Interview questions as reasonable adjustment

spectrum21

Comms69 said:

spectrum21 said:

Comms69 said:

spectrum21 said:

I find this idea of an unfair advantage a strange one. Even with interview questions it would still not make it a level playing field for me. I still be would at a disadvantage even with the questions. It would not make it more likely for me to get a job over a neurotypical person, they would still have the upper hand but it would lessen the gap but not get rid of it. The idea that making certain adjustments puts non-disabled people at an advantage underestimates the difficulties and disadvantages that disabled people have.

That's because you're looking at it from a subjective point of view.

If it makes a level playing field then isn't that the idea of reasonable adjustments. I'm interested in hearing why it's an unfair advantage, it has been said by several posters but with no further explanation as to why? Is it based on a subjective point of view or an understanding of certain medical conditions or disabilities? If I was given questions beforehand then apparently this gives me an advantage, I would be interested in knowing why that is?

Because you are not testing the same aspects of criteria.

Unknown questions test comprehension, ability to perform under changing dynamics and ability to think on your feet. The content of your answer is largely irrelevant in many way. 

I don't need an understanding of medical conditions as the question is regarding employment. You would have an unfair advantage the same way if you were given your exam papers two days before taking them... Which strangely is not seen as reasonable 

This is a bit like the old post doing the rounds on social media about making a test fair. All the animals  will have to fly in a race and whoever gets to the finish line first wins, great for those with wings not so good for the fish. 

I wasn’t going to make this thread about Autism but I think I will explain further. Open ended questions or vague questions are very difficult for autistic people to answer, we might not know what you mean. We can also struggle to know how much detail is required in these types of questions. Unknown situations and people are very difficult for us, trust me when I say this I’m already at a disadvantage before I’ve walked through the door.  I have to go to somewhere I’m not been before and my stress levels are extremely high, I might get there and there is a delay - autistic people aren’t good with unexpected changes to routine. Maybe their are bright lights or high pitched noises. At this point I’m doing my best to appear neurotypical and hide any difficulties I am having in, I do my best to prepare but as soon as I get asked a question that I’m not expecting my mind goes blank. I might eventually give an answer just get it over with and trust me in that panicked state it will be a terrible answer. I try to make the right amount of eye contact, body language I do my best to understand the vague opened questions but I get confused. Chances are I won’t get the job.

Knowing what questions will be asked would give me time to prepare, it not about cheating and getting all the right answers. It is about having time to query what the questions mean which I could do with someone I trust but also with the employer. It also means I understand the format of the interview this makes it a lot less stressful for me and I can be a bit more relaxed and maybe build up a bit more rapport with the interviewer - which is the main point of the interview. I still would struggle to get the job because Autistic people get judge on the things that neurotypical people find natural. My autism means I’m speaking a slightly different language from a neurotypical person, judging me based on what neurotypical do is unfair but it happens all the time. Giving an Autistic person questions beforehand really would not give me an advantage it would make things easier for me but it would not be an advantage. The only way to make it an advantage would be if something could swap my brain for a neurotypical one.

Comms69

spectrum21 said:

Comms69 said:

spectrum21 said:

Comms69 said:

spectrum21 said:

I find this idea of an unfair advantage a strange one. Even with interview questions it would still not make it a level playing field for me. I still be would at a disadvantage even with the questions. It would not make it more likely for me to get a job over a neurotypical person, they would still have the upper hand but it would lessen the gap but not get rid of it. The idea that making certain adjustments puts non-disabled people at an advantage underestimates the difficulties and disadvantages that disabled people have.

That's because you're looking at it from a subjective point of view.

If it makes a level playing field then isn't that the idea of reasonable adjustments. I'm interested in hearing why it's an unfair advantage, it has been said by several posters but with no further explanation as to why? Is it based on a subjective point of view or an understanding of certain medical conditions or disabilities? If I was given questions beforehand then apparently this gives me an advantage, I would be interested in knowing why that is?

Because you are not testing the same aspects of criteria.

