nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

NEW 2018 Assistant Principal Officer Competition

bobbysands81

Good luck everyone!

https://www.publicjobs.ie/en/?option=com_jobsearch&view=jobdetails&cid=94163

Find more posts tagged with

jobs

management

civil service

Quick Links

Comments

runawaybishop

TaurenDruid wrote: »

No, it doesn't.

The bar is supposed to be "does this application form show that the person has the requisite skills and experience". The requisite skills and experience did not change between 2016 and 2018. Dee was jusdged to have had them in 2016. She then got more skills and experience. And was judged to not have them in 2018.

The qualifying points for each section can and are changed depending on the numbers required. It is not a flat yes or no, each section is scored.

ammg

runawaybishop wrote: »

The qualifying points for each section can and are changed depending on the numbers required.

In the same boat. Should one pursue a formal or informal review?

runawaybishop

ammg wrote: »

In the same boat. Should one pursue a formal or informal review?

Informal first, nothing to lose by trying

dar100

TaurenDruid wrote: »

No, it doesn't.

The bar is supposed to be "does this application form show that the person has the requisite skills and experience". The requisite skills and experience did not change between 2016 and 2018. Dee was jusdged to have had them in 2016. She then got more skills and experience. And was judged to not have them in 2018.

Its a strange one, im thinking that the only variable that could of changed was the application form, more specifically how you answered the questions, and perhaps how you used the new experience to fill it out. Alternatively, the interpretation of the reader of your application

runawaybishop

Also just to confirm my above post about the shortlisting being relative -

This is not to suggest that other candidates are necessarily unsuitable, or incapable of undertaking the job, rather that there are some candidates who are, prima facie, better qualified and/or have more relevant experience

Max Mustermann

dar100 wrote: »

Its a strange one, im thinking that the only variable that could of changed was the application form, more specifically how you answered the questions, and perhaps how you used the new experience to fill it out. Alternatively, the interpretation of the reader of your application

What has changed is the introduction of a requirement to have an application form that meets certain criteria. There was no shortlisting in the 2016 competition and therefore you could have had anything on your form and still got to interview stage where you would then have the opportunity to demonstrate that you have the required competencies in person. Unfortunately now due to shortlisting, suitable candidates can get dropped because it is decided for one reason or another that they didn't demonstrate those competencies on their application form.

ammg

Max Mustermann wrote: »

What has changed is the introduction of a requirement to have an application form that meets certain criteria. There was no shortlisting in the 2016 competition and therefore you could have had anything on your form and still got to interview stage where you would then have the opportunity to demonstrate that you have the required competencies in person. Unfortunately now due to shortlisting, suitable candidates can get dropped because it is decided for one reason or another that they didn't demonstrate those competencies on their application form.

I think it's a bit of a cop out to not give more detailed feedback than you did not display adequate evidence of the competency.

runawaybishop

ammg wrote: »

I think it's a bit of a cop out to not give more detailed feedback than you did not display adequate evidence of the competency.

Individualised feedback is time consuming. They will have just scored the competency after a discussion that ain't written down.

Veledan22

ammg wrote: »

I think it's a bit of a cop out to not give more detailed feedback than you did not display adequate evidence of the competency.

I agree. There should be a requirement for PAS to provide more detailed feedback to candidates, rather than simply sending an email telling people that they weren’t successful because they didn’t have the necessary experience in competency x or y.

Crunchymomma

I'm out too. Fell short on managing projects /operations

Enova

dee75 wrote: »

Got my regional shortlisting reply also. Score from online tests was 129.

Didn't make it through shortlisting though and they said it was management/ leadership criteria that I fell down on.

However I was successful in batch 1 of the 2016 competition and came 2nd in one of my counties. Got offered an AP role but turned it down at the time as it didn't suit.

So basically 2 years ago I met all criteria, scored very highly in tests and interview and got offered a job.

Now 2 years later (with significant professional development especially in the management and leadership side) I don't make it through shortlisting?

Bizarre!!

Ah well, their loss!!

Sorry to hear that, Dee75. As far as I can make out the public competencies aren't changing but the internal assessment criteria is. It is messed up.

Ravelleman

dee75 wrote: »

Didn't make it through shortlisting though and they said it was management/ leadership criteria that I fell down on.

However I was successful in batch 1 of the 2016 competition and came 2nd in one of my counties. Got offered an AP role but turned it down at the time as it didn't suit.

So basically 2 years ago I met all criteria, scored very highly in tests and interview and got offered a job.

Now 2 years later (with significant professional development especially in the management and leadership side) I don't make it through shortlisting?

Brutal stuff. There was already some anecdotal evidence that this was happening earlier in the competition, though mainly with people that had failed at interview stage previously. You can certainly appeal, though the number of upheld appeals is very low (see PAS annual reports).

