One of the most common pitfalls when crafting the ‘Situation’ in your STAR response is providing an excessive amount of context. While it’s natural to want to ensure the interviewer understands your story fully, an overly detailed or rambling introduction can quickly lead to disengagement, confusion, and a lost opportunity to highlight your impact.

This article addresses the mistake of providing too much context in your STAR ‘Situation’ and offers practical advice on how to trim unnecessary details to create a more focused and impactful opening.

Why Too Much Context is a Mistake

• Interviewer Disengagement: Long, winding introductions can bore the interviewer, making them lose interest before you even get to the core of your story (your Actions and Results).
• Loss of Focus: Too many details can obscure the main point of your situation, making it harder for the interviewer to connect it to the behavioral question.
• Time Management: Interviews have limited time. Spending too much time on the situation means less time for other questions or for you to elaborate on your valuable actions and results.

For an overall perspective on mistakes to avoid in your situation, check out Common ‘Situation’ Mistakes to Avoid.

Identifying and Trimming Excess Context

• The “Need to Know” Test: For every piece of information you consider including in your ‘Situation’, ask yourself: “Does the interviewer *absolutely need* to know this to understand the core problem and my role in it?” If the answer is no, cut it.
• Avoid Deep Company History: Unless the company’s specific founding or evolution is directly relevant to the problem you solved, skip it. Stick to your department or team context.
• Keep Stakeholder Lists Short: Mention key players, but avoid introducing every single person involved. Focus on roles (e.g., “my manager,” “the client team,” “cross-functional stakeholders”) rather than names unless essential.
• Specific Timeframes, Not Epochs: Instead of “over the five years I was there,” try “during a challenging quarter last year.”
• Condense Technical Details: If your situation involves complex technical issues, summarize them in plain language. You can elaborate if asked, but the initial setup should be accessible.

Think about How Much Context is Needed for STAR as a guide, and also consider what specific Information to Include in STAR Situation.

Example: Before and After Trimming Context

Question: “Tell me about a time you solved a complex problem.”

Before (Too Much Context): “At my previous company, which was a large, multinational tech firm established in 1998, I worked in the product development department, specifically on the backend infrastructure team. Our team was comprised of seven engineers, two QA specialists, and a project manager. We had just acquired a smaller startup, and their legacy system, which was built on an outdated programming language, needed to be integrated into our main platform, but the documentation was sparse, and the original developers had left the company three months prior.”

After (Concise Context): “In my previous role as a Backend Engineer at a large tech firm, I was tasked with integrating an acquired startup’s legacy system into our main platform, despite outdated documentation and the absence of original developers.”

The revised ‘Situation’ cuts out irrelevant company history and team composition details, focusing purely on the essential elements of the problem and your role in it. It’s direct, clear, and sets the stage for your actions much more efficiently.

By diligently editing your ‘Situation’ for conciseness, you ensure your STAR stories are sharp, engaging, and effectively convey your capabilities without wasting valuable interview time.

For a complete understanding of all STAR elements, return to Deconstructing the STAR Method: Each Component Explained.