Unknown questions test comprehension, ability to perform under changing dynamics and ability to think on your feet. The content of your answer is largely irrelevant in many way. 

I don't need an understanding of medical conditions as the question is regarding employment. You would have an unfair advantage the same way if you were given your exam papers two days before taking them... Which strangely is not seen as reasonable 

This is a bit like the old post doing the rounds on social media about making a test fair. All the animals  will have to fly in a race and whoever gets to the finish line first wins, great for those with wings not so good for the fish. - If the job criteria is 'flying' and you cant 'fly' then yes it's not so good. It is however perfectly legal. Much like if I want to hire a doctor, i would require him or her to have the necessary qualifications to do so. 

I wasn’t going to make this thread about Autism but I think I will explain further. Open ended questions or vague questions are very difficult for autistic people to answer, we might not know what you mean. - You might not, but if that is the job necessity, you dont meet the criteria; and that's perfectly lawful and reasonable.  We can also struggle to know how much detail is required in these types of questions. Unknown situations and people are very difficult for us, trust me when I say this I’m already at a disadvantage before I’ve walked through the door. - Im not disputing that, im disputing the relevance of that, if the job requires that as part of the role.   I have to go to somewhere I’m not been before and my stress levels are extremely high, I might get there and there is a delay - autistic people aren’t good with unexpected changes to routine. Maybe their are bright lights or high pitched noises. - But those may well be reasonable adjustment you can request. And whether it's reasonable or not depends on the job. If you want to work as a steward at a football stadium, it wouldn't be; as an example to explain my point.  At this point I’m doing my best to appear neurotypical and hide any difficulties I am having in, I do my best to prepare but as soon as I get asked a question that I’m not expecting my mind goes blank. I might eventually give an answer just get it over with and trust me in that panicked state it will be a terrible answer. I try to make the right amount of eye contact, body language I do my best to understand the vague opened questions but I get confused. Chances are I won’t get the job. - yes you might not, but again if the role requires you to answer questions on the spot - which many do, then that would be a criteria which makes you unsuitable. 

Knowing what questions will be asked would give me time to prepare, it not about cheating and getting all the right answers. - knowing the types of questions may well be reasonable. e.g. "we wll ask you questions relating to your CV, your knowledge of the company and some scenario types questions. It is about having time to query what the questions mean which I could do with someone I trust but also with the employer. It also means I understand the format of the interview this makes it a lot less stressful for me and I can be a bit more relaxed and maybe build up a bit more rapport with the interviewer - which is the main point of the interview. - not necessarily.  I still would struggle to get the job because Autistic people get judge on the things that neurotypical people find natural. - perhaps. I get nervous in an interview, or the lead up, or whatever. It doesnt mean the recruiter is obliged to do everything i request; just that i can request some reasonable adjustments.  My autism means I’m speaking a slightly different language from a neurotypical person, judging me based on what neurotypical do is unfair but it happens all the time. - not necessarily legally unfair. Giving an Autistic person questions beforehand really would not give me an advantage it would make things easier for me but it would not be an advantage. The only way to make it an advantage would be if something could swap my brain for a neurotypical one.

Again you're looking at it purely subjectively. The reality is that if you can prepare all your answers before hand, the interview is not going to test the same criteria. It would be reasonable to give you additional time to answer (if appropriate to the role), it would be reasonable to not score you negatively on the language you use (again role dependant) etc. The adjustments should be suitable to the role, as much as the person. 

AskAsk

Comms69 said:

theoretica said:

Being allowed extra time on a test is a long established adjustment.  So being given extra time on the interview by having the questions a bit in advance in a waiting room would seem to be very much along those lines. 

It's not though really. Because you're allowed extra time during the test, not beforehand. 

