'Loaded' interview question

I am seeking a new opporunity and would like to avoid the 'why are you no longer at your last position' question. Is it okay to state that I am under a confidentiality agreement and try to move the conversation towards how my skills and experiences can benefit them?

What is the best way to handle this?

Honesty is the best policy. When interviewing applicants, I would want to know why a person is seeking a new position and I really want to know the answer, even if the person lost the position through downsizing, lay-off or being let go (mutually or not by choice.) I think an Applicant would want to not keep a "secret" that may come back to haunt him later. For example, perhaps a manager had a great rapport with his RPM and they got along fine, no problems. This person was replaced for whatever reason and the manager's new supervisor was less than cordial and there were clashes and miscommunications, and whatever. I would not advise someone to speak badly about a boss or co-worker but if you got fired, you need to be open and say something to the effect that there were some major areas of disagreement and not a "good fit" for you and you decided to pursue something that would be a better fit. Then I would launch into all of your skills and how your experiences will benefit the new company and what new ideas you can bring to the table. Not sure if this helpful or not, or if it the answer you wanted. However, being truthful and remaining true to yourself is an important and very relevant character trait in an emplyee and new team member.

How does this sound:

What I would like to say is something to the effect that, there were some situations that led to some potential problems for the teams I worked for. Unfortunately, there is a confidentiality agreement in place that prevent me from discussing details. I did learn from these situations, and should the same circumstances reoccur; I will handle them in a different manner.


Specifically, one issue involves a conflict between investigating potential claims of criminal activity on property; which needed the assistance of local enforcement. Unfortunately the conflict arose when law enforcement asked for information that could be used to identify the resident that these accusations were against. Because I did not want the investigation colored in any way, I hesitated to give this information, however due to budget cuts, I was told that without this information, they could not proceed without this information as their resources were stretched pretty thin. While I cannot ignore claims of potential criminal activity on property; I have to investigate and hope that these claims go unproven.

JK,

Mindy gave the what I think is the correct advise and that is to be honest. When you say confidentiality agreement in place, the question could then be posed to you by who, and if it is in writing, or is it self imposed?

Any appearance where you appear to be evasive and not straight forward could lead to error on the side of we do not want someone that may have a cloud over their head that could come around and hit the future property position as well.

Ok, so how would you characterize the issue:

Specifically, one issue involves a conflict between investigating potential claims of criminal activity on property; which needed the assistance of local enforcement. Unfortunately the conflict arose when law enforcement asked for information that could be used to identify the resident that these accusations were against. Because I did not want the investigation colored in any way, I hesitated to give this information, however due to budget cuts, I was told that without this information, they could not proceed without this information as their resources were stretched pretty thin. While I cannot ignore claims of potential criminal activity on property; I have to investigate and hope that these claims go unproven.

I'm sorry; I must be obtuse. I don't understand. Did you basically get fired because you would not cooperate with law enforcement regarding illegal activity occurring on your property which went against company policy? I would just say that you are looking for a new position with a company that offers you XY and Z. If the interviewer asks you about your last job, you answer the question describing all your duties performed. You can elaborate that there were other circumstances that caused a disagreement with your supervisor in how to handle illegal drug activity (or whatever it was in a nutshell without explicit details) and move on to the next question. I would not go into all that about the police procedure - but I am not understanding why that is relevant any way. If your company policy is to cooperate fully with all law enforcement officials and you didn't and it caused a meth lab to go on and eventually explode killing someone, then that would be a big problem. You need to use plain language, not try to dodge the issue head-on, but an interview is a time for give and take with each person asking questions and reaching an understanding. Does this help?

No, after much consideration, debate, and receiving information from multiple sources; it came to a point where I needed to get assistance in validating/refuting these claims of illegal activity on property involving some residents. In order for law enforcement to proceed; they needed some personal identifying information.

Then I would concentrate on finding a position at a property that has less criminal activity! I don't mean to be glib, but not everyone is suited for all types of properties. I have seen people who were too stressed at the project based Section 8 communities who did fine in another area at a conventional community. When you apply for a new job, concentrate your efforts on management companies that are more oriented toward Market Rate properties and I would say something in my cover letter stating what kind of property and position I am looking for with their company. Then, once you are interviewing and the question comes up about why you left your previous position, you tell them the truth - that you handled a highly sensitive matter a certain way and afterwards decided that this job was not the best fit for you. You might add that the experience you gained from that position provided valuable lessons in managing tough situations you might face in the future and you feel confident of your abilities to handle similar situations should they arise again. If further elaboration is asked of you, you will need to be as forthcoming as you can. I know, for me, when I interview an applicant, I want that person to be truthful and sincere. Managers, leasing consultants, everyone - all make mistakes sometimes in judgement, but we learn from our mistakes and move on. I just don't want an applicant to tell me he does everything perfectly and has never had a bad outcome because I think either they never handled anything important or they are flat out lying.

Also, there were some earlier postings about how to handle requests from law enforcement on this sight. Did you read those? Hindsight is always 20/20 ....

Problem is that whether the property is affordable or conventional; crime is an equal opportunity offender. Just because the property is in the 'good' part of town, does not mean that you don't have questionable activity happening on or near your property. My sister had a vacant house in her neighborhood being used as an indoor marijuana farm, just 5 lots away from an elementary school. If you have accusations and information coming from several sources and you fail to attempt to sort out the validity of the information; then it puts the safety of your residents at risk. My case was I had information coming from a number of different sources coming forward to point fingers at a couple of residents that on the surface seemed credible enough that it could simply not go ignored.

And, no I did not see any discussions on how others have handled issues like mine here. Can someone assist me in finding some?

I think you have already received some very good advice. Be honest, open, positive, and tell them what you can do, what you have learned from your experiences, and what your goals are.

It is far too obvious to someone skilled in conducting interviews when a potential employee is being vague or attempting avoid a topic or giving a clear concise answer.

There are no mistake free people and if you had to leave over a clash of principals then say it and move on in the interview process. It shows that you are honest and accountable for your actions. Looking for the perfect words to veil something is not. I hope that helps and I wish you much success.

So, getting back to the reason for MY termination specifically; how does this sound:

I was terminated over a conflict in company policies. I was in possession of information regarding potential illegal activity that seemed credible; but still needed 3rd party verification to proceed on as the residents have a crime and drug free addendum to the lease. Since I was not trained to be an investigator; I needed to seek assistance from local law enforcement and was told that, due to budget cuts they had no resources to help me confirm or refute the information I had. I was told by law enforcement that they needed some personal information that they could use to start with. I did not want to release this information; however, I felt it was important to be able to (hopefully) refute the information I had received. It was in the interest of having this information sorted out by professionals with this kind of experience, I reluctantly released the information that law enforcement needed. This was where the conflict in company policy came into play. I understand that I went into this without any knowledge; and if the same situation presented itself again; I would seek internal assistance first. As a result, I was terminated without seeing the outcome of any investigation.


How would you advise I use this?

Another suggestion to "avoid" this topic is to just state that you are looking for better opportunity. That is a simple and honest response. There is nothing wrong with that and in fact I bet that very reason is why many of us do leave current positions. :silly: