Competency based assessment/recruitment
Discussion
I'm grumpy about this at the minute because I've never been good at it and I'm trying to do one now, but..... Is competency based applications and interviews really a good way to recruit and promote staff? It's embraced whole heartedly where I work but all I seem to see is it favouring those who like blowing their own trumpet and are good at stretching the truth. It also seems to deter many good candidates. I reckon that this method of selecting people massively favours those who have learnt the competency lingo/tactics and actual vocational ability plays a relatively small part.
Just wondered what those less biased than I think of it? I don't really have any ideas for a better approach, but there must be another way.
Just wondered what those less biased than I think of it? I don't really have any ideas for a better approach, but there must be another way.
It sounds like you are too focussed on the buzzwords and terms rather than actually demonstrating clearly and concisely what you can do and your specific competencies. It is easier said than done, but listen to the question and understand exactly what is being asked. Don't listen for the buzzwords and reach back in your phrasebook to blurt out an answer. You could probably do with being better prepared too. If you say you have the experience then you need to simply match those experiences to the competencies required. Get a load of job descriptions. List what competencies they require. Write down 5 examples of how you can show you successfully show that with a positive outcome.
blueST said:
I guess it's just a case of learning to play the game, but for some reason I just don't seem to be able to get it. All the rediculous bulls
t buzzwords that crop up in the competencies get on my wick too! If I can get past the sift I usually do well in interviews
You need to clearly structure your answers to ensure the interview really understands your ability. The STAR response is still the best way. t buzzwords that crop up in the competencies get on my wick too! If I can get past the sift I usually do well in interviewsQU - Tell me about a time when you managed a project .....
Answer
Situation. The business strategy required us to improve our customer response time
Task. My role was to identify all customer contact points - Phone, email, Web enquiry and track traffic weekly monthly to provide a volume analysis and monitor average response times
Action, I found and implemented monitoring software to produce a KPI dashbard, when I then used to analyse responses, and then I re scheduled the shift patterns of staff to have more resouces in peak periods
Result, in three months we reduced customer response times by an average of 17% and that lead to an increase in sales of 3% and a decline in customers abandoning calls of 15%.
I try to use STAR but my examples are still usually garbage. We don't get asked things like "tell me a time when..." Instead I get a competency name like "partnership working", and are simply asked to write x number of words explaining how I meet the required level. I then have to refer to a book which details every competency along with what behaviours are expected and what levels. I must ensure my answer demonstrates the listed behaviours. Repeat for four of five competencies.
So is your gripe about the use of the application forms? Even if so, the same principles apply. You have to be able to communicate clearly and concisely. Understand the question. It might not even be a question it might be a statement. If you already know the style of questions/statements and the competencies that are to be assessed then you are in as good a position as you can be to present yourself in the best light. The problem sounds like that you cannot get things across in a way that the reader understands. Have somebody else check your responses. You probably think your examples and responses are brilliant but somebody else probably does not understand what you are writing.
blueST said:
I try to use STAR but my examples are still usually garbage. We don't get asked things like "tell me a time when..." Instead I get a competency name like "partnership working", and are simply asked to write x number of words explaining how I meet the required level. I then have to refer to a book which details every competency along with what behaviours are expected and what levels. I must ensure my answer demonstrates the listed behaviours. Repeat for four of five competencies.
At the end of the day, everyone has to jump through the same hoops.I've found it's essential to decipher what information they're actually looking for when they ask a question - often it's not what it seems. Look at the job description, look at the question and think about what answer they want. Then answer with some evidence of experience you have to satisfy their requirements.
I think the point I'm trying to make is that this type of assessment ends up recruiting people who are good at this type assessment and are hopefully adequate for the role. It doesn't seem to actually get you the best candidate for the job, unless the two things happen to coincide in the same person.
I just got to thinking there must be a better way, short of actually trying every candidate in the job.
I just got to thinking there must be a better way, short of actually trying every candidate in the job.
Gassing Station | Jobs & Employment Matters | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff