Principal Officer in the Civil Service

Gogglebox2017

I believe they have a batch of existing POs in tomorrow running through sample exercises for stage 2

patmagee

Uncle P wrote: »

Do you really think they'll call another batch that soon? (And the same number again? 166 seems like an odd number to call - I wonder what the rationale is.)

Okay - maybe I'm being overly optimistic saying early 2018 for the next batch...

Two batches of 166 = 332 (did that sum in my head - excellent critical analysis or what..??) - which is coincidentally (??) just one less than the 333 called in 2015 (must be some sort of magical PAS psychometric number....and yes 333 is half of 666....!!). Assume they are taking a more measured approach this time around, rather than raise expectations as they did over the past two years with those who will end up stranded on the 2015 panel.

No offence to anyone competent/experienced in the top 166 posting here on here but we really have to hope that all the spoof merchants and bullsh*itters will be found out at interview in a few weeks time. I heard today of two people in the top 166 who have ZERO staff management experience (yes I mean none at all - must have lived charmed lives to get to AO and AP levels without having any staff assigned to them) - who must be literally polishing a t*urd in terms of competency examples and interview patter.

PAS will have twigged at this stage that the critical analysis test was a wrong 'un, and they will be under pressure from DPER and all Depts to ensure that this process can deliver high quality candidates that can fill a PO role from day one. Hopefully, in order to meet the demand of the retirement cliff which is still lurking in the background...a couple of A/Sec competitions in the pipeline...and Ringer's Dept of Broadband and Rural Motorways...the panel will need to keep moving.

So this may eventually require a second throw of the net in 2018/19, which could be good news for numbers 167, 168, 169.....332 on the order of merit. While it is in their nature to hedge their bets, PAS have clearly left a fair bit of headroom if the order of merit goes well into the 400s...or even to 500...

Mama lion

does anyone know what the strategic exercise is?

tea and coffee

Mama lion wrote: »

does anyone know what the strategic exercise is?

It's usually an e-tray exercise although I did hear that in the not-so-distant past that there was a group interview for a previous PO competition

Persiancowboy

Mama lion wrote: »

does anyone know what the strategic exercise is?

That's not going to be revealed in advance of any testing.....usually PAS have a couple of different scenarios worked up, one of which each candidate will get to deal with. What you can be sure is that it is designed to test all of the core competencies identified as being necessary to be an effective PO.

And for the record, contrary to some suggestions elsewhere in this thread, this competition will not be used to fill PO1 posts and nor does the setting up of Michael Ring's new Department mean a bonanza of extra PO posts...it will be one of the smallest Depts around and most of the staff are already in situ (from other Depts) and are provincially based.

Moycullen1

Would anyone be willing to say, without being specific, what total combined score would have been required to make the first 166.

Tigger99

For the last open PO competition you had to draft recommendations based on fictional documents given to you then give a two person board a presentation.

Also PAS has specified that the top 60 from stage 2 will go onto a separate PO 1 competition if they want. Current serving POs not on probation will also be eligible.

nebraska132

my assessment is that they only took people in category A/the top third

wopbop22

I made it into the 166. I found the critical analysis difficult so I'm delighted to have got through to next round. does anyone know how long the interview and the mystery exercise will be?

gingerpele

Got my interview date. Supervised test starts at 10.30 and the day continues with a strategic exercise and a presentation on it until an interview at 15.20. What a ridiculous long process.

wopbop22

Interview times are just out. Looks like it will take all day between all the different parts. Best of luck to everyone

Fenry

My supervised tests start early with interview afternoon - not a morning person but will have to suck it up!

I came between 120-160 on the order of merit (dont want to provide the exact place to protect confidentiality) - assuming I do a reasonable interview and presentation what are the odds of landing a position? Would I be a year or two on the panel?

Uriel.

Fenry wrote: »

My supervised tests start early with interview afternoon - not a morning person but will have to suck it up!

I came between 120-160 on the order of merit (dont want to provide the exact place to protect confidentiality) - assuming I do a reasonable interview and presentation what are the odds of landing a position? Would I be a year or two on the panel?

It depends on your final position on the order of merit. The existing PO panel took about 2 years to get up place 100.

The age profile of the civil service plus the economic upturn would suggest that there will be a decent amount of vacancies. What you might not have this time around is pent up demand to the same level - given the last PO comp as well as departments promoting through internal competitions.

It's very hard to know. The higher up the order of merit you finish the greater chance you have in the shorter time - naturally

wopbop22

Looking back over the thread it looks like the critical analysis and job simulation tests were shorter in the resit then they were when they had to be done initially. Does anyone who went through the process that time remember how much shorter the resits were?

