simplified recruitment merit selection · recruitment: merit selection elearning course. job...
TRANSCRIPT
WHOLE OF
GOVERNMENT
www.nt.gov.au
Training Manual
SIMPLIFIED RECRUITMENT
MERIT SELECTION
Northern Territory Office of the Commissioner for Public Employment
Public Sector Appeals & Grievance Reviews Unit
Email: [email protected]
Phone: (08) 8999 4129
2 | P a g e
AIM
To assist NTPS selection panels to conduct selection processes that:
o are fair, transparent, efficient and effective
o comply with the merit principle
o select the person who will perform best in the job
o treat applicants courteously and
o accurately set out the reasons for the selection in a way that is clear and
understandable to applicants
LEARNING OUTCOMES
o Know the NTPS Recruitment and Selection Policy
o Understand the role and responsibilities of selection panel members
o Recognise conflicts of interest and learn how to deal with them
o Understand the merit principle and its application
o Understand the importance of work history and demonstrated workplace performance in
assessing applicants’ merit
o Learn practical, best-practice methods for shortlisting and assessing applicants
o Learn skills for obtaining useful reports from referees
o Understand the principle of natural justice and how it applies in selection matters
o Learn how to complete the NTPS Selection Report for Delegate
o Develop skills for writing good selection reports and SOAFAAs (Selection Outcome
Advice for All Applicants)
3 | P a g e
CONTENTS PAGE
Aims and Learning Outcomes 2
Absolute Requirements for NTPS Selection Process – Principles and Procedures 5
NTPS Recruitment and Selection Policy- What is the Merit Principle? 6
6 Quick Steps to Simplified Recruitment 7
Detailed Recruitment and Selection Checklist: Template 8 & 9
Step 1- Form Selection Panel and Create the RTF in eRecruit
Composition of Selection Panels & Role and Responsibilities of Panel Members 10
Conflicts of Interest 11 & 12
Delegate’s Role and responsibilities 13
Dissenting Views 13
Confidentiality 13
Job Descriptions & Selection Criteria 14
NTPS Job Descriptions: Template 15
eRecruit – Step One to Step 3 16 & 17
Step 2 – Shortlist Applicants for Further Consideration
Job Applications - Merit Selection is not an Application Writing Contest 18
Hypotheticals regarding Applications and Shortlisting 19
Shortlisting – Tips for Shortlisting Large Fields 20
How to Document Reasons for Shortlisting 20
Step 3 – Contact Referees of Shortlisted Applicants
Obtaining Referee Reports - Referee ‘Interviews’ 21
Choosing Referees 22
Contacting Referee- Why is it so Important? 22
Contacting non-nominated referees 22
Things you Can and Should Ask Referees 22 & 23
False and misleading Reports from Referees 23
Code of Conduct 23
Malicious Information 24
Natural Justice 24
4 | P a g e
Step 4 – Contact Further Assessments of Applicants if Necessary
Requesting Work Samples and Performance Evaluations 25
Interviews 25 & 26
Step 5 – Make the Decision
How do Selection Criteria and the Merit Principle Interact? 27
Assessing knowledge, skill, qualifications and experience, and potential for future development
27 & 28
Example: Experience and Knowledge vs Skill and Potential 28
Demonstrated Work Performance & Past Work History to assess Suitability 29
Step 6 – Write the Selection Report and SOAFAA
Writing the Selection Report 30
Example Selection Report write-up 31
Dot Point and Narrative Versions of Selection Report write-up 32
Drafting a context statement in explaining basis for selection decision 33
Panel recommendation – selected or not selected 33
Ranking of Applicants & Public Sector Instrument 21 34
Merit Selection is not Performance Feedback 34
SOAFAA - Selection Outcome Advice for All Applicants 34
SOAFAA Template with example 35 & 36
Real Life SOAFAA Example 37 & 38
Tips for Reducing Complaints from Applicants 39
Time Frame for Selection Processes 39
Contact details- Public Sector Appeals & Grievance Reviews and Online information
40
5 | P a g e
ABSOLUTE REQUIREMENTS FOR NTPS SELECTION PROCESS
PRINCIPLES:
Transparency – the process used must be clear and open and demonstrate the basis for
assessment and how suitability for the position will be assessed.
