Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on [email protected] for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact [email protected]

Principal Officer competition 2019

1568101135

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 111 ✭✭Summer2019


    Riskymove wrote: »
    in neither of the previous 2 competitions were additional batches called

    it is very unlikely unless lots of people fail to get on the panel


    Off the top of my head
    In 2015 about 350 were called to next stage and 180 put on a panel

    in 2017 they only called about half that and only 80 or so made it to a panel

    There are still people on the 2017 panel for regional posts



    So really given the numbers of actual PO vacancies expected I cannot see more than one batch on a panel for 2 years




    Thanks. It makes sense!


  • Registered Users Posts: 4 Matt le Kocha


    Riskymove wrote: »
    I may be confusing it with a different competition, but if I recall in the previous one you had to pass the maths bit but it was not used to assess you for the panel

    I have checked the feedback that I received from the previous competitions and there is no mention of the job simulation being the metric used to rank applicants (unlike this one).


  • Registered Users Posts: 5,134 ✭✭✭hardybuck


    Riskymove wrote: »
    I may be confusing it with a different competition, but if I recall in the previous one you had to pass the maths bit but it was not used to assess you for the panel

    I think that's been the case for a long time in a lot (if not all) the open competitions.


  • Registered Users Posts: 108 ✭✭ShellyMCD


    I've never said it's what being a PO is about. But I've worked with many POs and the fact that the next batch will be chosen regardless of how quickly they can grasp basic info and or work with numbers is quite scary.

    Also, I've just asked PAS where in the info booklet they mentioned the fact that the critical analysis was not going to be taken into account, and they responded that they decided after the tests were taken. I'm going to lodge a complaint as this has inevitably favoured a group of people over another, and they can't move the goalpost after someone scores

    Thanks, that interesting to know. Did you call or email PAS?


  • Registered Users Posts: 14 Nautilus support


    ShellyMCD wrote: »
    Thanks, that interesting to know. Did you call or email PAS?

    Email


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 108 ✭✭ShellyMCD


    Thanks


  • Registered Users Posts: 4 Matt le Kocha


    Details of the complaints procedure are on the public jobs website. Essentially they have to follow the CPSA codes of practice.


  • Registered Users Posts: 4 beleza


    Congratulations to all who are through and best of luck in the next round and beyond in the competition.

    To those (like me) who did not place in the 398 commiserations. I am disappointed. There will be other opportunities and it’s just not to be this time.

    I scored very highly on the critical - way into the top 3rd based on the feedback. I fell down on the job simulation (below average).

    I completed the scenarios efficiently and had time to review every answer. Given the limited information I was possibly too cautious in answering because of this. I could definitely identify with the types of situations presented. Some I have experienced in my role.

    I approached honestly and didn’t try and answer what I thought they wanted.

    I will reflect on this experience and will have to look into how these tests are best answered as there is obviously a collection of answers they want if they’ve placed this as the sole sifting criterion.


  • Registered Users Posts: 29 Megidje


    beleza wrote: »
    Congratulations to all who are through and best of luck in the next round and beyond in the competition.

    To those (like me) who did not place in the 398 commiserations. I am disappointed. There will be other opportunities and it’s just not to be this time.

    I scored very highly on the critical - way into the top 3rd based on the feedback. I fell down on the job simulation (below average).

    I completed the scenarios efficiently and had time to review every answer. Given the limited information I was possibly too cautious in answering because of this. I could definitely identify with the types of situations presented. Some I have experienced in my role.

    I approached honestly and didn’t try and answer what I thought they wanted.

    I will reflect on this experience and will have to look into how these tests are best answered as there is obviously a collection of answers they want if they’ve placed this as the sole sifting criterion.

    That has got to be the most reasoned and honest appraisal of a competition I have come across. I feel exactly the same. I do think that marking based on whether one regards a response as highly, slightly or in(appropriate) is difficult to judge when there is no specific feedback. And difficult to know where to start to try to get it right next time. Congratulations and commiserations accordingly.


  • Registered Users Posts: 4,708 ✭✭✭Augme


    I've never said it's what being a PO is about. But I've worked with many POs and the fact that the next batch will be chosen regardless of how quickly they can grasp basic info and or work with numbers is quite scary.

    Also, I've just asked PAS where in the info booklet they mentioned the fact that the critical analysis was not going to be taken into account, and they responded that they decided after the tests were taken. I'm going to lodge a complaint as this has inevitably favoured a group of people over another, and they can't move the goalpost after someone scores


    How has this favoured one group over another? And what group has it favoured?


