Phase 6 · Sit the interview
The interview itself
How the questioning works, how to answer at the level the standard asks for, and what to do when you do not know.
Who this is for:Candidates at any stage
Reviewers question primarily on your portfolio — but they may ask anything needed to satisfy themselves on each of the ten objectives.
Answer at the level the objective is set at
This is the single most useful technique in the interview, and it follows directly from how the objectives are written.
If an objective is set at Ability, your answer needs to show that you worked unsupervised and could advise someone else. "I sized the transfer beam" shows Experience. "I sized the transfer beam, I set the deflection criterion after talking to the cladding subcontractor, and I reviewed the graduate's version of the adjacent frame" shows Ability. Same project, different claim.
If an objective is set at Knowledge, do not over-reach into experience you do not have. Reviewers notice, and a candidate who overstates one objective is questioned harder on the rest.
The structure that keeps answers useful
Under pressure, most answers drift into describing the project. A four-part shape keeps them on track:
- 01The situation — one or two sentences, no more.
- 02What I did — specific, personal, and in the first person.
- 03The judgement — what I decided, what I rejected, and why.
- 04The outcome, and what I would do differently.
The fourth part is where candidates earn most and use least. Reviewers respond well to an engineer who can appraise their own work.
When you do not know
Say so, then say what you would do about it. "I haven't come across that. I'd start by checking the code clause, and I would take it to a colleague who has done it before, because it's outside what I've done unsupervised."
That answer is not a failure. It is a direct demonstration of the Code of Conduct — undertaking only tasks for which you are competent, and knowing the limits of your competence. Bluffing, by contrast, is the answer that damages you, because reviewers are experienced engineers and the follow-up question will find it.
Practical things that go wrong
- Not knowing your own portfolio. Anything in it is fair game, including work from six years ago.
- Answering as "we". It removes you from your own evidence.
- Talking past the question. If you have not answered in ninety seconds, you have probably drifted.
- Defending an error rather than owning it. Reviewers test judgement, and a candidate who cannot concede a point is showing them something.
- Letting an objective go unmentioned. It is your responsibility to demonstrate all ten.
Fictional example
The same question, two answers
Fictional example — reviewer asks about a temporary works decision
Weaker
"We had a propping scheme designed by the temporary works engineer, and the contractor installed it. It worked fine and the slab was poured on programme."
Stronger
"I identified that the transfer slab needed back-propping through two floors — my load take-down showed the floor below couldn't take the wet concrete load at seven days. I set out the requirement and the assumed strength gain, passed it to the temporary works engineer, and checked the returned scheme against my assumptions. I'd challenge the seven-day figure harder now; we took it from the mix design rather than site cube results."
Why — The second answer shows a decision, an assumption, a check of someone else's work, and a self-appraisal — evidence at the Ability level, against health-and-safety and construction objectives at the same time. The first answer describes a project on which the candidate happened to be present.
Prepare an answer for each of these
Walk me through a design decision you made that you would now make differently.
It tests self-appraisal, which reviewers weigh heavily and which candidates avoid because it feels like admitting a weakness.
What did you personally do on this project?
The most common question in the interview, and the one that exposes a portfolio built from team work.
Who checked this, and what did they change?
It goes straight to the level of supervision, which is what separates Experience from Ability.
How did sustainability influence this design?
A whole objective, and one where candidates often have the experience but have never articulated it.
What would you do if you found an error in issued information?
It tests the Code of Conduct and health, safety and risk at once, and the answer is about conduct rather than technique.
The week before
8 items · saved in this browser only
Ticked locally in this browser.
Related pages and tools
- The PRIWhat the interview is for, who conducts it, how long it lasts, and what it is your job to demonstrate.
- PresentationTen minutes, ten slides maximum, compulsory — and not giving one fails Core Objective 2 outright.
- Results and resitsHow the decision is approved, what happens when objectives are failed, the three-year window, and the only grounds for appeal.
- EvidenceThe difference between describing a project and evidencing a Core Objective, and what reviewers are actually reading for.
- Ethics and AIThe Code of Conduct running through every objective, and the Institution's position on AI tools during the interview.