Impartiality – the selection advisory panel and delegate must be fair and open-minded and
base their decision on available evidence of an applicant’s suitability, not personal views or
irrelevant information that is not supported by evidence.
Fairness – the methods of assessment used should be reasonable, applied in a fair and
equal manner to all applicants, and be based on available evidence of applicants’ suitability,
in particular proven work history and performance
Consistency – with the Merit Principle and the Principle of Natural Justice
PROCEDURE:
eRecruit system must be used by all selection panels to log vacancies and complete all
selection processes
NTPS Recruitment and Selection Policy must be complied with in all selection processes
NTPS Job Description template must be used for all vacancies.
NTPS Selection Report for Delegate template must be used for the selection panel’s
recommendation to the Delegate and in finalising the recruitment process.
Selection Outcome Advice for All Applicants (SOAFAA) template must be completed and
is required for finalising the selection process.
6 | P a g e
NTPS RECRUITMENT AND SELECTION POLICY
Purpose
The Northern Territory Public Sector (NTPS) Recruitment and Selection Policy ensures that the most suitable applicants
are selected to vacancies, and that NTPS selection processes are:
Simplified (i.e. not lengthy or unduly process-oriented)
Consistent across NTPS Agencies
Fair and Transparent
Courteous and Respectful of Applicants
Designed to assess applicants’ suitability based on proven capabilities
Informative about the reasons for selecting successful applicants
Context - The Merit Principle
Unless otherwise provided by law, NTPS selection decisions must follow the merit principle, which is that the
employment of a person: “must be based solely on the person’s suitability: to perform the relevant duties; and for
employment in the relevant workplace; and for employment in the Public Sector.” A person’s suitability is to be
determined: “having regard to the person’s knowledge; and skills; and qualifications and experience; and potential for
future development.” (Quotations from the Public Sector Employment and Management Act)
NTPS Recruitment and Selection Policy
To ensure that the merit principle is applied in all selection decisions, and to achieve consistency and best practice in all
selection processes, the NTPS commits to the following selection policy:
1. Job Descriptions will be reviewed prior to advertising to ensure the selection criteria are current; accurate; written in plain English; identify the level of experience, education, qualifications, capabilities and leadership qualities required for the position; and allow consideration of transferable skills and potential for future development.
2. Job Applications will be limited to a one page summary sheet with an attached resume/cv setting out experience, qualification and duties and achievements in previous roles, and contact details for current and other relevant referees.
3. Selection panel members will be impartial, be aware of equal employment opportunity principles, and have a clear understanding of the level, duties and requirements of the vacancy.
4. Selection panel members will, unless there are unusual reasons, have completed either the NTPS eLearning Selection Training course, or other Selection Training offered or approved by OCPE.
5. Selection panels will use eRecruit, Whole of Government uniform selection practices and procedures, and standardised selection report templates.
6. Selection processes will be finalised within a maximum of 6 weeks from the date the position is advertised until notification of the outcome, unless there are exceptional circumstances.
7. All applicants will receive a high standard of candidate care, and be fully informed of the selection outcome, including a summary of the merit of the selected applicant.
8. Managers/Supervisors will take care to prepare for the arrival of new employees and ensure that they are properly welcomed, inducted and oriented to the workplace.
Relevant URLs
eRecruit for use in NTPS Merit Selection: eRecruit
Templates and Guidelines for use in NTPS Merit Selection: Template and Guidelines
eLearning NTPS Merit Selection Training Course: MyLearning
Legislation: Public Sector Employment and Management Act
Craig Allen - Commissioner for Public Employment 1 June 2015
7 | P a g e
6 Quick Steps to Merit Selection
8 | P a g e
PANEL CHECK LIST FOR NTPS RECRUITMENT AND SELECTION
To be used in conjunction with NTPS Selection Templates and reference to relevant sections of the NTPS Recruitment and Selection Policy for more detailed information
An impartial and competent Selection Panel consisting of members who understand the requirements of the
job and are of appropriate level of seniority has been formed.
Possible Conflicts of interest have been discussed and dealt with appropriately.
Panel members have attended approved Merit Selection Training or completed the NTPS Simplified
Recruitment: Merit Selection eLearning course.
Job Description has been reviewed and written up on the Whole of Government JD template.
