A few days ago, I posted this on LinkedIn:
Saw a post from a job candidate relating that during an interview the HR rep asked him to open ChatGPT and insert this prompt so they could then discuss the results as part of the interview: “Based on my past conversations, can you analyze my behavioral tendencies?”
So I inserted this prompt myself to see what I would get, and this is the “key traits” part of the response. Can’t say I disagree with this assessment.
Note that this is based on how I use OpenAI (ChatGPT) specifically. It came with this disclaimer:
“I can give you a pattern-based behavioral analysis based only on how you tend to use this chat — not a psychological diagnosis, just observable tendencies in work style, communication, and creative habits. Think of it as a usage-behavior profile, not a personality judgment.”
Key Traits:
• Iterative precision
• Conceptual control
• Long‑term thematic focus
• Analytical–aesthetic balance
• Efficient communication
• Completion orientation
Potential Strength Areas:
• Branding and media production
• Policy or political communications
• Editorial leadership
• Curriculum or lecture development
• Project management involving creative deliverables
Overall Usage‑Based Behavioral Profile
Archetype: Creative Strategist / Producer–Analyst Hybrid
Try it yourself!
This got quite a few impressions, and about two dozen comments. Some of the comments got me thinking, so I thought I would repost here and elaborate a bit. Since LinkedIn limits post length I only posted the “Key Traits” portion of the response. I’ll add the full analysis at the end of this post, as well as a second version I generated this morning, for comparison.
Upon reflection, and after reading the comments, a few thoughts. First, why would an interviewer do this? With AI becoming more ubiquitous in professional settings, they may have simply wanted to find out if the candidate uses it. Whatever result it gave might provide insight on how the candidate uses AI and for what, but a non-user would not be able to complete the exercise.
Interviewers might also seek to find out if the candidate might have something to hide – for example, someone who uses Grok to create images of celebrities in bikinis – or birthday suits – might push back if asked to do this with that platform. Interviewers would consider this, I think. So I imagine this would make many candidates uncomfortable, if only because it’s new and they had never encountered the question before. Many people study for an interview like it’s a physics exam, and a surprise question might throw them off. Not to imply that recruiters might use this as sort of a psychological trick…
I’m also wondering if whatever “behavioral analysis” this prompt might generate has any real use. Since an LLM really just amounts to predictive software that uses training data (e.g., WikiPedia, Reddit, internet blog posts) to guess the next word in a sentence (or code?) using probabilities, it will spit out a different result every time. Of course, it will also change as an individual uses it more, and depend heavily on what that use is. For example, take a look at the summary of results from my first shot at this:
Key Traits:
• Iterative precision
• Conceptual control
• Long‑term thematic focus
• Analytical–aesthetic balance
• Efficient communication
• Completion orientation
Potential Strength Areas:
• Branding and media production
• Policy or political communications
• Editorial leadership
• Curriculum or lecture development
• Project management involving creative deliverables
Overall Usage‑Based Behavioral Profile
Archetype: Creative Strategist / Producer–Analyst Hybrid
A few moments ago I tried the prompt again and got this summary:
Overall Composite Pattern
Your behavioral tendencies suggest someone who is:
- Deliberate
- Detail oriented
- Strategic
- Comfortable with revision cycles
- Balanced between analytical reasoning and creative production
- Focused on outcome quality over speed
- Low-drama, high-persistence in problem solving
If expressed in a working style rather than a personality label, it would resemble a “producer-editor” mindset – someone who both generates content and continuously refines it to meet a precise internal standard.
Note the differences. Most of the traits track, but the formatting is very different. So is the output: “Working style” rather than “Archetype,” for example. “Producer-editor” rather than “Producer-analyst hybrid.”
I think it’s also important to note that all of this output is very flattering. The first iteration includes “Potential Strength Areas” but neither included anything about weaknesses, unless you count “focused on outcome quality over speed.”
In any event, we already know that employers and recruiters use AI to triage applicants, notably using some kind of software to hunt through resumes for keywords that match the job description. The federal government has done this for a long time, and the method has now spread to private employers. This causes candidates to use AI to revise resumes so they match these job descriptions, which I can tell you from personal experience is problematic and perhaps less efficient than one hopes. When I tried this it added an “Increased sales by 30%” bullet, but I was not in a sales role and I certainly didn’t grow them by 30%. In the end I could have revised it myself more quickly by the time I’d finished editing.