A reasonable adjustment would be allowing someone more time to consider their answer without negatively marking their score. 

i agree this would be a fairer adjustment.  to allow someone more time at the interview to answer questions that may require recall of events.  not all interview questions are about what you have done, as some are about what you would do.  in these circumstances, it is a test of how you would assess a situation and go about it, considering you have just been thrown the problem.  these questions do not require recall, but requires analysis and your ability to deal with a situation as they arise.

if the OP was given these questions in advance, he would have an advantage to think them through more thoroughly than the other candidates, and even ask for help from other people if he was given them before he attended the interview.

spectrum21

Comms69 said:

spectrum21 said:

Comms69 said:

spectrum21 said:

Comms69 said:

spectrum21 said:

I find this idea of an unfair advantage a strange one. Even with interview questions it would still not make it a level playing field for me. I still be would at a disadvantage even with the questions. It would not make it more likely for me to get a job over a neurotypical person, they would still have the upper hand but it would lessen the gap but not get rid of it. The idea that making certain adjustments puts non-disabled people at an advantage underestimates the difficulties and disadvantages that disabled people have.

That's because you're looking at it from a subjective point of view.

If it makes a level playing field then isn't that the idea of reasonable adjustments. I'm interested in hearing why it's an unfair advantage, it has been said by several posters but with no further explanation as to why? Is it based on a subjective point of view or an understanding of certain medical conditions or disabilities? If I was given questions beforehand then apparently this gives me an advantage, I would be interested in knowing why that is?

Because you are not testing the same aspects of criteria.

Unknown questions test comprehension, ability to perform under changing dynamics and ability to think on your feet. The content of your answer is largely irrelevant in many way. 

I don't need an understanding of medical conditions as the question is regarding employment. You would have an unfair advantage the same way if you were given your exam papers two days before taking them... Which strangely is not seen as reasonable 

This is a bit like the old post doing the rounds on social media about making a test fair. All the animals  will have to fly in a race and whoever gets to the finish line first wins, great for those with wings not so good for the fish. - If the job criteria is 'flying' and you cant 'fly' then yes it's not so good. It is however perfectly legal. Much like if I want to hire a doctor, i would require him or her to have the necessary qualifications to do so. 

I wasn’t going to make this thread about Autism but I think I will explain further. Open ended questions or vague questions are very difficult for autistic people to answer, we might not know what you mean. - You might not, but if that is the job necessity, you dont meet the criteria; and that's perfectly lawful and reasonable.  We can also struggle to know how much detail is required in these types of questions. Unknown situations and people are very difficult for us, trust me when I say this I’m already at a disadvantage before I’ve walked through the door. - Im not disputing that, im disputing the relevance of that, if the job requires that as part of the role.   I have to go to somewhere I’m not been before and my stress levels are extremely high, I might get there and there is a delay - autistic people aren’t good with unexpected changes to routine. Maybe their are bright lights or high pitched noises. - But those may well be reasonable adjustment you can request. And whether it's reasonable or not depends on the job. If you want to work as a steward at a football stadium, it wouldn't be; as an example to explain my point.  At this point I’m doing my best to appear neurotypical and hide any difficulties I am having in, I do my best to prepare but as soon as I get asked a question that I’m not expecting my mind goes blank. I might eventually give an answer just get it over with and trust me in that panicked state it will be a terrible answer. I try to make the right amount of eye contact, body language I do my best to understand the vague opened questions but I get confused. Chances are I won’t get the job. - yes you might not, but again if the role requires you to answer questions on the spot - which many do, then that would be a criteria which makes you unsuitable. 

Knowing what questions will be asked would give me time to prepare, it not about cheating and getting all the right answers. - knowing the types of questions may well be reasonable. e.g. "we wll ask you questions relating to your CV, your knowledge of the company and some scenario types questions. It is about having time to query what the questions mean which I could do with someone I trust but also with the employer. It also means I understand the format of the interview this makes it a lot less stressful for me and I can be a bit more relaxed and maybe build up a bit more rapport with the interviewer - which is the main point of the interview. - not necessarily.  I still would struggle to get the job because Autistic people get judge on the things that neurotypical people find natural. - perhaps. I get nervous in an interview, or the lead up, or whatever. It doesnt mean the recruiter is obliged to do everything i request; just that i can request some reasonable adjustments.  My autism means I’m speaking a slightly different language from a neurotypical person, judging me based on what neurotypical do is unfair but it happens all the time. - not necessarily legally unfair. Giving an Autistic person questions beforehand really would not give me an advantage it would make things easier for me but it would not be an advantage. The only way to make it an advantage would be if something could swap my brain for a neurotypical one.