If a Special Measures Plan is in place, the advertisement states this in the Information Box at the top of the JD
and uses the appropriate special measures wording as per the JD Template.
Obligations to Redeployees have been fulfilled.
The vacancy has been uploaded to be processed through eRecruit. Panels must ensure that the JD matches
the information logged in eRecruit (i.e. job title, primary objective etc.).
Schedule first panel meeting for the day after application period closes
At Panel Meeting 1: Consider applications/ Shortlist / Schedule a time for panel to meet to speak with Referees
If a Special Measures plan applies, the selection panel must first consider only applicants from the identified
SM group (e.g. ATSI or persons with disability). If all vacancies are filled with SM applicants the selection
process is completed. If not, and there are SM applicants who the panel found unsuitable, that finding must be
submitted to OCPE, on the required Template, for approval prior to the panel proceeding to consider any non-
special measures applicants.
Special measures requirements are met and panel can now consider non-SM applications
Shortlist – First step is to discuss and agree on a reasonable basis to be used for deciding which applicants will
be considered further (i.e. Set a standard or benchmark to use for reducing the field of applicants to a
manageable number of those who appear to be most suitable).
Begin to fill in the required Selection Report at the shortlisting stage. Note the total number of applicants, list
the names of the applicants not shortlisted for further consideration and provide a short explanation why the
applicant, or group of applicants, were not shortlisted. E.g. The 18 applicants listed below did not meet the
panel’s shortlisting benchmark of having the desirable tertiary qualifications, and at least 2 years’ working
experience in a related area.
Shortlist front-running applicants – i.e. Start from the top and work down - discuss applicants’ claims to
consider their suitability for the vacancy looking first for those who appear to be the strongest/most outstanding
applicants and identifying who would be at least two relevant referees for those star applicants.
Now consider the merit of the other shortlisted applicants and decide whether further consideration of them will
be warranted if the outcome on investigating the strongest/most outstanding applicants shows their claims to be
verified – i.e. Shortlist even further.
Next, contact referees for the front running applicants, or arrange a suitable time for the panel to ‘interview’
referees either in person or over the telephone. For non-NTPS applicants advise them of the intention to contact
referees, as they may not expect that at this stage.
Provide referees with a copy of the vacancy JD so that the reference provided can be more specific, detailed
and relevant to the vacancy being filled.
The panel may ask referees (or applicants) to provide a copy of the applicant’s current (or past relevant) JD and
any relevant work samples.
What To Do at Panel Meeting 2: Referee ‘Interviews’ regarding Applicants
Ensure all panel members are present for the referee ‘interviews’.
Conduct interviews of referees, in person or on speaker phone starting with the strongest applicants first.
9 | P a g e
(Referee Contact Template available) (Consider continuing to populate the selection report with a summary of
the referee comments.)
Once references for the stronger contenders have been obtained, as a panel, discuss and consider whether
other applicants warrant further consideration. It may be at this point that the panel realises that less
experienced/less qualified applicants are no longer contenders in terms of work history, skills and experience,
and that speaking with referees, even those who may confirm all of the claims by the applicant, will not bring
that applicant to contention.
Examine and consider all of the information obtained about the applicants whose referees you have contacted
and consider if you require anything more. If so, the panel may wish to set up interviews, obtain work samples
or locate other relevant information about the applicants.
Discuss whether Applicant Interviews will be conducted and what would be the purpose of an interview.
Applicant Interviews if conducted should also be an opportunity for applicants to discuss the duties and
responsibilities of the position and get a sense of the job.
If necessary because of negative reports provide applicants with Natural Justice.
As a panel, decide whether further information is required about any of the applicants.
GO TO - ‘Gathering Further Information’ section OR Finalising the Selection section.
Optional: Gathering Further Information
Advise applicants if there will be a significant delay in the process.
Arrange for any further steps which you may wish to conduct to assess merit. For example:
o Applicant interviews with some or all of the applicants (Template available) o Additional referee interviews o Gathering of further work samples, or o Readvertising the position.
If necessary, schedule an additional panel meeting to further discuss applicants and agree on a majority
selection decision.
Finalising the Selection
Panel to compare and decide who is the most suitable applicant having regard to merit
Finalise the selection report via majority decision, (Template Available) including meaningful and specific
comparison and the reasons for the decision.
