Related Posts
New to Fishbowl?
Download the Fishbowl app to
unlock all discussions on Fishbowl.
unlock all discussions on Fishbowl.
That was just a preview…
Sign Up to see all discussions
Sign Up to see all discussions
- Discover what it’s like to work at companies from real professionals
- Get candid advice from people in your field in a safe space
- Chat and network with other professionals in your field
Sign up in seconds to unlock all discussions on Fishbowl.
"" is an unusual email domain. If correct, please proceed to the next step
Messaging rates may apply
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
New to Fishbowl?
Download the Fishbowl app to unlock all discussions on Fishbowl.
Share
Embed this post
Copy and paste embed code on your site
Preview
Download the
Fishbowl app
Scan your QR code to download
Fishbowl app on your mobile
Sign up for free to view this conversation on Fishbowl
Sign up for free to continue using Fishbowl
Messaging rates may apply
That is an excellent question because I’m sure based on your job title, handling such situations is key to your position. I think that in an interview, provided you keep names, locations and specific dates and other identifying data out of your verbal description and explain the scenarios without too much specificity, you should be fine. For example, I have dealt with situations where an employee has made verbal violent threats, I would describe it that way rather than mentioning the specific nature of the threat. Then, you can focus on your resolution tactics.
It’s a fine line. But I will ask a vague question such as- why do you think staff would be saying this? Could something have happened/ said that could have been misinterpreted?
This is such a good question, and honestly, the fact that you are worried about confidentiality is a good sign. It tells me you understand the responsibility that comes with HR work.
The way I approach this is to speak to the nature of the issue, the risk, the process I followed, and the outcome, without sharing anything that could identify the employee, manager, department, location, or specific personal details.
For example, instead of saying, “I managed a case where an employee disclosed X and the manager did Y,” you can say, “I supported a sensitive employee relations matter involving competing concerns around performance, workplace conduct, and accommodation obligations.”
Then focus on what you actually did. Did you assess risk? Partner with legal? Coach the manager? Conduct or support an investigation? Review policy? Ensure procedural fairness? Protect confidentiality? Document properly? Recommend next steps? Those are the pieces that show your judgment.
You can still use a STAR format, but keep the situation broad and spend more time on your actions and reasoning. The interviewer does not need the dramatic details. They need to know you can manage sensitive issues with discretion, fairness, compliance, and calm judgment.
I would also say something like, “I will keep the details anonymized for confidentiality, but I can walk you through the process, risk considerations, and outcome.” That alone signals professionalism.
I don't see the problem. Simply don't mention which company you experienced something serious, and don't name names. How would the interviewer know whom you're talking about specifically?
I have often told the story of the employee I had who claimed that her boss just stood by and watched while she was raped, when the truth was that she picked up a guy in a bar where she and her boss (also a woman) were and took the guy to her boss's car to have sex. I've shared that I've been able to fire someone on FMLA because of the egregious behavior and mistakes made which were discovered while they were on leave.
You can relay those experiences without divulging any names or even the companies you had those experiences.