Objectivity is the ability to evaluate situations, information, and decisions based on facts and evidence rather than personal feelings, biases, or preconceptions. In the workplace, it manifests as making fair judgments, considering multiple perspectives, and separating personal emotions from professional decision-making.

Objectivity stands as a cornerstone competency in today's complex work environment. In roles ranging from management to individual contributors, the ability to remain impartial and make decisions based on evidence rather than emotion or bias directly impacts organizational success. Professionals with strong objectivity skills demonstrate several key dimensions: they recognize their own biases and work to mitigate them; they actively seek diverse perspectives; they distinguish between facts and opinions; they base decisions on concrete evidence; and they remain open to changing their views when presented with new information.

For hiring managers and recruiters, effectively evaluating objectivity during interviews requires listening for specific behavioral indicators. The best candidates can articulate situations where they've recognized their own biases, deliberately sought out contrary evidence, or changed their position when faced with new facts. Behavioral interview questions that focus on past experiences provide windows into a candidate's actual application of objectivity, rather than their theoretical understanding of it. By probing with thoughtful follow-up questions, interviewers can move beyond practiced responses to uncover genuine demonstrations of this critical competency.

Interview Questions

Tell me about a time when you had to make a decision that required you to put aside your personal opinions or biases.

Areas to Cover:

• The nature of the situation and the decision that needed to be made
• The personal biases or opinions that could have influenced the decision
• Specific steps taken to recognize and set aside those biases
• The framework or process used to make an objective decision
• The outcome of the decision and any feedback received
• Lessons learned about maintaining objectivity

Follow-Up Questions:

• How did you become aware of your potential bias in this situation?
• What specific techniques did you use to ensure your decision was based on facts rather than feelings?
• Looking back, how successful were you at remaining objective, and what would you do differently next time?
• How has this experience influenced your approach to similar situations since then?

Describe a situation where you changed your mind about something important after reviewing new data or evidence.

Areas to Cover:

• The original position or decision and why it was held
• The nature of the new information that emerged
• The process of evaluating the new evidence
• Any resistance felt toward changing the original position
• How the new position was communicated to others
• The ultimate outcome of the situation

Follow-Up Questions:

• What was your initial reaction when you encountered information that contradicted your original viewpoint?
• How did you balance the new evidence against your existing beliefs?
• How did others respond to your change of position?
• What did this experience teach you about decision-making and objectivity?

Share an example of when you had to evaluate conflicting information from different sources to reach a conclusion.

Areas to Cover:

• The context of the situation and why it was important
• The nature of the conflicting information
• The methodology used to evaluate the credibility of different sources
• How bias was prevented in the evaluation process
• The reasoning behind the ultimate conclusion
• The impact of the decision that was made

Follow-Up Questions:

• How did you determine which sources were more credible or reliable?
• What challenges did you face in reconciling the contradictory information?
• How did you ensure you weren't simply favoring information that aligned with your initial assumptions?
• What framework do you typically use to evaluate conflicting information?

Tell me about a time when you had to deliver feedback or an evaluation that needed to be completely fair and unbiased.

Areas to Cover:

• The context of the feedback situation
• Any personal relationships or feelings that could have affected objectivity
• Methods used to gather complete and factual information
• Specific approaches taken to ensure fairness in the evaluation
• How the feedback was structured and delivered
• The recipient's response and the outcome of the situation

Follow-Up Questions:

• How did you prepare yourself to deliver objective feedback?
• What standards or criteria did you use to ensure your evaluation was fair?
• How did you handle any emotional reactions (either yours or the recipient's) during the process?
• What would you do differently if faced with a similar situation in the future?

Describe a situation where you had to advocate for a decision that was objectively right but unpopular.

Areas to Cover:

• The context of the decision and why it was unpopular
• The evidence that indicated it was the right choice
• How opposition or emotional responses were handled
• The approach taken to communicate the objective reasoning
• How balance was maintained between empathy and objectivity
• The ultimate outcome and any lessons learned

Follow-Up Questions:

• How did you determine that this was the objectively correct decision despite its unpopularity?
• What techniques did you use to persuade others of the merits of your position?
• How did you respond to emotional or subjective arguments against your position?
• Looking back, would you change anything about how you handled the situation?