Complete the SOAFAA (Selection Outcome Advice for all Applicants), to be provided by DCIS to all applicants
notifying them of the outcome of the selection process. Ensure it gives full details of the selected applicant’s
merit, including referee information. The SOAFAA must give enough information that anyone reading it can
easily understand the reasons for the decision.
Give the finalised Selection Report and SOAFAA to the Delegate for approval.
If for any reason the selection report is not approved, redo areas where there were concerns, or contact OCPE
Public Sector Appeals & Grievance Reviews Unit on 8999 4129 for assistance.
Following the selection report’s approval by the delegate: Contact the selected applicant(s) to confirm
acceptance of the job.
Upload to eRecruit: Selection Report for the Delegate, SOAFAA (Selection Outcome Advice for All Applicants
Merit), and Any other relevant information including referee notes, work samples and interview notes.
As a courtesy, advise unsuccessful applicants of the outcome by direct contact wherever it is reasonable
(especially in the case of strong contenders or existing employees of the Agency).
A Successful Merit Selection Process Should Now Have Been Completed!
10 | P a g e
COMPOSITION OF SELECTION PANELS & ROLES RESPONSIBILITIES
Selection panels will generally have 3 or more persons and can include anyone who has
completed approved merit selection training and is able to be fair and impartial.
Panels should have at least one independent person of appropriate seniority (i.e. at the same
level of the Chair).
All panel members should generally:
Be at level or above the job being recruited;
Understand or be capable of understanding the requirements of the job;
Have the skills to participate confidently and knowledgably and make a competent
assessment;
Have no conflict of interest (or be reasonably perceived to have a conflict);
Understand the merit principle, equal employment opportunity principles and the principle of
natural justice.
Each panel member is of equal importance. If a panel member does not believe they can be frank,
open and honest with the Chair and other panel members (for example because of their position or
level or lack of knowledge of the role) that person should not sit on the panel! It is vital that all
members of the selection panel be free to speak their views and to have meaningful input into the
process.
ROLE AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE CHAIR
has an equal vote to that of the other panel members
generally takes the role of “secretariat” i.e. sets meeting times, ensures timeframes are set
and met, oversees selection report and SOAFAA being finalised and signed and filed
is usually the contact person for applicants
does not have to be the person who writes the selection report which should be a group
effort and could be done by the panel together
11 | P a g e
ROLE AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF INDEPENDENT PANEL MEMBERS
has a very important role in ensuring that all applicants are considered without bias and in
providing impartiality
should be of same level as the panel chair and be from an entirely independent work area
or ideally from outside the agency
must take an active role in the process and confidently challenge and discuss information
provided by other panel members who may have prior knowledge of applicants
should not be a referee for any applicant or be a person who could be reasonably seen to
have a pre-existing view of applicants
CONFLICTS OF INTEREST
A conflict of interest occurs when the private interests of a public sector employee interfere with, or
reasonably appear to interfere with, their official duties.
WHAT DOES THE PSEMA SAY?
Performance and Conduct Principle 5F(1)(d) of the PSEMA:
“Public sector officers must avoid actual or apparent conflicts of interest between personal or other
interests and duties as a public sector officer”.
WHY IS PERCEPTION IMPORTANT?
If an applicant reasonably believes that a member of the panel will be biased in their opinion of any
of the applicants, because of private interests such as friendship or family relationship or pressure
from that member’s superior, then this perception of bias will have the same effect on the process
as an actual bias. That is, applicants will not consider it to be a fair and just process (whether it
was or not).
12 | P a g e
WHAT TO DO WHEN A POTENTIAL CONFLICT OF INTEREST IS IDENTIFIED
Where there may be a conflict of interest or a perception of bias, whether real or apparent:
disclose the issue to the full panel
consider whether the person should continue as a panel member
if the panel member is to continue consider actions to mitigate the issue – e.g. adding
another panel member of higher level and clear independence and impartiality, being sure
to obtain independent referee reports
In cases of possible conflict of interest, e.g. family members, close friends, personal disputes with
an applicant - it is preferable and best practice for the panel member to excuse themselves from
the panel.
Merely having relevant and current knowledge – whether unfavourable or favourable – of some
applicants, does not of itself create a conflict of interest. Conflict of interest arises when the panel
member would have a private interest in the outcome, not simply because they have relevant
knowledge of an applicant’s merit.