Uriel.

wopbop22 wrote: »

Looking back over the thread it looks like the critical analysis and job simulation tests were shorter in the resit then they were when they had to be done initially. Does anyone who went through the process that time remember how much shorter the resits were?

Approximately half the amount,but many felt they were more difficult than the online version

Moycullen1

Fenry wrote: »

My supervised tests start early with interview afternoon - not a morning person but will have to suck it up!

I came between 120-160 on the order of merit (dont want to provide the exact place to protect confidentiality) - assuming I do a reasonable interview and presentation what are the odds of landing a position? Would I be a year or two on the panel?

Hi Fenry, I am curious as to how far away I was from the cut off score. As you haven't said where you were on the order of merit could you say roughly what your combined score was on the test. You can PM me if you like.

luckyboy

Moycullen1 wrote: »

Would anyone be willing to say, without being specific, what total combined score would have been required to make the first 166.

Not sure about the precise cut-off but, out of 1600 marks, some candidates I know who made it scored 1246 (for a place in the top 60-ish) and 1285 (placed top 30-ish) ...

Fenry

I scored a bit less than 1200.

Riskymove

luckyboy wrote: »

Not sure about the precise cut-off but, out of 1600 marks, some candidates I know who made it scored 1246 (for a place in the top 60-ish) and 1285 (placed top 30-ish) ...

it is always very tight

50 marks seems to move you about 60 places

wopbop22

The familiarisation material for the assessment day was issued earlier today. The resit test for the job simulation part is shorter than it was first time round but the critical analysis is the same length. For the presentation exercise we can use PowerPoint which is welcome but I think it will be tight enough time wise to both draft a report and prepare a presentation.

Uriel.

wopbop22 wrote: »

The familiarisation material for the assessment day was issued earlier today. The resit test for the job simulation part is shorter than it was first time round but the critical analysis is the same length. For the presentation exercise we can use PowerPoint which is welcome but I think it will be tight enough time wise to both draft a report and prepare a presentation.

Unless it's changed you don't actually present from PP. They print off the slides and give them to to the assessors and you are given one and you present from that (or free style it)

wopbop22

Uriel. wrote: »

Unless it's changed you don't actually present from PP. They print off the slides and give them to to the assessors and you are given one and you present from that (or free style it)

Thanks for the info. Did they read your report and ask questions on it or was it all based on the presentation?

Uriel.

wopbop22 wrote: »

Thanks for the info. Did they read your report and ask questions on it or was it all based on the presentation?

Both. They had read the report and asked questions on that and the presentation

Freddy B

So I just spoke to a pal of mine who finished outside the top 166. She got a text from PAS yesterday saying that they had made some error in the critical analysis scoring and that she would be called for assessment in October! :eek:

urban sprawl

I got the same message! I wonder how many candidates have been affected?

Tristram

Approximately where did ye place initially?

urban sprawl

I was high 200s

Riskymove

urban sprawl wrote: »

I was high 200s

did they give any specifics on the error?

Fenry

I have my assessment centre soon - I wish I had more time but there you go.

Interested to hear that there are may be lots more people called to AC assuming the top 166 were called and people up into the high 200s are being called now (are there sporadic errors or more widespread?)

If there are widespread errors is there a danger the whole exercise could be brought back to the drawing board in case of challenges to the process.

urban sprawl

Riskymove wrote: »

did they give any specifics on the error?

No details. No revised score or placing. Just a message to say they will be in touch re details of Assessment Centre.

When I say high 200s, I should clarify it's the 200-220 range.

cee_jay

Fenry wrote: »

I have my assessment centre soon - I wish I had more time but there you go.

Interested to hear that there are may be lots more people called to AC assuming the top 166 were called and people up into the high 200s are being called now (are there sporadic errors or more widespread?)

If there are widespread errors is there a danger the whole exercise could be brought back to the drawing board in case of challenges to the process.

I'm in the 166-180 range and haven't been called. So I don't think it is that widespread (I hope!)

VirgilBrigman

Has anyone actually asked PAS what happened?

Uncle P

cee_jay wrote: »

I'm in the 166-180 range and haven't been called. So I don't think it is that widespread (I hope!)

