Writing is a lonely occupation, and sharing the challenges and risks with another author can sound more appealing than going it alone. Unfortunately, finding and working effectively with a collaborator can much more difficult than achieving solo success. The risk could  be:

Collaboration is most successful when writers have complementary skills.  The challenge is in finding a partner who complements your skills and who needs the skills that you bring to the party.

Collaboration can lead to personality clashes.

To work effectively with another writer, you need to be confident in both yourself and your collaborator. You also need the ability to divide responsibilities, review each other's work, and make decisions about character, plot, scenes, etc. without letting egos get in the way.

Collaboration requires a double dose of self-discipline.

 What if one of you proves to more efficient than the other? The history of collaboration is littered with manuscripts that never got finished because Writer A had to wait for Writer B to do his share of the work.

Collaboration can raise tricky legal issues.

Let's say that you and your collaborator have been working on a book together. Your collaborator doesn't hold up her end of the bargain, and you're forced to complete the manuscript on your own.

What happens if you sell that manuscript? Your collaborator may demand 50% of the advance and royalties--or, worse yet, your collaborator may refuse to accept the publisher's offer.

Criminal defense lawyers do much more than simply question witnesses in court. For example, defense lawyers:

• negotiate "deals" with prosecutors, often arranging for reduced charges and lesser sentencing
• formulate sentencing programs tailored to a client's specific needs, often helping defendants avoid future brushes with the criminal justice system
• help defendants cope with the feelings of fear, embarrassment and reduced self-esteem that criminal charges tend to produce in many people
• provide defendants with a reality check -- a knowledgeable, objective perspective on their situation and what is likely to happen should their cases go to trial.
• are familiar with important legal rules that people representing themselves would find almost impossible to locate on their own, because many criminal law rules are hidden away in court interpretations of federal and state conare familiar with local court customs and procedures that aren't written down anywhere stitutions
• understand the possible "hidden costs" of pleading guilty which a self-represented person might never think about
• spend time on a case that a defendant cannot afford to spend
• gather information from prosecution witnesses, who often fear people accused of crimes and therefore refuse to speak to people representing themselvesare
• familiar with local court customs and procedures that aren't written down anywhere

When an interviewer presses you to reveal confidential information about a present or former employer, you may feel it's a no-win situation.  If you cooperate, you could be judged untrustworthy.  If you don't, you may irritate the interviewer and seem obstinate, uncooperative or overly suspicious.

BEST ANSWER:  Your interviewer may press you for this information for two reasons.

First, many companies use interviews to research the competition.  It's a perfect set-up.  Here in their own lair, is an insider from the enemy camp who can reveal prized information on the competition's plans, research, financial condition, etc.

Second, the company may be testing your integrity to see if you can be cajoled or bullied into revealing confidential data.

What to do?  The answer here is easy.  Never reveal anything truly confidential about a present or former employer.  By all means, explain your reticence diplomatically.  For example, "I certainly want to be as open as I can about that.  But I also wish to respect the rights of those who have trusted me with their most sensitive information, just as you would hope to be able to trust any of your key people when talking with a competitor."

And certainly you can allude to your finest achievements in specific ways that don't reveal the combination to the company safe.

But be guided by the golden rule.  If you were the owner of your present company, would you feel it ethically wrong for the information to be given to your competitors?  If so, steadfastly refuse to reveal it.

Remember that this question pits your desire to be cooperative against your integrity.  Faced with any such choice, always choose integrity.  It is a far more valuable commodity than whatever information the company may pry from you.  Moreover, once you surrender the information, your stock goes down.  They will surely lose respect for you.

One President we know always presses candidates unmercifully for confidential information. If he doesn't get it, he grows visibly annoyed, relentlessly inquisitive,  It's all an act.  He couldn't care less about the information. This is his way of testing the candidate's moral fiber.  Only those who hold fast are hired.