Hypothetical:
The work unit manager is the direct supervisor of the advertised vacancy.
She supervises 4 applicants, and 2 of those 4 have nominated her as a referee.
One of the applicants has complained that the manager cannot be impartial and fair
because he once accused her of bullying and they had to go to mediation
The manager also supervises the other selection panel members.
a) Is it appropriate for a nominated referee to be a selection panel member?
b) Should this supervisor be on the panel?
c) Is the make-up of this panel suitable?
Notes: _____________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________
13 | P a g e
ROLE AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE DELEGATE
has the delegation to action the panel’s recommendation as an agency decision
must read the selection report carefully and be satisfied that it provides the necessary
information to justify the selection being an informed and fair decision
ensures the selection report and SOAFAA include sufficient detail to adequately explain the
reasons for the selection decision based on the knowledge, skill, qualifications and
experience and potential of the applicants as verified by well-placed referees
is not to be a one-person selection panel and cannot replace the selection panels’
recommendation with his or her own decision.
Note: If a Delegate has concerns with the selection panel’s recommendation, he/she should
discuss this with the panel and send the selection back for the panel to further investigate and
better explain its reasons for their decision. The Delegate is the ultimate decision maker and can
refuse to accept the recommendation of the panel, in which case, if the panel cannot agree on
another recommendation acceptable to the Delegate, the process would be abandoned. The
Delegate does not have the power to simply substitute their own choice.
Any panel members concerned about a Delegate’s actions should bring the concerns to the
attention of the Appeals & Grievance unit of OCPE.
DISSENTING VIEWS
A democratic process applies (majority rules) but if a panel member dissents they should write a
short summary of the reasons why they have a different view. This is important for the Delegate in
consideration of the panel’s recommendation, and also is relevant should there be an appeal or a
grievance about the selection.
CONFIDENTIALITY
Panels should differentiate between the need to maintain confidentiality (which is to protect
applicants’ personal information) and providing reasonable information to applicants about the
selection process, the requirements of the job, the capabilities the panel regards as most important
in the successful applicant, the number of applicants and the reasons for the selection decision.
Applicants are advised, at the point of advertising the vacancy, that, if they are selected,
information about their merit will be provided to non-selected applicants to help them understand
the reason for the selection.
14 | P a g e
JOB DESCRIPTIONS & ERECRUIT
Job Descriptions should be reviewed before advertising to ensure it accurately explains what the
role is, what the main duties and responsibilities are and what skills, experience and capabilities
are sought. The inclusion of a Context Statement is optional, but is useful for giving applicants a
better understanding of the role and which selection criteria will be given particular weight.
SELECTION CRITERIA
To be selected an applicant must meet all essential criteria. Therefore the panel should ensure
that suitable applicants are not ruled out because selection criteria are too specific, restrictive, or
written in such a way that only a person who has actually done the job can meet the criteria.
Essential selection criteria should be as few as possible to accurately reflect what is required to
perform the job well, and, if it is reasonable that knowledge and skill can be learned on the job, the
criterion should reflect this, for example by using phrases such as:
or the demonstrated ability to quickly acquire this knowledge
similar experience in a related area
other skills and knowledge which would be readily transferable
demonstrated experience or directly relevant qualifications
The use of this kind of language allows for consideration of future potential for development in
assessing applicants.
Note: Determination 3 of 2015 on Job Descriptions provides that selection criteria “should
be tied to the duties and responsibilities of the job and allow consideration of transferable
skills and potential for future development” and “should not be written in such a way as to
limit applications from persons outside the NTPS.”
Examples of restrictive / too specific essential criteria:
Thorough operational knowledge of court practices, procedures, legislation and rules and
demonstrated ability to perform the duties of a Registrar of the Local Court/Justice of the
Peace. (AO3 Court Officer)
High level knowledge of staffing recruitment including advertising processing and contract
conditions.
Sound working knowledge of DoE and School Council’s policies, procedures and practices.
Knowledge of the Public Sector Employment and Management Act, Financial Management
Act, Procurement Act and work, health and safety standards.
Knowledge of contemporary issues impacting on the NT Public Sector workforce, and an
understanding of contemporary practices to address these.
15 | P a g e
JOB DESCRIPTION
Agency Work Unit
Job Title Designation
Job Type **Full Time/Part-time/Casual** Duration **ongoing or, if fixed, duration and dates**
Salary **Inserted by DCIS Recruitment** Location
Position Number
RTF Closing **To be inserted by DCIS Recruitment**
Contact **Insert name, telephone number and email of relevant contact person**
Agency Information **Insert link to the agency website**
Information for Applicants
Applications must be limited to a one-page summary sheet and an attached detailed resume/cv. For further information for applicants and example applications: click here
Information about Selected Applicant’s Merit
If you accept this position, a detailed summary of your merit (including work history, experience, qualifications, skills, information from referees, etc.) will be provided to other applicants, to ensure transparency and better understanding of the reasons for the decision. For further information: click here
Special Measures
**Special Measures information must appear here, using one of the three choices below as appropriate, or other wording only if approved by the Commissioner.**
1. **For Priority Consideration and Preference Plans:** The NTPS values diversity and aims for a workforce which is representative of the community we serve. Therefore under an approved Special Measures recruitment plan, ATSI applicants will be given priority consideration and preference in selection for this vacancy if they meet all essential selection criteria and are suitable at the position level. For further information: click here
2. **For Specifically Designated Positions:** The NTPS values diversity and aims for a workforce which is representative of the community we serve. Therefore under an approved Special Measures recruitment plan, this position is specifically designated for ATSI applicants who meet all essential selection criteria and are suitable at the level of the position. For further information: click here
3. Not applicable to this vacancy.
Apply Online Link **Link to the vacancy RTF to be inserted by DCIS Recruitment**
Primary Objective: ***Insert a concise description setting out the primary purpose of the job***
Context Statement: ***This section is optional and can be used to include any information the Agency may think
important; for example, to explain specific or unique features of the relevant duties and workplace, or the work of the
Agency, or to highlight the selection criteria or capabilities which are particularly important in performing the role
effectively***
Key Duties and Responsibilities: ***Insert a brief summary, which can be by way of either a numbered list or a narrative
description, of the key duties and responsibilities of the job, explained in terms that are accurate for the job requirements
and understandable by non-NTPS applicants***
Selection Criteria: ***Insert a list, or a narrative description, setting out experience, qualifications, education, capabilities,
knowledge, skills and personal qualities that are essential to achieve the outcomes of the job to the standard expected for
the level of the position. Non-essential (desirable) criteria may also be listed.
The selection criteria must be written in plain English and clearly and accurately identify the capabilities and leadership
qualities and components of merit that are appropriate to the responsibilities and level of the job. The criteria should be tied
to the duties and responsibilities of the job, and allow consideration of transferable skills and potential for future
development. The JD is not to contain unexplained acronyms, or NTPS specific terms, and is not to be written in a way
that unnecessarily limits the field of applicants, or restricts the vacancy to only NTPS applicants. Examples and tips
and for writing JDs are available on the OCPE website.
Further Information: ***This section, like the Context Statement, is optional. It can include any further information that is
relevant to the vacancy, including non-smoking policies, information about criminal history checks, flexibility in starting
dates, requirements for travel, etc.**
Approved: ***Insert Date of Approval*** ***Insert Name and Title of Approving Delegate***
16 | P a g e
ADVERTISE THE VACANCY - ERECRUIT
STEP ONE
eRecruit can be accessed by clicking on the following link: https://erecruit.nt.gov.au
To create a new advertised vacancy, click on “Create” and select “Advertised”
STEP TWO
Follow the prompts and complete the questions. Any questions you might have while completeing
eRecruit should generally be referered to your HR unit for assistance, for example “Appn Code” or
“Funding Type”.
You will then upload the Job Description for the vacancy ensuring the JD is on the Whole of
Government template.
17 | P a g e
STEP THREE
Once approved, the job vacancy will appear on the NTG Careers in Government page and will
include the JD and a closing date for applications. See below for examples:
DOWNLOADING APPLICANTS APPLYING FOR ROLE
Applicants are only to provide a one page summary and a resume. Applications can be
downloaded from eRecruit as they are received, and all selection panel members should have
access to eRecruit.