I know someone who was placed in the 300s but is now being called for interview because of the "quality assurance error" or however PAS are describing it. So there must have been some pretty major scoring errors if it turns out they actually did better than you.... Seems to me that this turn of events pretty much calls everyone's placing on the order of merit into question, and even whether there was anyone already called forward who shouldn't have been :eek:

patmagee

Looks like it is time for PAS to issue a message to all candidates regardless of their placing (pass or fail) setting out precisely what happened, what they have done to resolve it, and how/if we were all affected by the error(s). Too much at stake here for many of us to just have this swept under the carpet, especially if, as you allude to Uncle P, that it is quite possible that there are people down in Chapter House right now being interviewed that may not be there on merit.

I also heard from someone else that someone in the top 166 had screenshot the online tests - with hindsight I suppose that was technically quite a simple thing thing to do, not to mention that it is cheating, despite PAS' 'honesty' policy....and they have had two weeks+ to 'practice' for the supervised tests...which may or may not be identical...

Whole thing stinks just a bit....

Nocrac

[quote="patmagee;104610450".

I also heard from someone else that someone in the top 166 had screenshot the online tests - with hindsight I suppose that was technically quite a simple thing thing to do, not to mention that it is cheating, despite PAS' 'honesty' policy....and they have had two weeks+ to 'practice' for the supervised tests...which may or may not be identical.....[/quote]

That's very foolish of them - the supervised tests are never the same. Also, would there not be a screen shot detection system built into the online test?

wopbop22

It was a long day between all three parts. Does anyone know what how much of your final score is based on the presentation and how much is attributed to the interview. Is it 50:50?

Uriel.

wopbop22 wrote: »

It was a long day between all three parts. Does anyone know what how much of your final score is based on the presentation and how much is attributed to the interview. Is it 50:50?

On the last competition I believe it was 75:25 in favour of the interview.

Mama lion

very long drawn out day. Not feeling overly confident but it was experience.
Anyone any idea when results are due out?

Riskymove

Mama lion wrote: »

very long drawn out day. Not feeling overly confident but it was experience.
Anyone any idea when results are due out?

given the pace I imagine a week or two given they finish on Friday

basically by the end of the month I guess

Mama lion

Riskymove wrote: »

Mama lion wrote: »

very long drawn out day. Not feeling overly confident but it was experience.
Anyone any idea when results are due out?

given the pace I imagine a week or two given they finish on Friday

basically by the end of the month I guess

Thanks a mil

lfp

As there was mention of October assessment for the aptitude error I would wonder if the results might be delayed.

Riskymove

lfp wrote: »

As there was mention of October assessment for the aptitude error I would wonder if the results might be delayed.

I suppose that is possible.

Rosen

I heard the results will be out at end of Sept too. Tough day!!

Roseoftralee

I am one of the people called to stage two after the mistake was discovered. There are three days of interviews taking place in early October. I was assured that there would only be one panel so it's difficult to understand how they would be able to provide placings until the second batch of interviews are complete.

Three days of interviews suggests that quite a few extra people are affected by the error (unless there are fewer boards)

It is all a bit of a mess.

Riskymove

Roseoftralee wrote: »

Three days of interviews suggests that quite a few extra people are affected by the error (unless there are fewer boards)

if 3 Boards then up to 70 or so max

urban sprawl

Roseoftralee wrote: »

I am one of the people called to stage two after the mistake was discovered. There are three days of interviews taking place in early October. I was assured that there would only be one panel so it's difficult to understand how they would be able to provide placings until the second batch of interviews are complete.

Three days of interviews suggests that quite a few extra people are affected by the error (unless there are fewer boards)

It is all a bit of a mess.

I was also told first week of October. No sign of revised score or placing, though. Given the eligibility for the PO1 and Counsellor competitions will be on the basis of place in the first batch, I expect results will have to be delayed till after the October assessments.

otwb1

Roseoftralee wrote:

I am one of the people called to stage two after the mistake was discovered. There are three days of interviews taking place in early October. I was assured that there would only be one panel so it's difficult to understand how they would be able to provide placings until the second batch of interviews are complete.

Did they ever say what the error was?

Roseoftralee

otwb1 wrote: »

Did they ever say what the error was?

No but I didn't ask either. I asked for my revised score and place but I was told "that wasn't available yet".

Bowiegal

What's going on at all. Its all a bit of a mess. Very poor of PAS not to communicate the error to all applicants and advise of any revised placing on the order of merit.

Riskymove

Bowiegal wrote: »

What's going on at all. Its all a bit of a mess. Very poor of PAS not to communicate the error to all applicants and advise of any revised placing on the order of merit.

no revision of placing I imagine

They will just call those affected to the assessment day

They called 166 initially but that order doesn't mean anything to the panel. A completely new order of merit will be established based on the interview and assessment.