Tell me about a time when you realized your initial judgment about a person or situation was incorrect.

Areas to Cover:

• The initial judgment made and what it was based on
• What triggered the realization that the judgment might be incorrect
• The process of reevaluating the person or situation
• How biases were identified and addressed
• Actions taken based on the new, more objective assessment
• Impact of the corrected judgment on relationships or outcomes

Follow-Up Questions:

• What assumptions were you making in your initial judgment?
• How did you feel when you realized your initial assessment was wrong?
• What steps have you taken since then to prevent similar misjudgments?
• How has this experience affected how you make initial assessments now?

Describe a situation where you had to weigh multiple stakeholders' needs to make an objective decision.

Areas to Cover:

• The context of the decision and the various stakeholders involved
• The competing interests or perspectives at play
• The method used to objectively assess each stakeholder's needs
• How personal relationships with stakeholders were prevented from influencing the decision
• The rationale behind the final decision
• How the decision was communicated to affected parties

Follow-Up Questions:

• How did you ensure you gave fair consideration to all perspectives, especially those you might not have naturally agreed with?
• What criteria did you use to prioritize different stakeholders' needs?
• How did you handle any pressure from stakeholders to favor their interests?
• What would you do differently if faced with similar competing interests in the future?

Share an example of when you had to analyze data or information that challenged your existing beliefs or preferences.

Areas to Cover:

• The existing beliefs or preferences and how they were formed
• The nature of the contradictory data or information
• The analytical process used to evaluate the information objectively
• Any internal resistance experienced and how it was managed
• The conclusions reached after analysis
• How this affected subsequent thinking or decision-making

Follow-Up Questions:

• What was your initial reaction when encountering this contradictory information?
• How did you ensure your analysis remained objective despite your preferences?
• What techniques do you use to minimize the impact of confirmation bias in your analysis?
• How has this experience influenced your approach to analyzing information that challenges your views?

Tell me about a time when you had to remain neutral as a mediator or facilitator between conflicting parties.

Areas to Cover:

• The context of the conflict and the parties involved
• Your relationship with the involved parties
• Specific strategies used to maintain neutrality
• How bias was prevented in the mediation process
• The approach to facilitating a fair resolution
• The outcome of the mediation and lessons learned

Follow-Up Questions:

• How did you establish trust with both parties despite potential perceptions of bias?
• What was the most challenging aspect of remaining neutral in this situation?
• How did you manage your own reactions if one party was more persuasive or if you personally agreed more with one side?
• What techniques have you developed to maintain objectivity in similar situations?

Describe a situation where you had to make a difficult decision based solely on data rather than intuition or personal preference.

Areas to Cover:

• The context of the decision and why it was difficult
• The nature of the data available and any limitations
• The analysis process used to interpret the data
• How personal intuition or preferences were identified and set aside
• The reasoning behind the final data-driven decision
• The outcome and what was learned about data-driven decision-making

Follow-Up Questions:

• How did you feel about setting aside your intuition in favor of what the data indicated?
• What challenges did you face in interpreting the data objectively?
• Were there any gaps in the data, and how did you address them?
• In retrospect, how did the data-driven decision compare to what your intuition suggested?

Tell me about a time when you had to evaluate the performance of someone you either particularly liked or disliked.

Areas to Cover:

• The nature of the relationship and personal feelings involved
• The performance evaluation context and its importance
• Specific measures taken to ensure fair assessment
• The framework used to evaluate performance objectively
• How personal feelings were recognized and managed
• The delivery of the evaluation and the outcome

Follow-Up Questions:

• What specific techniques did you use to separate your personal feelings from your professional assessment?
• How did you ensure you applied the same standards to this person as you would to others?
• Were there any moments when you caught yourself being either too harsh or too lenient?
• What have you learned about conducting objective evaluations of people you have strong feelings about?

Share an example of when you had to make recommendations or decisions that affected your own interests or department.

Areas to Cover:

• The context of the situation and the potential conflict of interest
• How the conflict of interest was identified and addressed
• The process used to ensure objective analysis
• Steps taken to separate organizational needs from personal/departmental interests
• How the recommendation or decision was justified to others
• The outcome and impact on trust or credibility

Follow-Up Questions:

• How did you balance your awareness of your own interests with the need for objectivity?
• Did you involve others in the decision to ensure impartiality? If so, how?
• How did you communicate your decision-making process to demonstrate objectivity?
• What was the most challenging aspect of maintaining objectivity in this situation?