18 | P a g e
JOB APPLICATIONS
Applications for NTPS jobs are limited to a maximum one page summary sheet and a detailed
CV/Resume. The purpose of shorter job applications is to:
1. encourage applications;
2. make it more efficient for selection panels to assess applications by limiting the length of
written claims in order to concentrate more on specific detail in resumes; and
3. improve the basis for merit selection by ensuring that panels consider proven work history,
experience and level of past jobs, rather than relying on an applicant’s unverified claims
against individual criteria.
MERIT SELECTION IS NOT AN APPLICATION WRITING CONTEST!
An application’s function is only to bring an applicant to the selection panel's attention. Do not
place too much emphasis on how the job application is written, or use the application itself as
evidence of merit. Rather it should be used primarily as a source of information to help to identify
applicants who warrant further consideration, by paying particular attention to work history,
relevance of duties in former roles, qualifications and education, level attained previously etc.
19 | P a g e
HYPOTHETICAL SCENARIOS – APPLICATIONS
a) Is it appropriate to ask that person to apply?
b) If that person does apply, is it appropriate to accept their late application?
Notes: _____________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________
SHORTLISTING
HOW TO SHORTLIST
When shortlisting start by considering the most important aspect of the job and capabilities you will
place most emphasis on. Then look to information generally found in resumes such as:
Past work history
Previous and current work levels (salary may assist in considering non-NTPS)
Education and qualifications
Experience in similar roles
Previous duties and responsibilities
Existence of appropriate and contactable referees
This should enable you to quickly get the field to a manageable level of people who appear to meet
the criteria to the expected level and warrant further consideration.
Should you shortlist the applicant for further consideration?
Notes: _____________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________
Hypothetical
You are on a panel for a position which has attracted a number of
applicants but the panel has assessed none as suitable.
You are aware of someone you think, based on proven performance, and
would be very good in the role.
Hypothetical
You are the Chair Person and supervisor of the incumbent who has
applied for the vacancy. In your view the incumbent has performed poorly
in the role.
20 | P a g e
TIPS FOR SHORTLISTING LARGE FIELDS
When shortlisting a large number of applicants you will want to initially narrow the applicants and
can set a ‘first bar’ test by using factors such as:
Context statement – do the applicants have relevant experience and work history to suggest they meet the most important criteria to the level required in the context of the job e.g. If the job is working in remote health, should we start by shortlisting only those applicants with experience or specific training for working in remote settings
Desirable criteria – such as education and training, qualifications or specific skills; so, for example, in a large field for a finance related position, you might say we will start by only shortlisting those with the desirable criterion of tertiary qualification in accounting
Level of experience in one area of the essential criteria (for example we will shortlist only applicants who have worked for more than six months at a level commensurate or above the position, considering both external and internal applicants and who have specific experience working in project management)
Experience in directly related area - so for example with 100 nurse applicants you might say – Initially we will only shortlist ones with at least 5 years’ experience in an operating theatre)
IMPORTANT NOTE RE SHORTLISTING: The shortlisting benchmark or bar must be applied fairly and consistently to all applicants. E.g. It is not appropriate for the panel discount some applicants on the basis that “they have not worked for significant periods of time at or near the same level in relevant roles” – if they do not apply this same requirement to all applicants
HOW TO DOCUMENT REASONS FOR NOT SHORTLISTING
APPLICANTS NOT CONSIDERED FURTHER
The selection report template requires you to list the applicants and the reasons why they were or
were not shortlisted for further consideration.
In small fields list the names of applicants and provide a brief explanation against each
name as to why they were not shortlisted.
If a number of applicants were not shortlisted for the same reason these can be collated
together, simply by listing the names, but showing only the one reason.
Provide meaningful reasons as to why the applicants were not shortlisted. One sentence
will suffice. E.g. by referring to the panel’s benchmark for shortlisting: “Applicants 1 to 30
listed below were not shortlisted because they do not have the tertiary qualifications which
were an essential criterion.
21 | P a g e
OBTAINING REFEREE REPORTS – REFEREE ‘INTERVIEWS’
Recommended first step in assessing
shortlisted applicants is to have the panel,
together as a group, contact well placed
referees to obtain as much information as
possible about proven performance.
Always start with the few strongest
‘front-runner’ applicants.
By contacting referees at the start of a selection process the panel will avoid doing
unnecessary interviews of persons whose referee reports do not support their claims made in
resumes or applications.
