Administrative Officer 2015 open competition

ezra_pound

ColcloughP wrote: »

But surely a 4 year long BA and/or a masters is a better metric than a 20 minute test. As far as I can tell, the only thing those tests accurately measure is someone's ability to speed-read, which is hardly analogous with intelligence.

I know lots of people in the army and lots of people that have applied for it. I know people who failed the psychometric tests who went on to become very successful in their field and I know people who passed the tests, got into the army and then went on to become very poor officers.

Yeah. They should interview all 7000 applicants for the 100 jobs Max. Very efficient way of doing things.

ColcloughP

ezra_pound wrote: »

Yeah. They should interview all 7000 applicants for the 100 jobs Max. Very efficient way of doing things.

You're just presenting the worst solution to your position. A classic straw man argument.

A far more reasonable and fairer process would be to have a more comprehensive application form which would ask the applicant to give more than just the basics of their qualifications. It should allow applicants to upload a reasonably sized CV with a motivational letter and it should ask them to specifically state why their education and experience would make them a suitable candidate for the job.

People who are successful in this round will be those who not only have the relevant experience but who also sold themselves as candidates by understanding the position and demonstrating how their qualifications match the needs of the job.

So with 3rd sec, for example, people with languages, experience and a master's in trade or international relations who can write a good application form go through while people with biology degrees who can write a good application but not good enough to demonstrate why their knowledge of biology would make them a good diplomat, don't get through.

Sure it'll probably take longer, but when it comes to hiring the best people for the job of who effectively runs the country, I think it'd be worth it.

ezra_pound

ColcloughP wrote: »

You're just presenting the worst solution to your position. A classic straw man argument.

A far more reasonable and fairer process would be to have a more comprehensive application form which would ask the applicant to give more than just the basics of their qualifications. It should allow applicants to upload a reasonably sized CV with a motivational letter and it should ask them to specifically state why their education and experience would make them a suitable candidate for the job.

People who are successful in this round will be those who not only have the relevant experience but who also sold themselves as candidates by understanding the position and demonstrating how their qualifications match the needs of the job.

So with 3rd sec, for example, people with languages, experience and a master's in trade or international relations who can write a good application form go through while people with biology degrees who can write a good application but not good enough to demonstrate why their knowledge of biology would make them a good diplomat, don't get through.

Sure it'll probably take longer, but when it comes to hiring the best people for the job of who effectively runs the country, I think it'd be worth it.

So you ARE saying 7000 or whatever amount of applicants there are should be subjectively shortlisted?

The benefit of this is questionable. For example I have never met a junior diplomat or AO who seemed to me not to have the relevant qualifications or to be in any way unsuitable for the role. In other words the current system works well. If this were not the case perhaps your suggestion should be considered.

Your suggestion is a) inefficient b) weakens the objective and impartial nature of civil service appointments and c) is unnecessary as the current system appoints quality and highly suitably qualified staff.

ColcloughP

ezra_pound wrote: »

So you ARE saying 7000 or whatever amount of applicants there are should be subjectively shortlisted?

The benefit of this is questionable. For example I have never met a junior diplomat or AO who seemed to me not to have the relevant qualifications or to be in any way unsuitable for the role. In other words the current system works well. If this were not the case perhaps your suggestion should be considered.

Your suggestion is a) inefficient b) weakens the objective and impartial nature of civil service appointments and c) is unnecessary as the current system appoints quality and highly suitably qualified staff.

Yes, of course you meet AOs and 3rd Secs who are qualified, but that's only because they're selecting the few qualified applicants out of the few hundred who make it through phase 1, however, there's no way of knowing whether or not there was someone more qualified that didn't make it through phase 1. That's because right now out of the people who make it through phase 1, only a fraction are even qualified enough to ever have gotten the job.

If you processed application forms instead, you would have people going in for an interview, everyone would be qualified. Speaking in terms of raw statistics, surely when you interview a group of 100 people for a job, you are more likely to get the best person for the job if 100% of the interviewees are qualified for the job compared to a mere fraction of 100%.

griffdaddy

The misunderstanding of both what certain university degrees entail and what the role of an AO is in the Civil Service in this thread is staggering. Honestly this thread reads like a conversation you'd hear between week old first years walking down the concourse in UCD. If people make it through the online assessment they'd do well to read up on the role or even try to talk to an actual AO. Suffice to say for the most part nobody will care that you have a degree in accounting or women's studies and the chances of you working in either of those areas would be slim.

keepkeyyellow

Does anyone who did the last AO comp remember how long it took them to get results? Was looking at the CO one and it took 6-7 weeks.

connmel

keepkeyyellow wrote: »

Does anyone who did the last AO comp remember how long it took them to get results? Was looking at the CO one and it took 6-7 weeks.

