In this article
Before you start
This page answers one question from the behavioral interview family.
Why interviewers ask this
If you give a vague answer, the interviewer has no evidence that you notice your own gaps or fix them. Yale's career office says that in asking about strengths and weaknesses, employers assess your level of self-awareness and your honest assessment of where you can improve. Indeed's career guide says hiring managers look for two main insights: your weakness and the steps you are taking to improve.
A weak answer disguises a strength ("I care too much about quality") or confesses a flaw with no plan. A strong answer pairs a real gap with a specific habit you built. A Staff-level answer adds how you check that the habit still holds. Interviewers also use this as a behavioral probe: Wisconsin's career guide says employers use behavioral interviewing to evaluate your past behavior as a way to predict your future performance.
Areas of improvement answer from first principles
- Area of improvement
- An area of improvement is a specific skill or work habit that you do not yet do as well as the role will need, which you can name honestly and are deliberately developing.
In plain words
Think of a bug report on yourself. A good report names the symptom, shows how it was reproduced, describes the fix and says how you know it is fixed. A bad report says "something is off, will look later." The analogy breaks in one place: an interviewer is not a maintainer, so you only describe one small bug, not your whole backlog.
In one precise sentence, a good answer is a short STAR story whose subject is a bounded weakness and whose longest part is the actions you took.
The question has several wordings, and "areas of improvement" is the same question as "weakness" in different words, so the same answer serves them. Yale advises preparing two or three answers, since most interviewers are rarely satisfied with only one.
Step 1: Choose a real weakness that is not a core requirement
Choose a real weakness that is not a core requirement of the job. Yale says to avoid using a key job requirement as a weakness and to avoid clichés such as perfectionism, which can read as disingenuous.
For an engineer, that rules out "I cannot debug" or "I do not write tests" when the posting asks for them. A skill gap also works well because you can take concrete steps on it, such as a course or a work assignment. Illustrative candidates, which are examples and not a ranked list: estimating how long work takes, asking for review early, writing design notes, or presenting to non-engineers. Pick one that is true for you. You now have the subject; the next step gives it a concrete scene.
Step 2: Name it with one recent example
Name it with one recent example. The example is the Situation and Task of the STAR story, and it must be short: Wisconsin's career guide says the biggest mistake students make is spending too much time setting up the story and running out of time to explain the outcome.
Say the weakness in plain words, then the point where it cost something. "I used to hold changes until they felt finished, so feedback arrived late and one feature needed a redesign" is one sentence of setup and one of consequence. Input: your chosen weakness. Output: a scene of about two sentences that shows the gap without blaming a colleague. You now have the problem on the table, and the interviewer is waiting for what you did.
Step 3: State the actions you took to improve
Describe the actions you took to improve. This is the longest part: Northwestern's suggested split gives action half of the response, the largest share, and Indeed says you should not list the weakness without the steps.
Name two or three actions in the first person and make each checkable: opened small draft changes early, wrote a short design note before coding, asked one reviewer to challenge the plan. Skip abstract promises such as "I am working on communication." If a course or a team assignment was part of it, say which. Input: the scene from step 2. Output: a short list of deliberate changes in how you work. The result comes next, because actions without an outcome are only intentions.
Step 4: Close with the result and what changed
Close with the result and what changed. Northwestern's guide asks you to describe the outcome of your actions or what you learned.
For this question, add one more thing: what you do differently now and how you check it. "Review rounds on my changes dropped, and I still review my own habits when a deadline tightens" shows a result and an ongoing check. That final clause is what separates the Staff column of the rubric below. Keep the claim honest: do not say the weakness is gone, say it is under control and watched. If you have no measured result, state the observable change in how the team works with you. You now have the full answer: weakness, scene, actions, result and ongoing change.
Step-by-step description
- Pick a real, bounded weakness.
- Give one recent scene.
- State what you did.
- Say what changed.
- Choose a real weakness that is not a core requirement of the job.
- Name it with one recent example.
- Describe the actions you took to improve.
- Close with the result and what changed.
Knowing it is half the job. Saying it is the other half.
Interview Clozo is an AI interview copilot for real interview rounds: it hears the question and puts a strong answer on your screen, and you say it in your own words. See the features or how it works.
Start Free Trial →The Staff-level answer
The block below is an illustrative composite written for teaching, not a real person's story.
What areas of improvement do you see in yourself as an engineer?
One area I have been working on is how I use code review. Early on I held changes until they felt finished, so feedback arrived late and rework was large. Last year a feature I built needed a redesign after review. Since then I open small draft changes early, write a short design note before coding, and ask one reviewer to challenge the plan. I also watch how many review rounds my changes need. The rounds dropped, and teammates see my work sooner. It is still a habit I check, especially under deadline, because my instinct is to polish alone.
What makes it Staff-level: it names a mechanism you control, ties the result to team behavior, and admits the habit needs maintenance. It passes the step 1 test because reviewing code is part of the job, but the gap named is when and how early you ask for review, not whether you can do it.