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 4 Matt le Kocha


    I've never said it's what being a PO is about. But I've worked with many POs and the fact that the next batch will be chosen regardless of how quickly they can grasp basic info and or work with numbers is quite scary.

    Also, I've just asked PAS where in the info booklet they mentioned the fact that the critical analysis was not going to be taken into account, and they responded that they decided after the tests were taken. I'm going to lodge a complaint as this has inevitably favoured a group of people over another, and they can't move the goalpost after someone scores

    I am of the same view. I looked back at the information booklet and it says that:

    'Candidates will be ranked on the outcome of their online assessment tests and may be called to Stage 2 in accordance with their ranking'.

    Significantly it says 'tests', not 'test'.


  • Registered Users Posts: 4 Blondie2000


    I think the same it was indicated that scores on both tests would be used to calculate overall score. I don’t think they can change their minds during the competition as it would obviously effect the outcome. CPSA guidelines maintain transparency and if there was a change from the information booklet this should have been communicated during the process before the tests and clearly stated.


  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    I am of the same view. I looked back at the information booklet and it says that:

    'Candidates will be ranked on the outcome of their online assessment tests and may be called to Stage 2 in accordance with their ranking'.

    Significantly it says 'tests', not 'test'.

    Although, if you're looking at the 's', then they can rely on the word 'may'. :o


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,396 ✭✭✭AlanG


    I got called to the next section - a 9 minute video to answer 3 questions. I did very high in the critical and ok in the Job Simulation. It woudl be interesting to put in an FOI request for the questions and answers to the simulation section.

    With regards to answering the questions I took the approach of "what actions would a PO be willing to have in the published in the papers about this scenario" It is not about what people would do in the real world, it is about what they should do by the rules. For example the scenario where your friend in a different department tells you informally that a supplier is bogey you should not act any differently due to what may be unfounded gossip (and you should already have checks in place). In reality many people would act on this sort of information and mention it to their superiors.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,817 ✭✭✭tea and coffee


    I'm sure there must be some exemption from FOI, otherwise previous tests would be used as a basis for potential candidates to study for future ones.


  • Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators Posts: 7,920 Mod ✭✭✭✭cee_jay


    FOI Section 30(a)
    What the Act states:
    30(1) A head may refuse to grant an FOI request if access to the record
    concerned could, in the opinion of the head, reasonably be expected to—
    (a) prejudice the effectiveness of tests, examinations, investigations,
    inquiries or audits conducted by or on behalf of an FOI body or the
    procedures or methods employed for the conduct thereof


  • Registered Users Posts: 2 morant


    One of the questions has been bugging me since the test and I would value input from anyone that got through to the next stage. It is the question about the rash decision from above you are instructed to follow up. I wasn't sure if chain or command would be followed/ expected or should you delay/ confront /lobby to allow a decision made in calmer circumstances be made!


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,396 ✭✭✭AlanG


    cee_jay wrote: »
    FOI Section 30(a)
    What the Act states:
    30(1) A head may refuse to grant an FOI request if access to the record
    concerned could, in the opinion of the head, reasonably be expected to—
    (a) prejudice the effectiveness of tests, examinations, investigations,
    inquiries or audits conducted by or on behalf of an FOI body or the
    procedures or methods employed for the conduct thereof

    From my experience working on FOI requests you need a very strong reason not to release something. The local FOI officer may try to use that section to block information but upon appeal there is very little chance that details of an old test could be said to prejudice the effectiveness of future tests as they could not argue that they will use the same tests again or it would give returning candidates an unfair advantage. That FOI exemption is clearly intended for information pertaining to future tests and examinations. .


  • Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators Posts: 7,920 Mod ✭✭✭✭cee_jay


    AlanG wrote: »
    From my experience working on FOI requests you need a very strong reason not to release something. The local FOI officer may try to use that section to block information but upon appeal there is very little chance that details of an old test could be said to prejudice the effectiveness of future tests as they could not argue that they will use the same tests again or it would give returning candidates an unfair advantage. That FOI exemption is clearly intended for information pertaining to future tests and examinations. .

    Precedence would say otherwise:
    https://www.oic.ie/decisions/ms-k-and-the-public-appoi/


  • Registered Users Posts: 10,884 ✭✭✭✭Riskymove


    cee_jay wrote: »
    FOI Section 30(a)

    whatever about previous job scenarios it is really the scoring process that would be key and likely to be refused.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 82 ✭✭Tr1ckieD1ckie


    morant wrote: »
    One of the questions has been bugging me since the test and I would value input from anyone that got through to the next stage. It is the question about the rash decision from above you are instructed to follow up. I wasn't sure if chain or command would be followed/ expected or should you delay/ confront /lobby to allow a decision made in calmer circumstances be made!