Again you're looking at it purely subjectively. The reality is that if you can prepare all your answers before hand, the interview is not going to test the same criteria. It would be reasonable to give you additional time to answer (if appropriate to the role), it would be reasonable to not score you negatively on the language you use (again role dependant) etc. The adjustments should be suitable to the role, as much as the person. 

I’m not going to discuss this further as your answer clearly shows a lack of understanding of Autism. Not that I expect you to understand but as someone who is Autistic I find it disappointing when a Autistic voice isn’t being listened to you. If you have an interest in finding out more please compare your nervousness to how Autistic people feel at interview I think you’ll find it is not comparable. There is a video on YouTube should be interested. What your saying in regards to certain aspects being part of the job then yes of course certain jobs would be difficult for me however sometimes, if not often a job interview, might be require something that has nothing to with the job. It seems that any adjustments I could request would be unreasonable, I’m not sure how legally true this you maybe right. Which if right, makes reasonable adjustment a waste of time. 

Comms69

spectrum21 said:

Comms69 said:

spectrum21 said:

Comms69 said:

spectrum21 said:

Comms69 said:

spectrum21 said:

I find this idea of an unfair advantage a strange one. Even with interview questions it would still not make it a level playing field for me. I still be would at a disadvantage even with the questions. It would not make it more likely for me to get a job over a neurotypical person, they would still have the upper hand but it would lessen the gap but not get rid of it. The idea that making certain adjustments puts non-disabled people at an advantage underestimates the difficulties and disadvantages that disabled people have.

That's because you're looking at it from a subjective point of view.

If it makes a level playing field then isn't that the idea of reasonable adjustments. I'm interested in hearing why it's an unfair advantage, it has been said by several posters but with no further explanation as to why? Is it based on a subjective point of view or an understanding of certain medical conditions or disabilities? If I was given questions beforehand then apparently this gives me an advantage, I would be interested in knowing why that is?

Because you are not testing the same aspects of criteria.

Unknown questions test comprehension, ability to perform under changing dynamics and ability to think on your feet. The content of your answer is largely irrelevant in many way. 

I don't need an understanding of medical conditions as the question is regarding employment. You would have an unfair advantage the same way if you were given your exam papers two days before taking them... Which strangely is not seen as reasonable 

This is a bit like the old post doing the rounds on social media about making a test fair. All the animals  will have to fly in a race and whoever gets to the finish line first wins, great for those with wings not so good for the fish. - If the job criteria is 'flying' and you cant 'fly' then yes it's not so good. It is however perfectly legal. Much like if I want to hire a doctor, i would require him or her to have the necessary qualifications to do so. 

I wasn’t going to make this thread about Autism but I think I will explain further. Open ended questions or vague questions are very difficult for autistic people to answer, we might not know what you mean. - You might not, but if that is the job necessity, you dont meet the criteria; and that's perfectly lawful and reasonable.  We can also struggle to know how much detail is required in these types of questions. Unknown situations and people are very difficult for us, trust me when I say this I’m already at a disadvantage before I’ve walked through the door. - Im not disputing that, im disputing the relevance of that, if the job requires that as part of the role.   I have to go to somewhere I’m not been before and my stress levels are extremely high, I might get there and there is a delay - autistic people aren’t good with unexpected changes to routine. Maybe their are bright lights or high pitched noises. - But those may well be reasonable adjustment you can request. And whether it's reasonable or not depends on the job. If you want to work as a steward at a football stadium, it wouldn't be; as an example to explain my point.  At this point I’m doing my best to appear neurotypical and hide any difficulties I am having in, I do my best to prepare but as soon as I get asked a question that I’m not expecting my mind goes blank. I might eventually give an answer just get it over with and trust me in that panicked state it will be a terrible answer. I try to make the right amount of eye contact, body language I do my best to understand the vague opened questions but I get confused. Chances are I won’t get the job. - yes you might not, but again if the role requires you to answer questions on the spot - which many do, then that would be a criteria which makes you unsuitable. 