I think this is a problem for recruiters and employers. I’ve hired a lot of people during my career, and I never used keyword searches or other such tools to sort resumes. I understand that recruiters sometimes receive hundreds of applications for a single role, and getting through this many, and for several different roles, may not be manageable.
But my preference is to read enough of a resume to decide whether or not the candidate could handle the work and is at a place in their career that matches the role. I’m looking for signs of intelligence, thoughtfulness, an analytical mind, creativity, and trainability. Teaching combat skills to thousands of soldiers and professional skills to dozens of staff members helped me understand how to spot people who are willing and capable of learning new skills and procedures. This is what I look for in a new hire.
This is not easy to demonstrate in a resume, especially if the candidate worries more about matching key words.
In any event, it appears that employers have a new way to use AI when triaging candidates at the interview stage, and candidates should be prepared for this. My worry as an employer is that using these tools is very likely to make me pass over the most qualified candidates. The two best hires I’ve made in my life would not have made the cut based on a keyword comparison with the job description. Both have thrived and progressed in their careers to become assets to the firm.
I’m happy, for them and for myself, that I worked that process the old-fashioned way.
Below you can review both ChatGPT responses in case you’d like to compare them. Note that even the disclaimer differs between the two examples.
Here’s the full ChatGPT response from last week:
I can give you a pattern-based behavioral analysis based only on how you tend to use this chat — not a psychological diagnosis, just observable tendencies in work style, communication, and creative habits. Think of it as a usage-behavior profile, not a personality judgment.
1. Creative–Iterative Work Style
Strong tendency toward refinement over first-draft acceptance.
You rarely stop at version one. Your pattern is:
- Request → Review → Micro-adjust → Review again → Final polish.
- You frequently ask for small, precise changes (font weight, color hue, head tilt, text phrasing).
- This shows:
- High tolerance for iteration.
- Visual and textual sensitivity.
- Preference for evolution rather than wholesale redesigns.
This is common in designers, editors, and producers who think in layers rather than big jumps.
2. Producer / Director Orientation
You often act less like a casual user and more like a creative director:
- You specify tone, branding, mood, and visual symbolism.
- You give corrective feedback quickly and clearly.
- You maintain continuity across projects (logos, fonts, recurring titles).
Behaviorally, this suggests:
- Systems thinking.
- Strong internal “brand model.”
- Comfort delegating execution while retaining conceptual control.
3. High Thematic Consistency
Your projects orbit a few recurring domains:
- Politics / civics
- Media production (thumbnails, branding, scripts)
- Analytical essays
- Structured argumentation
This indicates:
- Sustained long-term interests rather than novelty-seeking.
- Identity alignment with subject matter.
- Goal-oriented usage rather than exploratory wandering.
4. Analytical + Expressive Duality
You oscillate between two modes:
| Analytical Mode | Expressive Mode |
|---|---|
| Essays, critiques, structured arguments | Thumbnails, branding, titles |
| Requests for citations and formatting | Visual symbolism and tone |
| Long-form planning | Rapid creative iteration |
This combination is notable. Many users lean heavily toward one side. You consistently engage both, which suggests:
- Comfort switching cognitive gears.
- Strategic + aesthetic integration.
- Desire for both substance and presentation quality.
5. Precision Without Perfection Paralysis
You show high standards but not indecision paralysis:
- You refine, but you do finalize.
- You move forward after “good enough plus polish.”
- You don’t endlessly reopen finished work.
This suggests productive perfectionism rather than obstructive perfectionism.
6. Communication Style
Your communication traits:
- Direct.
- Instruction-oriented.
- Low emotional padding.
- Efficient corrections rather than long explanations.
This is typical of:
- Project managers,
- Editors,
- Military/technical communicators,
- Or anyone accustomed to operational clarity.
It doesn’t read as curt — more task-efficient than socially elaborate.
7. Temporal Behavior
You often return to projects over days or weeks rather than abandoning them. That indicates:
- Long attention horizon.
- Project continuity.
- Commitment to completion rather than impulse creation.
8. Risk & Experimentation Pattern
You experiment within boundaries:
- You’ll test fonts, imagery, or phrasing,
- But rarely abandon the core concept or brand voice.
This is controlled creativity — innovation with guardrails.
