Skip to main content

The 4 Worst Interview Questions and What to Ask Instead

Interviews are supposed to evaluate whether a candidate can do the job. All too often, though, they become tests of endurance, performance, or obedience. And some of the most common interview questions aren’t just unhelpful, rather lazy, intrusive, and manipulative, reflecting a deeper problem in how companies approach hiring.

If we want real insight, we have to ask insightful questions. That sounds obvious, but it’s staggering how many interviews still fall back on shallow or shady lines of questioning. You’ve invested hours wading through half-baked applications, irrelevant referrals, and now AI slop. After all that effort, why would you waste the actual interview, the most valuable moment, with questions that produce rehearsed answers and zero useful insight?

Let’s look at four of the worst interview questions to ask, not just to call them out, but to push for a smarter, more respectful way of interviewing that both values people and leads to better hiring decisions.

1. Can you explain the gap in your resume?

On the surface it might sound like harmless curiosity, but dig deeper and it’s clear the real concern is about control. We’re wondering if the candidate would be an unpredictable or inconvenient hire and are sniffing around for a reason to reject them, even if it means pressuring them to disclose personal information. This question is really probing for details that are legally protected or otherwise off-limits: someone’s illness or mental health issues, caregiving responsibilities, parenthood, etc.

Posing a Trojan horse question to fish for information we’re not allowed to ask outright undermines the basic trust that should exist between the candidate and interviewer. If we want to be respected as organizations and professionals, we must extend that same respect to others, especially when it comes to legal boundaries and personal experience.

More importantly, resume gaps aren’t indicators of poor performance or character. They’re indicators of life. Whether someone stepped away to care for a dying parent, gave birth, was laid off, took a sabbatical, or simply couldn’t find a job because the industry was on a hiring freeze, none of that has any bearing on whether they can do the job now. Their ability to contribute isn’t defined by an uninterrupted work history — it’s defined by their capability today.

Better questions to ask instead:

  • What kind of projects excite you these days, and what kind of work do you want more of? (Future-focused, practical, zero judgment)
  • Tell me about the professional experiences or skills you’ve developed that would help you succeed in this role. (Gives room to talk about any experience, whether paid, unpaid, informal)
  • What strengths have you brought to past teams that you think would help you thrive here? (What they can do now is what matters)

2. Why do you want to work here?

This question is maybe the most cynical of all the questions on this list because everyone knows the real answer. We work jobs to pay rent, support our families, and build a future. If someone happens to like your mission, that’s a bonus, but let’s not pretend every job is a dream come true. And if you're trying to guage passion and culture fit with this question, there's better questions to ask (surprise!)

What this question is really testing is how well the candidate can flatter us. The best performers will be those who can convincingly fake corporate passion, say the right things about the brand, and quote something from our About page. But that’s not honesty, that’s acting, and sycophancy isn’t a culture trait we should be looking for.

If you want real insight, stop fishing for flattery. Instead, we should be asking questions that lead to honest and useful answers, grounded in seeking for a mutual fit.

Better questions to ask instead:

  • What kind of company or team do you feel most effective in? (Insightful, honest, and practical)
  • How do you see this role fitting into your longer-term goals? (Focuses on alignment)
  • What’s something you hope to accomplish here if you got the job? (Invites vision, not flattery)

3. How do you stay current on industry trends?

This one masquerades as a question about professional development but its subtext is toxic. What we’re really asking is: do you spend your free time upskilling to stay competitive? Not only does that have no relevance, it quietly penalizes anyone with a life outside of work.

If the applicant is a parent, a caregiver, or just someone who values their own time, this question puts them on the defensive, forcing them to either lie or justify why their weekends aren’t filled with work-related activities. It implies that being a healthy, balanced person makes you a less dedicated employee.

But it gets worse. This question can also carry ageist undertones. It assumes that staying “current” means constantly chasing trends or adopting the newest tools, which can unfairly stereotype older candidates as out of touch or inflexible. We shouldn’t be asking people to prove they’re still relevant; we should be assessing how they think, what they’ve learned, and how they can contribute.

If you’re trying to gauge whether someone is engaged, ask them what kinds of learning environments help them grow. Ask what support they need to keep developing. Engagement isn’t about sacrificing your personal time, rather it’s about being present and supported during work hours.

Better questions to ask instead:

  • Have there been any tools, patterns, or ideas you’ve found useful or interesting? (No pressure to be trendy, just engaged in their own way)
  • Are there any problems you’ve solved lately that you’re particularly proud of? (Growth happens through doing, not reading)
  • What kind of work keeps you challenged or engaged? (Still gets at curiosity without forcing trendiness)

4. Why did you leave your last job?

This question pretends to be about the candidate’s professional timeline, but it’s really about reading their emotional temperature. Are they going to say something damning about their last employer, or will they perform the delicate dance of saying nothing meaningful while sounding positive? The problem with this question is that the honest answers are punished.

