asking them how they would govern under crisis, then voters really don't have any choice.

One would wish the Senate would figure out that they have power: If the candidate refuses to answer hypotheticals, then the candidate is refused appointment. That's the point behind a confirmation hearing, after all: To find out how the candidate would behave in difficult situations.

If they aren't willing to tell us how they would carry out their jobs, detailing the decision-making process, then why on earth do they think we should give them the job? Ah, but to answer would mean you have to take a stand and indicate you have a real position. That makes it difficult to pretend to be all things to all people.

Re: All leaders need to answer hypotheticals
by rrfan
Can you imagine getting a job if you didn't respond to a hypothetical question posed by your prospective employer?
Re: All leaders need to answer hypotheticals
by FPR

It would require that you look your interviewer in the eye and insult them for asking what you've now deemed an irrelevant and stupid question.

Hypothetical questions are of course the modus operandi (wink, Mitt) of all hiring situations. They act as an insightful thought experiment that anyone passionate about the work they are pursuing should be excited to participate in. But such musings make you vulnerable and that just doesn't gel with the iron-clad walls of self-preserving PR strategy that these candidates deploy while still considering whether or not to run.

As their prospective employers I'm saying their refusal is unacceptable and dismissing them. I also need people who work for me to be accountable for their actions. If employees get into the habit of declining to comment any time they feel intellectually (or ethically) vulnerable, can I expect them to be open about the nature of the work they're doing for me (wink, Gonzo)?

View as RSS news feed in XML