    I wondered about that one too... I took the view that sometimes we have to protect our managers from themselves... The question did frame it as an irrational and unexpected reaction


  • Registered Users Posts: 14 Nautilus support


    Augme wrote: »
    How has this favoured one group over another? And what group has it favoured?

    For example, Jim scored 600 in the critical and 451 in the scenarios, whereas Joe scored 700 in the critical and 450 in the scenarios. Jim goes to stage 2 and Joe doesn't. Even though the average is massively in Joe's favour. Anyone like Jim is favoured, compared to people like Joe.
    Also, Joe spent 3 weeks before the test studying for verbal and numerical tests. How's that fair?


  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    For example, Jim scored 600 in the critical and 451 in the scenarios, whereas Joe scored 700 in the critical and 450 in the scenarios. Jim goes to stage 2 and Joe doesn't. Even though the average is massively in Joe's favour. Anyone like Jim is favoured, compared to people like Joe.
    Also, Joe spent 3 weeks before the test studying for verbal and numerical tests. How's that fair?


    The Critical Analysis was taken into account, and people that did not reach a pass mark were excluded (and therefore not ranked), so both tests matter.



    But, for PAS to simply ignore the detailed applications required makes a mockery out of the system. If I'd have known prior to the process that applications would only be considered after a somewhat refined Just17 'Are you mostly A, B or Cs to see who is your ideal boyfriend test' I'd not have applied. And I'll not apply again for PAS positions and have deleted my Publicjobs profile.



    Some senior Civil Servants do make excellent candidates for non PS roles, and the PS do need more than just career Civil Servants, but this process will have experienced non CS's running a mile from the process. It's a farce, and at this remove I can have a laugh.


  • Registered Users Posts: 14 Nautilus support


    The Critical Analysis was taken into account, and people that did not reach a pass mark were excluded (and therefore not ranked), so both tests matter.



    But, for PAS to simply ignore the detailed applications required makes a mockery out of the system. If I'd have known prior to the process that applications would only be considered after a somewhat refined Just17 'Are you mostly A, B or Cs to see who is your ideal boyfriend test' I'd not have applied. And I'll not apply again for PAS positions and have deleted my Publicjobs profile.



    Some senior Civil Servants do make excellent candidates for non PS roles, and the PS do need more than just career Civil Servants, but this process will have experienced non CS's running a mile from the process. It's a farce, and at this remove I can have a laugh.

    My interpretation of being "ranked" based on both tests is not that one is pass/fail and the other one determines the order. My interpretation may be wrong of course, but for a senior position line this one 1)you would expect the info booklet to be a bit clearer, and 2) pas deciding what counts before and not after the tests.

    I also agree that the fact that the cv/application form counts ZERO at this point is farcical


  • Registered Users Posts: 85 ✭✭VanHalen


    My interpretation of being "ranked" based on both tests is not that one is pass/fail and the other one determines the order. My interpretation may be wrong of course, but for a senior position line this one 1)you would expect the info booklet to be a bit clearer, and 2) pas deciding what counts before and not after the tests.

    I also agree that the fact that the cv/application form counts ZERO at this point is farcical

    I reckon they haven’t even bothered to look at the CV’s at this point. They’ll sift through the 10 minute videos and decide what CVs to review based on that.


  • Registered Users Posts: 42 sheepstealer


    Even then they will cull based on your answer relating to managing people and resources before looking at other two. Still though I could imagine for the reviewers it will be tedious in the extreme going through 398 replies !


  • Registered Users Posts: 3 jmc1993


    Did anyone do the Online interview today? How did it go and did anyone use notes to prompt themselves?


  • Registered Users Posts: 5,134 ✭✭✭hardybuck


    Fair play to anyone who makes it to the panel after jumping through so many hoops.

    Interesting to see that the upcoming TCO competition won't be using the same video and online testing methods, and I don't think the EO competition did earlier this year either.


  • Registered Users Posts: 304 ✭✭William72


    jmc1993 wrote: »
    Did anyone do the Online interview today? How did it go and did anyone use notes to prompt themselves?

    Interesting question - was thinking of this too - I was thinking of some index cards to prompt me. Nothing I've read is saying its not permitted but still not sure. Anyone do/thinking of doing this?


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 8 kaseyj


    jmc1993 wrote: »
    Did anyone do the Online interview today? How did it go and did anyone use notes to prompt themselves?

    Did mine today. Very nerve wracking process. I didn't rely on cue cards or notes. I didn't think the process really allowed the time for this with 3 min answers. It was tough to get the answer in to the time and try and maintain composure and eye contact on camera. Glad it's over


Advertisement