First, I like to say useless cliches.
Too many cliches in interview answers are fatal to candidates and have at least two negative effects. First, the examiner doesn't want to listen, and the same content appears repeatedly, which makes the examiner feel on pins and needles; Second, it is meaningless. Ten thousand interview questions are answered in almost the same words, and the candidates' own ideas are not recognized.
The reason why there is a cliche is because the candidates are "panicked". More than 90% of the candidates have told me that they are afraid of "no goods in their stomachs" and will not say it.
Candidates are "lazy" and don't know how to think in the face of questions. They design personalized answers according to specific questions. They are too lazy to think, trying to muddle through by reciting those cliches.
Second, the answer time is too long.
The interview answering time is generally 3-5 minutes per question, including the examiner's reading time and the examinee's thinking time.
Training institutions in society always emphasize the need to lengthen the content and make full use of time. Looking through the interview reference answers of various institutions, if you look at it at normal speed, you can't finish it in 3-4 minutes, not to mention that candidates are very nervous in the examination room and it is easy to answer questions over time.
One of the reasons why institutions require this is that they are superstitious about reference points, thinking that interviews, like applying for exams, must be scored. The more answers, the greater the probability of stepping on the main points. The actual examiner's score is not exactly according to the reference score, as long as it is "reasonable", you can get the score; Second, the more content you answer, the more you will show it to the examiner and the easier it is to shine.
However, after talking to the interviewer, their recommended answer time is 1-2.5 minutes (excluding thinking time). Especially when the examinee's answer is not bright, the more the examiner says, the less he will listen, just like the old lady's foot-binding cloth, which is smelly and long, but will affect the score.
Third, the answer is irrelevant.
It is not impossible for candidates to answer a long paragraph, but if there is a logical order, it will make the examiner listen more easily and understand the candidates' ideas more easily. For example, the same content, divided into "one, two, three" is easier to understand than saying a long paragraph.
When doing interview training, some candidates like to talk for a long time. I always spend a lot of energy writing down the candidates' contents and then sorting out their main points. In the real examination room, most examiners listen casually. If you don't have the habit of scoring, I'm afraid there will only be a little content left in the examiner's mind.
Fourth, the beginning is too long.
Some training institutions often emphasize that the answer must be "wearing a hat and boots" and "a good beginning is half the battle". So many students talked about the significance and importance, and it took 1 minute to start talking about the topic. If the time is not up, it will seriously slow down the pace of answering questions. When it comes to the main content after that, most examiners can't listen.
The correct answers are "I see the following questions this way: 1……" and "If I arrange this survey, I will take the following measures: 1……", which leads to your initial answer. The examiner listened to your opinion on the topic, not the useless nonsense at the beginning.
It's especially important that structured interviews are short, flat and quick, and no nonsense is the gist.