Tell me about a decision where you went looking for input before making it. Whose did you want, and what were you hoping they'd challenge?

Consultation done well is evidence-gathering; done badly it's endorsement-shopping or outsourcing the decision. Asking what they hoped would be challenged separates the two — and shows whether the candidate still owned the call once the input arrived.

• What did they say that you didn't want to hear?
• What input did you overrule, and why?
• Who owned the final decision, and did everyone know it?

Advisers picked for what they knew or would push back on rather than for agreeableness, input that visibly changed the decision or was overruled with reasons, and ownership kept throughout.

Input collected until it agreed, consultation used to spread blame in advance, or the decision quietly became a committee's because deciding alone felt exposed.