The Interview That Felt Wrong
The Interview That Felt WrongHere’s something we hear often at Seaside Staffing Company: “I’ve never had household staff before, and I don’t know what I don’t know. This house manager candidate seems impressive on paper, but something feels off.” You’re sitting in your Austin home after interviewing someone with an excellent resume for managing your property. They said all the right things. Their references checked out. But your gut is sending warning signals you can’t quite articulate.
After two decades of placing house managers with families throughout Austin, from Westlake to Tarrytown, we’ve learned to recognize red flags that families often miss or dismiss. We’ve seen impressive candidates who turned out to be nightmares. We’ve caught fabricated credentials before families made catastrophic hiring mistakes. We’ve learned which warning signs absolutely cannot be ignored, no matter how desperate you are to fill the position.
The work we do at Seaside Staffing Company is never automated, and it’s never one-size-fits-all. We believe in protecting families by helping them recognize red flags before making expensive mistakes. When you’re hiring a house manager in Austin, you need to know which warning signs should stop you immediately, which concerns warrant deeper investigation, and when to trust your instincts even if you can’t explain exactly why something feels wrong.
Red Flag One: Vague or Inconsistent Work History
The first critical red flag when hiring a house manager appears in their work history. Not gaps in employment, which can happen for legitimate reasons. But vague descriptions of responsibilities, inconsistent dates across different documents, or inability to clearly articulate what they actually did in previous roles.
When you ask “What were your main responsibilities at your last position?” and the answer is generic and broad, that’s concerning. House managers who’ve actually done the work can tell you specific details: the size of the property they managed, how many staff members they supervised, what systems they implemented, what vendors they coordinated, what their typical week looked like.
At Seaside Staffing Company, we dig deep into work history because it reveals truth about candidates’ actual experience versus what they claim. We’ve caught numerous candidates who exaggerated titles, inflated responsibilities, or claimed experience they don’t actually possess.
Here’s a real story from our Austin placements. A candidate applied for a house manager position with an impressive resume listing “estate management” experience at several properties. During our interview, we asked specific questions about their responsibilities. Their answers were suspiciously vague. Further investigation revealed they’d actually been a housekeeper who occasionally coordinated vendor appointments, not a house manager with operational oversight. They were hoping to leverage limited experience into a role they weren’t qualified for. We never presented them to our client family.
What to watch for: inability to provide specific examples when asked about previous responsibilities, dates that don’t align consistently across resume and conversations, job titles that seem inflated compared to actual duties described, or evasiveness when asked detailed questions about day-to-day work.
If a candidate’s work history feels vague or inconsistent, investigate thoroughly before proceeding. Better yet, work with Seaside Staffing Company where we’ve already verified every claim.
Red Flag Two: They Promise Everything Without Asking Questions
The second significant red flag appears when an Austin house manager candidate will agree to everything you mention without asking a single clarifying question. You describe your property needs and they immediately say “Yes, I can do all of that.” You mention complex systems and they claim experience with everything. You outline challenges and they promise easy solutions.
Here’s why this red flag matters: experienced house managers know that every property is unique. They need to understand your specific situation before committing to anything. They ask questions about your property’s systems, your current vendors, your management style, and your expectations because they’re actually thinking about whether they’re the right fit and what success would require.
Candidates who promise everything without questions are either inexperienced enough not to know what they don’t know, or they’re so desperate for employment that they’ll say anything to get hired. Either scenario predicts problems.
At Seaside Staffing Company, we actually view appropriate questions from candidates as green lights. It shows they’re thinking critically about the role rather than just trying to get any job.
An Austin family once interviewed a house manager candidate who claimed expertise in literally everything they mentioned: pool maintenance, smart home systems, landscaping oversight, renovation project management, staff supervision, and budget forecasting. Seemed too good to be true. It was. That candidate lasted three weeks before it became clear they had surface familiarity with many things but deep expertise in none. The family learned that candidates who promise everything often deliver nothing well.
Watch for: immediate agreement to everything without any clarifying questions, claims of expertise in an impossibly broad range of areas, promises that sound too easy for complex challenges, or lack of curiosity about your specific situation.
If a candidate isn’t asking thoughtful questions, they’re not seriously considering what your household actually needs.
Red Flag Three: Poor Communication or Professionalism
The third critical red flag reveals itself in how house manager candidates communicate throughout the hiring process. They’re late to the interview without calling ahead. They respond to emails days later or not at all. They’re inappropriately casual in their communication style. They make spelling or grammar errors in professional correspondence. They seem distracted or unprepared during conversations.