Describe a time when you had to challenge a deeply held belief or practice within your organization because the evidence showed it wasn't effective.

Areas to Cover:

• The belief or practice being challenged and why it was valued
• The evidence that contradicted the established belief
• The approach to presenting the contradictory evidence
• How resistance or emotional responses were handled
• The steps taken to advocate for an evidence-based alternative
• The outcome and any lessons about organizational change

Follow-Up Questions:

• How did you ensure your own assessment of the evidence wasn't biased by other factors?
• What was most challenging about presenting evidence that contradicted established beliefs?
• How did you balance respect for the organization's culture with the need for objective assessment?
• What would you do differently if you had to challenge an established belief again?

Tell me about a time when you received feedback that indicated you might have been biased or subjective in your approach.

Areas to Cover:

• The context of the situation and the feedback received
• Initial reaction to the feedback
• The process of reflecting on and evaluating the feedback
• How the potential bias was recognized or understood
• Actions taken to address the bias and improve objectivity
• Changes in approach resulting from the experience

Follow-Up Questions:

• What was your initial reaction to receiving this feedback?
• How did you determine whether the feedback was valid?
• What specific changes did you make to your approach as a result?
• How has this experience changed how you check yourself for potential biases now?

Share an example of how you've created or improved a process to ensure more objective decision-making within a team or organization.

Areas to Cover:

• The context and need for improved objectivity
• Previous issues or biases that needed to be addressed
• The design of the new or improved process
• How the process specifically promotes objectivity
• Implementation challenges and how they were overcome
• Results and impact of the improved process

Follow-Up Questions:

• What specific biases or subjective elements were you trying to eliminate with this process?
• How did you get buy-in from stakeholders who might have been comfortable with the previous approach?
• How do you measure whether the process is actually leading to more objective decisions?
• What further improvements would you make to the process based on what you've learned?

Frequently Asked Questions

Why is objectivity an important trait to assess in candidates?

Objectivity is crucial because it enables employees to make fair, evidence-based decisions that benefit the organization rather than being driven by personal biases or emotions. Objective employees can evaluate situations accurately, consider diverse perspectives, and adjust their thinking when presented with new information. This leads to better decision-making, more equitable treatment of colleagues and customers, and ultimately more successful business outcomes.

How can I tell if a candidate is giving genuine examples versus telling me what they think I want to hear?

Look for specificity and complexity in their responses. Genuine examples include concrete details, unexpected challenges, and realistic limitations. Ask probing follow-up questions about their thought process, emotional reactions, and specific actions taken. Pay attention to whether they can discuss failures or limitations in their objectivity, as this demonstrates self-awareness. Candidates giving prepared answers often struggle to provide consistent details when asked to elaborate on specific aspects of their example.

How many objectivity-related questions should I include in an interview?

Focus on 2-3 well-crafted questions with thorough follow-up rather than rushing through many questions. This approach allows you to explore a candidate's examples in depth and get beyond their prepared responses. Select questions that are most relevant to the specific role and mix complexity levels based on the seniority of the position. For leadership positions, include at least one question about how they've fostered objectivity in teams or processes.

How can I assess objectivity in candidates with limited work experience?

For candidates with limited work experience, frame questions to include academic projects, volunteer work, or personal situations. For example, ask about times they had to make fair decisions among friends, evaluate conflicting information for a school project, or set aside personal preferences when working in a group. The key is to focus on the thought process and approach rather than the specific context, as the fundamental aspects of objectivity can be demonstrated in non-work settings.

How does assessing objectivity differ from assessing other soft skills?

Objectivity is unique because it's often demonstrated by the absence of something—personal bias—rather than the presence of a specific behavior. When assessing objectivity, focus on the candidate's awareness of potential biases, their process for making decisions, and their ability to change course when presented with new information. Look for concrete examples of when they've separated feelings from facts, considered multiple perspectives, or made decisions counter to their personal preferences. Also, pay attention to how they talk about opposing viewpoints—objective candidates can articulate opposing positions fairly even when they disagree.

Interested in a full interview guide with Objectivity as a key trait? Sign up for Yardstick and build it for free.