For the EO competition earlier this year it was 2 weeks later.

daithi84

Just realised i only did 2 out of the 3 tests :-(

There goes my chances

Armaghmagic

Sorry to hear that Daithi.

I see that they are recruiting EOs for the transport authority if you want to throw your hat into that ring?

Check Public Jobs or National Transport Authority website! Dont lose faith yet :-)

fiachr_a

ColcloughP wrote: »

But surely a 4 year long BA and/or a masters is a better metric than a 20 minute test. As far as I can tell, the only thing those tests accurately measure is someone's ability to speed-read, which is hardly analogous with intelligence.

They test how sharp your mind is supposed to be. A lot of very dull minds have degrees.

The_Conductor

fiachr_a wrote: »

They test how sharp your mind is supposed to be. A lot of very dull minds have degrees.

There may very well be a significant additional weighting given to the psychometric/work-skills test this time round (perhaps someone might like PAS to clarify). The numeracy- doesn't count (other than a pass mark being necessary).

Slydice

I think the AP results just started coming out today so once they clear anything from that, they'll probably get onto the results for this competition.

The_Conductor

Slydice wrote: »

I think the AP results just started coming out today so once they clear anything from that, they'll probably get onto the results for this competition.

Getting the HEO out the door is high priority too- its going to be an interesting few weeks ahead...........

Bobby04

Slydice wrote: »

I think the AP results just started coming out today .....

Do you know that for a fact? Curious because that's not what people are saying on the AP thread.

Slydice

Bobby04 wrote: »

Do you know that for a fact? Curious because that's not what people are saying on the AP thread.

Shur... let's give it a week and we'll see

Bobby04

Slydice wrote: »

Shur... let's give it a week and we'll see

griffdaddy

The_Conductor wrote: »

Getting the HEO out the door is high priority too- its going to be an interesting few weeks ahead...........

Is there a HEO competition on the way?

The_Conductor

griffdaddy wrote: »

Is there a HEO competition on the way?

Yup.

griffdaddy

The_Conductor wrote: »

Yup.

Cool hadn't heard that. Any idea if there'll be internal/interdepartmental aspects to it?

The_Conductor

griffdaddy wrote: »

Cool hadn't heard that. Any idea if there'll be internal/interdepartmental aspects to it?

There is.
I don't have much info on it- and I don't want to speculate in the absence.
Apparently some Departments are being laggards and trying to delay the competition- as they have internal panels in place who they haven't placed yet.
There is also an argument over what date the panel ratios will apply from.
PSEU reps should have more info.

Aglomerado

The_Conductor wrote: »

There is.
I don't have much info on it- and I don't want to speculate in the absence.
Apparently some Departments are being laggards and trying to delay the competition- as they have internal panels in place who they haven't placed yet.
There is also an argument over what date the panel ratios will apply from.
PSEU reps should have more info.

There's an internal panel in my Department, and about half of them have been promoted in the last year. They've still to get to me though...

The_Conductor

Aglomerado wrote: »

There's an internal panel in my Department, and about half of them have been promoted in the last year. They've still to get to me though...

The proposal is its to be what will be the first ever external HEO competition with an equal External/Interdepartment/Internal split- 1:1:1 with the ratios to be set dated back to the 1st of July last (same as for the AP panels). If there are internal HEO promotions since the 1st of July- there would have to be commensurate appointments from both the new (to be) constituted external and interdepartmental panels.

Its not just one Department dragging its feet though- apparently, its several.

Riamfada

Hi,

Does anyone know when there will be more information from the department about the administrative officer positions. Did the online exam a few weeks ago and have heard nothing since.

Halpenny

We're expecting AO results before the end of the week. PAS stated this on twitter.

Also there's an active thread on the graduate campaign: http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2057495516

Mac0783

The results are out. :eek:

hard copy

Just got results, ranked in the low 600's but according to the message they're only taking 250 to next stage. Happy enough as thought I might have failed numerical but seems like a very low number to take to 2nd stage

hard copy

Just got results, ranked in the low 600's but according to the message they're only taking 250 to next stage. Happy enough as thought I might have failed numerical but seems like a very low number to take to 2nd stage

(seems to be 2 threads on this which maybe should be merged)

The_Conductor

Congratulations on reaching the qualifying standard- however, we're only calling the top 250 to the next stage..........
Apparently they had just shy of 4000 applicants.

Well done to those of you who are in the top 250.

Its so damn annoying that the numeracy isn't counted- and I really don't think its fair in today's day and age........

jameskil

hard copy wrote: »

Just got results, ranked in the low 600's but according to the message they're only taking 250 to next stage. Happy enough as thought I might have failed numerical but seems like a very low number to take to 2nd stage

well done - in the 1500s here
lost points on the assessment questionnaire. Seems pointless having a numerical exam when its not counted overall. Ill never get called anyway

keepkeyyellow

550s - assessment questionnaire screwed me over the most