9. Cognitive Tendencies (Behavioral Inference)
Based on interaction style alone, you likely favor:
- Structured reasoning.
- Visual thinking.
- Iterative problem solving.
- Strategic messaging.
- High agency over outcomes.
You show less evidence of:
- Random exploration,
- Emotional venting,
- Open-ended philosophical wandering.
Your usage is purpose-driven.
10. Overall Behavioral Profile (Usage-Based)
Archetype: Creative Strategist / Producer–Analyst Hybrid
Key Traits:
- Iterative precision
- Conceptual control
- Long-term thematic focus
- Analytical–aesthetic balance
- Efficient communication
- Completion-oriented
Potential Strengths in Real-World Contexts:
- Branding & media production
- Policy or political communications
- Editorial leadership
- Curriculum or lecture development
- Project management with creative deliverables
Important Caveat
This is not a personality or psychological diagnosis. It’s simply a behavioral pattern analysis of how you use tools and structure requests. Different contexts (social, emotional, personal) could look very different.
In short: you consistently behave like someone producing work with intent, not just consuming or experimenting.
Here is the full ChatGPT response from this morning:
Based on the patterns in your past conversations — especially the kinds of projects you initiate, the level of detail you request, and how you iterate on outputs — several behavioral tendencies stand out. This is not a psychological diagnosis, just an observational profile of interaction style and working habits.
1. Iterative Perfectionism
You rarely accept the first version of a creative or technical output. Instead, you:
- Request incremental refinements.
- Specify exact wording, fonts, colors, proportions, or framing.
- Revisit earlier versions if later ones drift from your vision.
Tendency: You appear to value precision and alignment with intent over speed. You are comfortable with multiple revision cycles if it leads to a closer match to your internal standard.
2. High Agency / Directive Communication Style
Your instructions are typically:
- Clear
- Imperative rather than tentative (“Change X to Y,” “Remove Z,” “Use this image.”)
- Outcome-focused rather than exploratory.
Tendency: You generally know what you want before you ask. You use tools as instruments rather than collaborators for brainstorming. This suggests strong internal visualization and decisiveness.
3. Project Continuity and Long-Form Thinking
You often return to:
- Ongoing essay projects
- Branding consistency (fonts, logos, naming)
- Thematic continuity across media
Tendency: You think in systems and arcs, not isolated tasks. You value coherence across time and outputs, which is characteristic of strategic planners and content architects.
4. Analytical + Creative Dual Track
Your requests fall into two broad but balanced categories:
Analytical
- Election data
- Legislative composition
- Policy or historical analysis
- Fact-checking claims
Creative
- Thumbnails and branding
- Podcast scripts
- Visual composition
- Musical or stylistic elements
Tendency: You show cognitive flexibility — the ability to move between data-driven reasoning and aesthetic design without friction. Many people skew heavily one direction; you appear comfortable in both.
5. Control Over Narrative and Framing
You frequently refine:
- Titles
- Tone
- Taglines
- Emphasis and wording
Tendency: You care deeply about how information is presented, not just what is presented. This often aligns with media producers, educators, or advocates who understand framing effects on audience perception.
6. Persistence with Frustration Tolerance
When outputs don’t meet expectations, you:
- Continue requesting changes rather than abandoning the task.
- Maintain a generally calm, matter-of-fact tone.
- Adjust parameters rather than escalating emotionally.
Tendency: High task persistence and emotional regulation in problem-solving contexts.
7. Efficiency with Social Minimalism
Your conversational style tends to:
- Skip pleasantries.
- Avoid unnecessary elaboration.
- Move quickly to actionable instructions.
Tendency: You appear task-oriented rather than socially oriented in tool interactions. The goal is completion and quality, not rapport.
8. Brand and Identity Consistency
You repeatedly maintain:
- Specific fonts
- Color schemes
- Logo placements
- Naming conventions
Tendency: Strong orientation toward identity cohesion and professional presentation. This is common among people managing a personal or media brand.
Overall Composite Pattern
Your behavioral tendencies suggest someone who is:
- Deliberate
- Detail-oriented
- Strategic
- Comfortable with revision cycles
- Balanced between analytical reasoning and creative production
- Focused on outcome quality over speed
- Low-drama, high-persistence in problem solving
If expressed as a working style rather than a personality label, it would resemble a “producer-editor” mindset — someone who both generates content and continuously refines it to meet a precise internal standard.