Max Mustermann wrote: »

What has changed is the introduction of a requirement to have an application form that meets certain criteria. There was no shortlisting in the 2016 competition and therefore you could have had anything on your form and still got to interview stage where you would then have the opportunity to demonstrate that you have the required competencies in person. Unfortunately now due to shortlisting, suitable candidates can get dropped because it is decided for one reason or another that they didn't demonstrate those competencies on their application form.

We appear to be moving into a new space in this competition. My hope, though likely to be in vain, is that the process will have become more transparent by the next competition, that is, assuming it does not change again.

Veledan22 wrote: »

I agree. There should be a requirement for PAS to provide more detailed feedback to candidates, rather than simply sending an email telling people that they weren’t successful because they didn’t have the necessary experience in competency x or y.

Principle 5 of the Code of Practice for Appointment to Positions to the Civil and Public Services commits PAS to offering "meaningful feedback" to candidates, though the reality is quite different, as this thread clearly demonstrates.

The_Conductor

I'm one of the ones keeping quiet here. I actually made the cut this time- but feel like such a fraud- when I know several people on this thread in real life- and can't but help feel that they would make better APs than I might. I made the cut last time too- but failed the interview- on the basis that I wasn't able to support sufficient management experience. While I hope the experience I have gained in the intervening period of time stands to me- I am saddened to see so many very decent candidates fall by the wayside..........

Addle

Same thing happening in the current HEO competition.

JDoherty1560

Hi, would there many AP appointments in Limerick and Clare? I can only think of the Dept of Transport in Shannon and the Regional Revenue office in Limerick...

Veledan22

The_Conductor wrote: »

I'm one of the ones keeping quiet here. I actually made the cut this time- but feel like such a fraud- when I know several people on this thread in real life- and can't but help feel that they would make better APs than I might. I made the cut last time too- but failed the interview- on the basis that I wasn't able to support sufficient management experience. While I hope the experience I have gained in the intervening period of time stands to me- I am saddened to see so many very decent candidates fall by the wayside..........

If you switch the management competency for leadership, I’m in the exact same situation as you. Some really excellent candidates have been knocked out by this shortlisting process ☹️

Addle

In fairness, if they were that excellent, their form should reflect that.

ThumbTaxed

I got shortlisted. Anyone want my position?

A packet of Tayto and a can of Fanta will do

BobCat123

ThumbTaxed wrote: »

I got shortlisted. Anyone want my position?

A packet of Tayto and a can of Fanta will do

Congrats on getting through..what was your oom?

Remind me

Addle wrote: »

In fairness, if they were that excellent, their form should reflect that.

I wonder how much more effort people would have put into their forms if they knew it would be subject to shortlisting

tigger123

Remind me wrote: »

I wonder how much more effort people would have put into their forms if they knew it would be subject to shortlisting

If you're not putting your full effort into your form, you probably don't deserve to be shortlisted.

Riskymove

JDoherty1560 wrote: »

Hi, would there many AP appointments in Limerick and Clare? I can only think of the Dept of Transport in Shannon and the Regional Revenue office in Limerick...

Irish Aid (part of DFA) also in Limerick

TaurenDruid

Remind me wrote: »

I wonder how much more effort people would have put into their forms if they knew it would be subject to shortlisting

What, like it said in the information booklet?

Mind you, jusdging by the numbver of questions asked here that spelled out in the original booklet, not many people actually did read it...

prettyboy81

Good to see movement for people with this competition but like all recruitment sad to see the bad news people are receiving at the same time.

I placed poorly and further down the OOM scoring low 90's so not that hopeful of being called for Dublin. Best of luck those heading to do etray and interviews. Whilst not everyone is getting good news nice to see recruitment across the civil and public service in good numbers.

Remind me

TaurenDruid wrote: »

What, like it said in the information booklet?

Mind you, jusdging by the numbver of questions asked here that spelled out in the original booklet, not many people actually did read it...

Ah......

TaurenDruid

Self-booking for the next batch doing Stage 3 supervised tests/e-Tray opens tomorrow. How long were the tests on for, last time - a week, wasn't it?

Veledan22

Does anybody know roughly how many candidates got through the shortlisting?

minky123

TaurenDruid wrote: »

Self-booking for the next batch doing Stage 3 supervised tests/e-Tray opens tomorrow. How long were the tests on for, last time - a week, wasn't it?

yes a week M-F morn and afternoon slots

Riskymove

Veledan22 wrote: »

Does anybody know roughly how many candidates got through the shortlisting?

word of mouth is around 350

FlexBrowne

PhoenixParker wrote: »

Got through shortlisting. Surprised and delighted.
Any tips on the format of the next bit?

Me too. How many are going through to Stage 3?