Appreciating good interviewing

I have come to appreciate the art of asking good questions and conducting good interviews. While I have long been curious about this subject, I was reminded of it through the media’s response to the recent death of Mike Wallace. This veteran of the TV show “60 Minutes” was regarded by many as one of the best TV interviewers of all time. A number of retrospectives showed highlights of some of his interviews, and he was indeed compelling.

My interest in the subject of interviewing started out of necessity – when I first had to conduct interviews with customers as part of a new consulting job. I had never done such a thing before and had to learn on the job. I got my first lesson working beside another more experienced consultant, Paul, in my first consulting gig. At the end of my first day of interviewing customers about their product design process, Paul gave me some feedback. He observed that when I asked a question that was not answered within a few seconds, I would ask an easier version of the question to break the silence. As a simple example, I might ask a question like, “How do you keep the team aligned?” If the client paused too long, I might prompt him with possible answers: “Do you have regular meetings? Use email? Walk around? ” In essence, I had surrendered on the question that might get a more interesting answer and instead offered multiple-choice answers of my own. Since it was easier, the customer was happy to pick one of my answers. Paul suggested I be more patient with silence; that I would get better, more thoughtful answers if I allowed the customer time to think and craft his own response. That made an impression on me and fueled an interest in the more general subject of interviewing and asking good questions.

Although I seldom conduct formal interviews any more in my job, over time I have paid more attention to what I view as good and bad habits of interviewers, mostly in the media. The recent reflections on Mike Wallace made me think about the subject anew. As a consumer of the TV news and talk shows, I have collected some unscientific observations of some very basic, but often ignored, interviewing practices (and, in parentheses, some contrasting habits I disdain).

What good interviewers (and, bad ones) do:

• Ask well-worded, succinct questions. Good, brief questions seem much more powerful and evoke better responses.  (By contrast, some bad interview “questions” are not actually questions; they are statements followed by a pause…  and the silence is the interviewee’s cue to discern the implied question and respond.)
• Focus on one question at a time. It makes the interview clearer and easier for the interviewee, and the audience, to follow.  (Sounds basic, but it is astounding how many interviewers ask a string of two, three, or four questions at once. It seems to escape them that most of the time, only the last question is answered and the rest are wasted.)
• Listen to the answer and either ask a related follow-up question or use it to explore a new subject. It not only shows respect for the interviewee, but opens the possibility for pursuing unexpected areas.  (It appears that many interviewers have a script of prepared questions and do not wander from it. At times, they miss great opportunities to probe a provocative answer.)
• Allow the interviewee to finish each response and, as my friend Paul suggested, be patient with some pauses. If a question is important enough to ask, it makes sense to give the interviewee time for a thoughtful response.  (Some seem more concerned with avoiding dead air and may not even allow the subject to finish an answer before firing off the next question.)

What do you think makes for a good interview? Who do you think are today’s good interviewers?