Knowing what questions will be asked would give me time to prepare, it not about cheating and getting all the right answers. - knowing the types of questions may well be reasonable. e.g. "we wll ask you questions relating to your CV, your knowledge of the company and some scenario types questions. It is about having time to query what the questions mean which I could do with someone I trust but also with the employer. It also means I understand the format of the interview this makes it a lot less stressful for me and I can be a bit more relaxed and maybe build up a bit more rapport with the interviewer - which is the main point of the interview. - not necessarily.  I still would struggle to get the job because Autistic people get judge on the things that neurotypical people find natural. - perhaps. I get nervous in an interview, or the lead up, or whatever. It doesnt mean the recruiter is obliged to do everything i request; just that i can request some reasonable adjustments.  My autism means I’m speaking a slightly different language from a neurotypical person, judging me based on what neurotypical do is unfair but it happens all the time. - not necessarily legally unfair. Giving an Autistic person questions beforehand really would not give me an advantage it would make things easier for me but it would not be an advantage. The only way to make it an advantage would be if something could swap my brain for a neurotypical one.

Again you're looking at it purely subjectively. The reality is that if you can prepare all your answers before hand, the interview is not going to test the same criteria. It would be reasonable to give you additional time to answer (if appropriate to the role), it would be reasonable to not score you negatively on the language you use (again role dependant) etc. The adjustments should be suitable to the role, as much as the person. 

I’m not going to discuss this further as your answer clearly shows a lack of understanding of Autism. Not that I expect you to understand but as someone who is Autistic I find it disappointing when a Autistic voice isn’t being listened to you. If you have an interest in finding out more please compare your nervousness to how Autistic people feel at interview I think you’ll find it is not comparable. There is a video on YouTube should be interested. What your saying in regards to certain aspects being part of the job then yes of course certain jobs would be difficult for me however sometimes, if not often a job interview, might be require something that has nothing to with the job. It seems that any adjustments I could request would be unreasonable, I’m not sure how legally true this you maybe right. Which if right, makes reasonable adjustment a waste of time. 

And you clearly show a lack of understanding of employment law (and discrimination law). Which is what this sub-forum is about. 

I am interested in your views and experiences, from a personal point of view. But it has no bearing on the legal position - which is what the OP was asking about. 

Before you jump to conclusions - which you already have i fear - you should note that i do have a disability as legally defined; and am able to request reasonable adjustments. And if you wish to go down the "it's a shame you wont listen to an autistic voice" angle, you do not speak for other people (unless you wish to disclose you have been elected to some form of position as spokesperson), so your view is no more or less relevant than mine. 

I did not say that 'any requests would be unreasonable'; just that this request would be unreasonable - except perhaps in some very specific roles, perhaps as a data analyst or some such. Your disability, just like mine, is not a 'blank cheque' to make whatever demands you wish; just that you have the right to some reasonable adjustments. Ultimately if you feel your requests are reasonable, and they are not met; a court is able to provide independent arbitration. 

theoretica

There will be a strong relationship between how reasonable an adjustment is for interview and how suitable the job is for the candidate who makes the request.  If the candidate is a good fit for the job and the adjustments they would need to do the job well are reasonable then the similar adjustments they would need for the interview will also be reasonable.  They key consideration should not be the interview itself, but whether the adjustments would be reasonable in the job.

Bookowl

I'm dyslexic and so would have issues with memory. It is recommended in my dyslexia report to have questions pre interview. Maybe speak to citizen advice or a particular charity that deals with your condition and speak to legal team.

