Struggling with interviews despite experience – does performance really equal capability?

I wanted to share an honest experience and hear how others think about this. I’m a nervous wreck when it comes to interviews. I have several years of professional experience, so it’s not like I’m new or unqualified. But on the day of the interview, my nerves completely take over. My mind goes blank, and everything I’ve prepared or reflected on seems to abandon me. Because of this, I often struggle to give “perfect” STAR-format answers. My responses end up being less structured, more scattered, and probably less impressive than what interviewers expect. The end result is usually rejection; even for roles I genuinely believe I could perform well in. This makes me question how behavioral interviews actually assess “fit.” Someone who has memorized polished STAR answers might perform very well in interviews, but that doesn’t necessarily mean they’ll be the best person for the job. On the other hand, there are competent candidates who understand the work deeply but aren’t great at packaging their thoughts neatly under pressure. I fall into that second category. I also find the STAR format somewhat inauthentic for me personally. it doesn’t match how I naturally think or communicate. Add to that, I’m not a native English speaker, so I’m often struggling to find the right phrasing in real time to convincingly express what I know and what I’ve done. So i’m just curious: \- How do interviewers differentiate between interview performance and actual capability? \- Is there room in the current interview process for candidates who are strong practitioners but weaker performers? \- And for candidates like me, how do you bridge this gap without turning into someone who just memorizes answers? Would really appreciate perspectives from both interviewers and fellow candidates.