If someone cannot demonstrate professionalism during the hiring process when they’re supposedly trying to make a good impression, they certainly won’t demonstrate it once employed. House managers need excellent communication skills because they coordinate vendors, manage staff, and represent your household. Poor communication during hiring predicts poor communication in the role.
At Seaside Staffing Company, we pay close attention to how candidates conduct themselves throughout our process. Professionalism matters. Responsiveness matters. Attention to detail matters. These qualities predict job performance more reliably than impressive resumes.
Here’s what this looked like recently. A candidate applied for a house manager position in Westlake. Their resume was strong. But they were fifteen minutes late to the initial phone screening without any advance communication. When they finally called, they hadn’t reviewed our agency information or prepared any questions. They seemed to be multitasking during the conversation. These professionalism failures during hiring predicted exactly how they’d handle the job: poorly. We didn’t advance them.
Watch for: tardiness without communication, slow or inconsistent email responses, unprofessional communication style, lack of preparation for interviews, distraction during conversations, or careless errors in written correspondence.
Professional house managers demonstrate professionalism from first contact. If you’re not seeing it during hiring, you won’t see it during employment.
Red Flag Four: They Speak Negatively About Previous Employers
The fourth red flag appears when house manager candidates speak disparagingly about previous families or employers during interviews. They might describe former employers as “difficult” or “unreasonable.” They might blame previous employers for everything that went wrong. They might violate confidentiality by sharing inappropriate details about former households.
Here’s why this matters profoundly: if they speak negatively about previous employers to you, they’ll speak negatively about you to future employers or, worse, to vendors and service providers while still in your employment. Professional discretion and loyalty are essential qualities in house managers who have intimate knowledge of your household and significant authority.
Moreover, candidates who blame everyone else for problems typically lack the self-awareness and accountability required for successful household management. House managers need to take ownership of challenges, learn from difficult situations, and maintain professionalism even when employment ends badly.
At Seaside Staffing Company, we train our recruiters to listen carefully to how candidates discuss previous positions. Neutral, professional mentions of why employment ended is normal. Extended negativity or blame is a dealbreaker.
An Austin family ignored this red flag when a house manager candidate spent significant interview time criticizing their previous employer family. The candidate seemed knowledgeable otherwise, so the family overlooked the negativity. Six months later, they discovered their house manager was complaining about them to vendors, damaging their reputation in the local service community. The family learned too late that the first-interview negativity predicted exactly how this person would behave.
Watch for: extended criticism of previous employers, blaming others for all problems, inability to identify anything they learned or would do differently, violation of confidentiality about previous households, or generally negative tone when discussing work history.
Professional house managers can discuss previous employment, including why it ended, without disparaging former employers. If you hear negativity during interviews, recognize it as a preview of how they’ll eventually discuss you.
Red Flag Five: Lack of Systems or Process Thinking
The fifth significant red flag appears when house manager candidates cannot articulate systems, processes, or organizational approaches they’ve used successfully. You ask how they manage vendor relationships and they give vague answers. You ask about their approach to preventive maintenance and they don’t have one. You ask how they track household budgets and they seem to make it up as they go.
House managers should think systematically. They should have developed approaches over their career for managing recurring responsibilities efficiently. They should be able to describe tools they use, systems they’ve implemented, and processes that work.
Candidates who lack systems thinking might be able to handle individual tasks but will struggle with the strategic oversight that house management requires. They’ll be reactive rather than proactive, responding to problems instead of preventing them.
At Seaside Staffing Company, we specifically ask process and systems questions during interviews because they reveal whether candidates think strategically or tactically. Excellent house managers have sophisticated approaches to common challenges. Mediocre ones just wing it.
Here’s an example from our Austin placements. A candidate interviewed for a house manager role at a large property. When asked about their approach to coordinating multiple ongoing projects, they couldn’t articulate any system. “I just handle things as they come up,” they said. This lack of systematic thinking predicted the chaos they would have created. We didn’t recommend them. The family ultimately hired a candidate who described detailed project management systems, vendor tracking spreadsheets, and preventive maintenance schedules. That systematic approach has kept their household running flawlessly for three years.
Watch for: inability to describe systems or processes they’ve used, vague answers to “how do you…” questions, lack of tools or methods for managing complex responsibilities, or reactive rather than proactive thinking.
House managers should have developed approaches to common challenges. If they haven’t, they’re not experienced enough for the role.
