The Selection Interview Question
In an interview you are asked: "Tell me about a time you failed." You have three candidate stories: (1) you missed a deadline on a coursework project because you underestimated the work; (2) you led a team that lost a sports final after you changed the tactics at half-time; (3) you once argued with a manager and were formally reprimanded. The interviewer follows up with: "What would you do differently, and how do you know you have changed?"
1. Which story should you choose, and why? Structure your answer.
Read the worked answer
Choose story (2). It shows ownership of a decision, a measurable outcome, and a lesson about leadership under pressure. Story (1) is acceptable but low-stakes and individual. Story (3) risks signalling poor judgement or an unresolved conflict unless handled very carefully.
Structure (STAR):
- Situation: leading a team into a final, level at half-time.
- Task: decide whether to hold tactics or change them.
- Action: I changed the tactics without consulting the team or checking our fitness levels.
- Result: we lost; the change disrupted a system that was working.
Reflection: the failure was not the decision itself but making it unilaterally and without evidence. I now consult the team and test a change before committing to it.
Why this works: it is honest, specific, shows self-awareness, and points to a concrete behavioural change - which is exactly what the follow-up question tests.
2. How do you answer the follow-up: 'What would you do differently, and how do you know you have changed?'
Read the worked answer
What I would do differently: consult the team before changing a working system, and gather evidence (fitness, opposition) rather than acting on instinct alone.
How I know I have changed: give a concrete, verifiable example. For instance: "In a later project I proposed a change to our approach, but first I asked each team member for their view and ran a short trial. When the trial showed the change was worse, I dropped it. The project finished on time."
Reasoning: the interviewer is testing whether the lesson is real or rehearsed. A specific subsequent example with an observable outcome is far stronger than a general claim like "I am more consultative now". Avoid over-claiming; acknowledge that the instinct to act quickly is still there, but that I now check it against the team's input.
Pitfall to avoid: do not choose a 'failure' that is really a humblebrag, and do not blame others. Own the decision and the outcome.