One thing that has always bothered me about interview advice is how people act like the process rewards the most honest candidate.

I have been on both sides of the table. I have interviewed and been interviewed. And in every room there were unspoken rules, strategic answers, carefully positioned stories, and entire performances disguised as conversations.

Yet whenever someone fails an interview, the assumption is they were not prepared enough. Not qualified enough. Not confident enough.

If I spend ten minutes being genuine about why I left my last job, that is somehow a red flag. If I spend ten minutes crafting a polished non-answer about growth opportunities, that is called professionalism.

I failed six interviews before a friend told me something I did not want to hear.

You keep showing up to a strategy game thinking it is a honesty test.

And they were right. The office never actually ran on eight straight productive hours. And interviews never actually rewarded pure transparency. We just pretend both things are true because it is easier than admitting the game has rules nobody writes down.

Am I the only one who thinks we are measuring candidates against a version of the process that was never actually designed to find the best person for the job?

One thing that has always bothered me about interview advice is how people act like the process rewards the most honest candidate.

I have been on both sides of the table. I have interviewed and been interviewed. And in every room there were unspoken rules, strategic answers, carefully positioned stories, and entire performances disguised as conversations. Yet whenever someone fails an interview, the assumption is they were not prepared enough. Not qualified enough. Not confident enough. If I spend ten minutes being genuine about why I left my last job, that is somehow a red flag. If I spend ten minutes crafting a polished non-answer about growth opportunities, that is called professionalism.

I failed six interviews before a friend told me something I did not want to hear. You keep showing up to a strategy game thinking it is a honesty test. And they were right. The office never actually ran on eight straight productive hours. And interviews never actually rewarded pure transparency. We just pretend both things are true because it is easier than admitting the game has rules nobody writes down.

Am I the only one who thinks we are measuring candidates against a version of the process that was never actually designed to find the best person for the job?