If you leave a job because of toxic leadership, layoffs, discrimination, or maybe even burnout, those are legitimate reasons. Admitting that shouldn’t feel like stepping on a landmine. Candidates are forced to contort their real experiences into something vague and non-threatening to avoid being seen as difficult or negative.

It’s also important to bear in mind what kind of culture we’re trying to build. If we want a workplace grounded in trust, honesty, and mutual respect, we have to model that from the very first interaction. Pushing candidates to craft carefully sanitized answers rather than speak candidly about their experiences doesn’t carry us to that goal. We don’t build a healthy team by testing who lies best under pressure; we build it by creating an environment where people can be honest, heard, and safe being real with each other from day one.

Rather than dissecting people’s past, it’s better to focus forward. Ask what the candidate is looking for now. Ask what kind of team or environment helps them do their best work. These kinds of questions will elicit more helpful responses to help determine a proper fit.

Better questions to ask instead:

  • What are you looking for in this next role that you didn’t have before? (Future-facing, constructive, and honest)
  • What kind of environment helps you do your best work? (Relevant to your company’s ability to support them)
  • What goals do you have for your next position? (This helps align candidate and company priorities without rehashing past wounds)

Stop Hiring for Unicorns, Start Hiring for Humans

There’s another problem hiding behind these bad questions: the obsession with hiring “the best.” That mindset is poison and leads companies to treating hiring like a competition instead of a collaboration. You don’t need a rockstar or a ninja or a unicorn. You need someone qualified, motivated, and capable of growing into the role.

And no, you don’t want “culture fit.” That’s just code for “people who act like us.” What you want is “culture add”, someone who brings new perspectives, new experiences, and new value to the team. Hiring for sameness results in stagnation. When we hire for inclusion and competence, that’s when we evolve.

At the end of the day, good hiring isn’t about tricking candidates. It’s about building relationships based on mutual respect, honest expectations, and shared success. If you’re asking bad questions, you’re going to get bad answers — and worse hires. When we fix our assumptions, fix our questions, then we can actually build a team worth keeping.

Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Writing a Minimal PSR-0 Autoloader

An excellent overview of autoloading in PHP and the PSR-0 standard was written by Hari K T over at PHPMaster.com , and it's definitely worth the read. But maybe you don't like some of the bloated, heavier autoloader offerings provided by various PHP frameworks, or maybe you just like to roll your own solutions. Is it possible to roll your own minimal loader and still be compliant? First, let's look at what PSR-0 mandates, taken directly from the standards document on GitHub : A fully-qualified namespace and class must have the following structure \<Vendor Name>\(<Namespace>\)*<Class Name> Each namespace must have a top-level namespace ("Vendor Name"). Each namespace can have as many sub-namespaces as it wishes. Each namespace separator is converted to a DIRECTORY_SEPARATOR when loading from the file system. Each "_" character in the CLASS NAME is converted to a DIRECTORY_SEPARATOR . The "_" character has no special ...
6 comments
Read more

Safely Identify Dependencies for Chrooting

The most difficult part of setting up a chroot environment is identifying dependencies for the programs you want to copy to the jail. For example, to make cp available, not only do you need to copy its binary from /bin and any shared libraries it depends on, but the dependencies can have their own dependencies too that need to be copied. The internet suggests using ldd to list a binary’s dependencies, but that has its own problems. The man page for ldd warns not to use the script for untrusted programs because it works by setting a special environment variable and then executes the program. What’s a security-conscious systems administrator to do? The ldd man page recommends objdump as a safe alternative. objdump outputs information about an object file, including what shared libraries it links against. It doesn’t identify the dependencies’ dependencies, but it’s still a good start because it doesn’t try to execute the target file. We can overcome the dependencies of depende...
Post a Comment
Read more

A Unicode fgetc() in PHP

In preparation for a presentation I’m giving at this month’s Syracuse PHP Users Group meeting, I found the need to read in Unicode characters in PHP one at a time. Unicode is still second-class in PHP; PHP6 failed and we have to fallback to extensions like the mbstring extension and/or libraries like Portable UTF-8 . And even with those, I didn’t see a unicode-capable fgetc() so I wrote my own. Years ago, I wrote a post describing how to read Unicode characters in C , so the logic was already familiar. As a refresher, UTF-8 is a multi-byte encoding scheme capable of representing over 2 million characters using 4 bytes or less. The first 128 characters are encoded the same as 7-bit ASCII with 0 as the most-significant bit. The other characters are encoded using multiple bytes, each byte with 1 as the most-significant bit. The bit pattern in the first byte of a multi-byte sequence tells us how many bytes are needed to represent the character. Here’s what the function looks like: f...
1 comment
Read more