Interviewing is much more than one of the many information-gathering activities on the way to figuring out a story. When you interview someone close to your story, or for that matter a critic, you get not only information about that story, but frequently you tap into experiential and emotional levels of the subject that will make the writing live.

That doesn’t happen anywhere else in the process, and it’s gold. On a basic level, we’re almost all voyeurs, eager to learn about other people, imitate what they do, or perhaps take their experience as an object lesson in what not to do. We all feed on experience, the sense of “what was that like?” that fires our imaginations.

Most of us aren’t good interviewers because interviewing isn’t taught. Too often we take any conversation as an opportunity to talk about ourselves. I’ve seen plenty of reporters do it during interviews, and am guilty of it on occasion, particularly if the person inspires me. The margins of the great Robert Caro’s interview notebooks are full of reminders to himself to shut up and let the other person talk.

Here are some personal tips, in a format I call R.E.S.E.T., which stands for Research, Empathize, Seek, Endorse, Test. I’ve used these with CEOs and incarcerated people, and I’ve had pretty good success with them.

Research: The subject that you are interviewing, as much as the topic you’ll be interviewing them about. Seek a little knowledge and confidence about who they are, leaving room to be surprised during the interview.

You can look for ways they describe themselves on LinkedIn or in online biographies, blogs, or video interviews on places like YouTube. How do they talk about themselves and the path that got them here? Were there detours, and what do those tell you? Does the way they describe themselves and their topic/invention give you new ways of seeing? Are they a natural or a scripted talker? Does their expression of ideas change over the years, or are they consistent. You’re on a hunt for patterns, looking for ways to frame your questions that will resonate with the subject.

Empathize: Imagine the ways your subject thinks about things (again, without being dogmatic, remaining ready to change your mind later on – all the stuff that’s online isn’t necessarily who they are.) When do they seem most at ease? What excites them most, the past discovery or the future implications? How does this relate to what they’re doing now?

The goal here is to build some respect for the person you’ll be speaking with, in as specific a way as possible. Give them the respect anybody giving you their time deserves, and give it in advance of the interview. They’re likely to appreciate that you’ve put in the time to learn something about their subject, and to think about what it means to them. Even if you’re completely wrong, and they say so, you’ve done more than most interviewers have done with them.

Seek: This is the interview itself. You are seeking analytic clarity, underlying passion, and novel insight (with luck, in a single great quote.)

It’s often useful to state your goal, why you’re there and where you hope to be at the end of the meeting. There’s nothing wrong with focus. Let them know you’ve done a little research from all that stuff that’s online, maybe mention a couple of relevant things. Have questions you’ve written out to stay on track, and be prepared to utterly ignore them if the subject becomes more interesting, even passionate, in a new direction (you can always say, “Let’s circle back to…”)

If you’re recording, say so, but write by hand at the same time. I think the analog approach lends a nice physicality – also, you can write down impressions, quotes that strike you in the moment, stuff where the person reacted in an interesting way, or color stuff about the room or the moment you won’t capture digitally. And, like Robert Caro, you can remind yourself to shut up until you’re sure the other person is really done talking. Often when you do talk, it’s good to repeat snippets or paraphrases of what the other person said, to respectfully show you’ve been listening.

A note about questions: Open-ended ones tend to be more interesting. That’s why “What was that like?” is good, along with “Tell me about…” or, often, questions about interacting with other people, either on their team or customers. Asking them about the greatest difficulty or the biggest breakthrough is likely to lead someplace interesting, since that is a question about struggle, something about overcoming difficulty that the reader will be interested in. And, part of the goal in asking questions is keeping the subject interested in talking.

Endorse: Towards the end of the interview pressure test what you’ve learned, and look to provoke more information. If these questions go sideways, it’s better to course-correct in the moment than try and reassemble things later.

Questions like “So, if I were to say…” can provide factual confirmation. “It seems like you’re telling me…” leads to a kind of empathetic confirmation or rejection. You can seek the larger implications of a topic with “As I think about this, I wonder if…” or “As you think about what we’ve been talking about, what do you think it says about (fill in invention, topic, strategy, field)…” which can extend your learning and show you a new side of the subject.

It never hurts to say “Is there anything else we didn’t cover that you think is important?” Maybe there is, and you’ll never know unless you ask. I like to note the time periodically, with statements like, “I’m aware we’ve only got a few minutes,” both to show I’m respecting their time and to give them a chance to say something they don’t really know they want to say (ask any shrink – the last 10 minutes of the session are usually the best.)

Test: After the interview, revisit it to confirm your thesis before you start writing.

If there was an impartial person in the room, review how it went with them. You can do that with your natural allies/adversaries (like journalists with PR people) but you should discount for their bias. Check things with yourself, in particular what moment stirred you, in any particular direction – You’ll want to get that down on paper, because if it moved you, it’s likely to move the reader.

Critique yourself; what might have gone better? Was there something in this that could lead to another story, in addition to the one you’re writing now?  Should that be in this, or saved for another time? The answer may have to do with your medium.

These are some of the techniques that have worked for me over the years, and I think they can work for you, too. One more thing: However big, powerful, or intimidating someone you’re interviewing may be, try not to be intimidated. They, and the people who have hired you, aren’t stupid, and they think you belong in that room, asking those questions. Techniques like the ones I’m describing here are also part of an effort to find some part of the subject’s humanity. Who ever minded having that acknowledged?