In recent times, I have received feedback from both candidates and recruiters who have been 'victimized' for proving too smart for a key member of the panel. Would you advice your candidate to back off and let the interviewer win(even when you know you are right) or 'slug' it out and get your point across(at the risk of sounding inflexible)?
However, I am of the view that an interview session should not be a win-lose or lose-win situation for both parties in a panel-interview session. A win-win is a better choice for both candidates and recruiters on one side and the panel on the other. I don't believe that their is anything as 'too smart' in knowledge/experience, there is always room to learn something in everything.
If I find myself in this situation, I would step back and have the panel's opinion first and find a professional way to comment on their opinion in the light of my understanding. The key word here is confidence as there would be someone on the panel that would watch out for it. So in closing don't be 'victimized' or play the victim but be the victor.
'I don't believe that there is anything as 'too smart' in knowledge/experience, there is always room to learn something in everything'
Tell that to hiring/line managers who get intimidated by the competencies of the candidate knowing that over time, if they make no attempt to 'raise their game' this 'fresh blood' will get ahead of them. I think it's the responsibility of the organization to ensure that talent is not sacrificed on the altar of self preservation.
Although, like Karen rightly observed a candidate is sometimes shortlisted for a job he/she is over qualified for. When this happens, it's the candidates responsibility to tone down the resume(personally, I believe he/she shouldn't be on the list in the first place)
Remember Stoop to conquer? that's what i would recommend. The coward always lives to witness more battles! What if I'm wrong? feel free to contribute your opinion...