Example: estimating how long work takes
Illustrative: "I used to give estimates from the best case, and two projects slipped. Now I split work into small pieces, add a buffer for unknowns, and compare my estimate with the actual time after each task. My last two estimates were close, and I still review them."
Example: presenting to non-engineers
Illustrative: "I explained designs in technical terms, and product partners lost the thread. I now start with the decision they need to make, use one diagram, and ask for questions midway. A partner told me the last review was clearer, and I keep asking for that feedback."
Example: writing design notes
Illustrative: "I started coding before writing down the plan, so reviewers found gaps late. I now write a one-page note with the goal, options and risks first. Reviews catch problems earlier, though I still skip the note when I am rushed, and I watch for that."
A junior engineer can pick a narrower gap, such as asking for help sooner. A senior engineer should pick one that involves other people, such as delegating or presenting, and show its effect on the team.
Timing matters too. Northwestern suggests splitting a STAR answer 15% Situation, 10% Task, 50% Action and 25% Result, while Wisconsin's guide gives 15, 15, 50 and 20, so treat the splits as guidelines. For an illustrative answer of 75 seconds, the Northwestern split gives about 11 seconds to situation, 8 seconds to task, 38 seconds to action and 19 seconds to result.1 Action is the longest part under both splits.
Text description of the diagram
- Under the Northwestern split a 75-second answer gives about 11 seconds to situation, 8 seconds to task, 38 seconds to action and 19 seconds to result.
- Action is the longest part under both splits.
The rubric
Interview scoring is not public, and the table below is advice on what a strong answer shows, not a company's scoring sheet.
| Dimension | Weak answer | Strong answer | Staff answer |
|---|---|---|---|
| Honesty | Disguised strength or cliché | Real, bounded weakness | Real weakness with a cost you can describe |
| Evidence | Opinion only | One recent example | Example plus an observable change |
| Action | "I am trying to improve" | Two or three concrete steps | Steps plus how you check they still work |
| Relevance | A core job requirement | Not essential to the role | Tied to how you work with a team |
| Delivery | Long setup, no result | Action is the longest part | Ends on what changed, then stops |
Three variants of this question
What would your previous manager say you have trouble with?
Use the same story, framed from outside: "My manager said I shared work late, so I started drafting early." The same question is often worded this way, so no new story is needed, only a new first sentence.
What would you change about yourself if you could?
Answer with the same weakness and the same actions, and add that you have already started changing it. Avoid a wish that is unrelated to work.
What areas of improvement do you see in your engineering work?
The engineering-work wording narrows the question to craft. Pick a skill gap such as estimation or design notes, and link it to a concrete practice. For the broader wording, see what is your greatest weakness.
Common mistakes
- "I am a perfectionist." (wrong) Yale calls this cliché and possibly disingenuous. (right) "I held work back too long, and here is what I changed."
- "I have no real weaknesses." (wrong) It signals low self-awareness. (right) Name one bounded gap and its fix.
- "I cannot write tests." (wrong) It is a core engineering requirement; Yale and Indeed both advise against it. (right) Pick a gap that the posting does not depend on.
- A long story that runs out of time before the result. (wrong) Wisconsin names this as the biggest mistake. (right) Two sentences of setup, then actions.
- Listing the weakness with no steps. (wrong) Indeed says you should not list one without the other. (right) Always pair the gap with what you did.
In an Amazon-style loop, a growth story fits the stated principle of Learn and Be Curious, which Amazon describes as central to a culture of continuous improvement. Pair this answer with why should we hire you and the other common interview questions.
Follow-up questions
What is a good area of improvement for an engineer?
A good one is true for you, not a core job requirement, and fixable with concrete steps. No source ranks engineer-specific areas, so treat estimation, early review and design notes as examples.
How many areas of improvement should I prepare?
Prepare two or three, because Yale notes most interviewers are rarely satisfied with only one. Each needs its own short example.
Can I say I am a perfectionist?
Avoid it. Yale says discussing your perfectionism as a weakness can be seen as disingenuous.
How long should the answer be?
Aim for about a minute, an illustrative target (the timing example above uses 75 seconds), with action as the longest part. Practice it out loud so the setup does not eat the time.
How does this differ from the greatest weakness question?
It is the same question in softer wording, so one story serves both. Read how to answer the greatest weakness question, and see how to answer interview questions for the wider method.
- An area of improvement answer is a short story about one real, bounded weakness.
- Do not choose a core job requirement or a cliché such as perfectionism.
- Action is the longest part; two sentences of setup are enough.
- Close with the result and what you changed, and how you keep it up.
- Prepare two or three different areas, since interviewers may ask for more than one.
Sources
- The Behavioral Interview — Yale Office of Career Strategy, 26 Oct 2026
- Interview Question: What Are Your Greatest Weaknesses? — Indeed Career Guide, 14 Aug 2026
- Behavioral Interviewing & The STAR Approach — Northwestern University Career Advancement, 26 Oct 2026
- How to use Amazon's Leadership Principles in your interview — Amazon, 26 Oct 2026
- STAR Method for Behavioral Interview Questions — University of Wisconsin career guide, 26 Oct 2026
