Adults, of course, are more readily willing to offer up anecdotes of their own success. In this case a conversation does even more to prevent an entirely rehearsed response. Conversations make us vulnerable. While they allow candidates to highlight strengths, conversations also shine a light on weaknesses. Done right, a conversation allows a candidate to comfortably elaborate on their weaknesses without feeling defensive. Questions assessing skills and experience are still fair game, even the occasional curve ball — provided you take care in the approach. I may still ask a Software Engineer candidate to code on a white board, but it’s a collaboration. Unless you’re trying to create a hostile team dynamic that crumbles under pressure, there’s no value in putting someone on the spot. I’m looking to see what that person can (or cannot) achieve with the team’s support.

To illustrate, there’s the now famous “Sell me this pen,” example from The Wolf of Wall Street. On its own this request creates an imbalance and increases the stakes of the interview. Candidates may feel they’re being strung along, that the interviewers are enjoying watching them suffer. It can be toxic and damage reputations. However, when done right, it immediately builds trust and rapport. A conversational approach could be (what follows is meant as a conversation, not a series of rapid-fire questions) “Have you ever seen The Wolf of Wall Street? Do sales people like that movie as much as they do Glengarry Glen Ross? Remember Leo asking people to sell him a pen? Has anyone ever asked you that? How’d it go? Is that a good way to see if someone can sell? Do you think there’s a single right answer? What if he just responded that he never used a pen?”

A traditional interview is an attempt at using a structured approach to hiring. It’s inspired by science: Ask the same standard question of a group of candidates and rank them. However, whereas the scientific method had you make slight adjustments to a single variable and hold everything else constant, you can’t do this with a pool of candidates with a lifetime of subjective experiences. With a conversational approach, you’ll be scoring less on the same set of questions, but you will have a more accurate picture of each candidate as they stand as individuals. It takes more time, but you’ll have more confidence in your selection.