Winning the interviewing game.

M F Lyons

PubMed · 11183240

Winning the interviewing game.

Abstract

Those who don't "interview well" are not likely to receive the job offer, despite their qualifications. A job interview is actually a fierce competitive activity that offers only two grades: an A or F. By nature, physicians are competitive; they like to win. Infrequent interviewees are prone to making easily corrected mistakes, such as showing no enthusiasm or having poor eye contact. The key for interviewing success is preparation--doing research, developing a personal statement, and role-playing practice interviews. View the interview as a sales call whose bottom-line goal is to achieve an offer, or at least to let you leave with the option to return for future discussions.

Explore related subjects

Interviews as Topic Job Application Physician Executives United States Journal Article

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeX RIS

M F Lyons. Winning the interviewing game.. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/11183240/

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

PubMed2007

Conditional reimbursement within the Dutch drug policy.

In The Netherlands, conditional reimbursement is considered to be a promising approach to achieving more effective and efficient pharmaceutical care. Because of its formal status and nationwide regulation, conditional reimbursement may allow governments to better control medical decision-making. To evaluate the effects of conditional reimbursement on medicine use and its performance as a policy tool, we compared observed volumes of medicine use with expected volumes. In addition, we mapped the annual growth by analysing trends in the volumes of use of all conditionally reimbursed drugs; starting with the year the drug entered the market (using macro-level data). Next we explored five cases in depth (using micro-level data) in order to explore what fraction of individual prescriptions met the requirements. We also performed qualitative research (document analysis, interviews (N=65)) in order to obtain the stakeholders' perspectives on how the measure functions, as well as to interpret the case studies data further. The findings suggest that conditional reimbursement may be an effective policy instrument, but that several changes are needed to optimize its impact. These changes are predominantly related to transparency (e.g. conditions are set following clear procedures and criteria), legitimacy (conditions should be consistent with criteria for prioritization), feasibility of procedures to control appropriate use, and timely and appropriate commitment of the stakeholders.

Interviews as Topic↗

PubMed2006

Sail through those interviews.

Explore the source record for details and available documents.

Interviews as Topic↗

PubMed2006

The effect of defined violations of test security on admissions outcomes using multiple mini-interviews.

INTRODUCTION: Heterogeneous results exist regarding the impact of security violations on student performances in objective structured clinical examinations (OSCEs). Three separate studies investigate whether anticipated security violations result in undesirable enhancement of MMI performance ratings. METHODS: Study 1: low-stakes: MMI station stems provided to a random half of 57 medical school applicants 2 weeks in advance of participation in a research study. Study 2: high-stakes: 384 medical school applicants sat a 12-station MMI to determine admission. Each half received 1 of 2 pilot MMI station stems 2 weeks in advance. Study 3: high-stakes: 38 interviewees with dual applications to occupational therapy and physiotherapy experienced the same 7-station MMI twice on the same date. RESULTS: No statistically significant differences in MMI performances were detected. CONCLUSIONS: Predictable violations of MMI security do not unduly influence applicant performance ratings.

Interviews as Topic↗