Ditzy_Mitzy

It might be worth finding out if this is a competency based interview.  Lots are these days and they tend to be the same, by and large.  The focus tends to be on open questions in the Tell, Explain, Describe style and the candidate answers according to the STAR method: Situation, Task, Action, Result.  For instance:
Interviewer: 'Tell me about a time you have dealt successfully with a difficult customer'
Candidate: 'It was a busy day in the shop and there was a long queue at my checkout.  I could see the next customer was angry so I asked if there was anything about his visit to the shop that had failed to meet his expectations.  He said that he was unable to find any Lynx Africa on the shelf so was worried he wouldn't pull at the over fifties' disco.  I called for a manager and asked her to fetch a tin of Lynx Africa from the stockroom and take payment separately so as not to hold the queue up.  The customer left happy but stayed single for the rest of his life'.  
You know how to answer these.  Best thing to do is to prep: think of the sorts of competency questions that are likely to be asked and come up with some dummy answers.  Look through your records and think how single incidents can be adapted to fit different situations.  
Nobody's going to be bothered about you taking notes in either.  Most employers will tell you in advance that it is competency based.  In fact almost every interview I've ever had has been competency based.  There's lots more about it here:
https://www.prospects.ac.uk/careers-advice/interview-tips/competency-based-interviews

KiKi

Hi OP
Yes, this is a reasonable adjustment that you can request - but, of course, they may not agree, and may propose a different reasonable adjustment.  Sending out interview questions in advance is something I would do for neurodivergent candidates or those who needed to see the questions in advance, and being deaf, or partially deaf, or with memory problems, I would consider reasonable.  Not all employers will think the same (as you can see on this thread).
Some of the comments on this thread suggest that this would be a significant advantage for the candidate.  Two responses on that from me: firstly, if you're genuinely concerned about that, you can send the questions to all candidates.  Secondly, if you are neurodivergent, or have a disability you are *already* at a disadvantage.  Stats on disability from recruitment to pay gap shows this.  Providing questions in advance doesn't suddenly give a candidate a huge advantage, it simply levels the playing field.  
In my experience, sending out questions in advance rarely advantages anyone.  Most people plan responses for competency based questions, and it's the job of the interviewer to get the right information from someone.  So if, in an interview, someone gives me a less than complete answer, I ask for more detail, and ask additional questions to get what I need.  An interviewee knows themselves better than anyone.  So if I ask for an example of x, they are going to have one, or I will rephrase the question or guide them to something that will fulfil that criteria (I wouldn't have shortlisted them otherwise).  Almost every candidate comes with something ready to share.  Some people are more prepared than others.  Giving an already-disadvantaged candidate the questions in advance means they can simply show themselves at their best, which is what all other candidates can do anyway.  This is especially true when CBAs are not a great predictor of performance anyway, and I would always use a CBA in conjunction with work examples, for eg, to ultimately to make my decision.
Not everyone will agree with this view, but I've taken this approach enough times to be confident that it's an appropriate reasonable adjustment, and doesn't significantly impact the recruitment process.  It is certainly not something that 'goes too far'.  If you've not experienced disability at work, you don't realise just how much more some people have to struggle.
Good luck, OP - but be aware that not many organisations out there may be as willing as mine to work in this way.
KiKi

jobbingmusician

So the consensus on here seems to be that getting the questions in advance won't work.  However, I would ask - how far in advance?  There seem to be two options that haven't been directly discussed (one has been discussed indirectly.

Option 1 -  getting the questions at the beginning of the interview, printed out in a nice clear font, so that you can consider each question, with maybe a minute or so in between each question so you can make notes to help your memory.

Option 2 - getting the questions while you are waiting for the interview, maybe 15 minutes before, so that you can go through the note-taking process and prepare without putting your memory at strain.

There is no guarantee, of course, that the employer will go for either option.  And whether either option is suitable will also depend on the nature of the job (there is no use in a fireman having 15 minutes to prepare, for example.)  These both seem like reasonable adjustments to me, however, and you can but ask.