22 | P a g e
Information obtained by referees in advance can then be used to inform the discussion with
individual applicants (rather than a set of identical questions), should the panel decide to do
follow up interviews.
Most importantly, it becomes very easy to afford natural justice if the referees have already
been contacted because the issues can be raised with applicants at first meeting.
CHOOSING REFEREES
Think about what you want to know about the applicant; this may assist you in finding the right
referee. Referees are not just someone nominated by an applicant to say good things about them -
to be effective, referees must be the persons best-placed to give relevant, current or recent
feedback on an applicant’s merit.
The panel should ensure that the referees provide examples to support any conclusions they make
about the applicant. Not enough for the referee to just say “She is really great and you won’t be
sorry to have her.” Ask the referee for evidence upon which that conclusion is based. This can
include requesting copies of work samples, and of existing written performance reports.
CONTACTING REFEREES – WHY IS IT SO IMPORTANT?
Panels should together contact referees directly, and ensure that, to assist in obtaining meaningful
information, they convey to the referees details about the requirements of the job, the operating
environment, and which aspects of the selection criteria are most important. The panel should then
ask referees for full and accurate information relating to the applicant’s capabilities and, where
referees have supervised more than one of the applicants, seek comparative comment.
CONTACTING NON-NOMINATED REFEREES
There is no rule preventing contact with non-nominated referees, but ensure that there
is a valid reason why that referee can give relevant and current or recent information.
Best practice is to advise applicants you will be contacting referees and with private
sector applicants advise them first of the intention to contact non-nominated referees.
Sometimes non-nominated referees are the source with the most current and relevant
information about the person’s ability to perform the job.
Natural justice must be applied with all referee information (not just non-nominated referees) –
but only arises if significantly adverse information is obtained which might cause you to not
select an otherwise front-runner applicant.
A nominated referee should also always be contacted if a non-nominated referee has been –
although appropriate weight must be given to the report based on relevance.
THINGS YOU CAN AND SHOULD ASK REFEREES
When speaking to referees, make sure that any information given is detailed and supported by
real workplace examples i.e. not just generic statements that a person is good at what they do, a
strategic thinker, an effective leader etc. Interview the referees carefully, just as you would have
done in an interview of the applicant.
23 | P a g e
Examples of questions that you might want to ask:
What is your level and your role in relation to the applicant?
Is there another person in addition to you, such as your supervisor for example, who is well-placed to provide useful information about this applicant?
At what level has the applicant been employed, for how long, any periods acting higher duties?
What are the applicant’s responsibilities and functions in the role in which you supervised them? (Recommended that you obtain copies of the applicant’s current job description and carefully explore the duties and responsibilities.)
Has the applicant managed staff – how many, with what degree of responsibility?
Can you give some examples demonstrating how the applicant works: as a leader / team player / following direction from numerous superiors / with minimal supervision / strategically / with diverse groups of persons.
What is their productivity level, work ethic, understanding of confidentiality etc?
Would you hire them again for this particular vacancy given that we are seeking someone with particular skill in ______?
Would you describe them as someone with potential, and if so why?
Are there any concerns e.g. ability to work in a team, disciplinary issues? What is the basis for these concerns and how were they dealt with? Are there other potential referees with information about the issues?
Have there been performance issues and if so what were they and what was the outcome if there was a performance management process?
SEEK SPECIFIC COMPARISON BETWEEN APPLICANTS:
It is useful to ask a referee who supervises several of the applicants to compare their suitability for
the role. This is more meaningful than having individual reports about each applicant that the panel
then has to attempt to use in comparing applicants. Because comparison is useful, if the referees
only know one applicant and none of the others you can give them a basis for comparison: for
example “We have a strong field of applicants some of whom have acted in the vacancy and
achieved very good results. Is there anything about this applicant that would suggest they are
competitive to someone like that?”
FALSE AND MISLEADING REPORTS FROM REFEREES
Code of Conduct 22.1 requires NTPS employees to provide frank and accurate reports on other
staff, and those outside the Public Servants if asked. NTPS employees should be aware that
breaching the Code of Conduct may result in formal disciplinary proceedings.
CODE OF CONDUCT – 22.1 “WHEN REQUIRED TO GIVE REFERENCES FOR, OR MAKE REPORTS ON, OTHER NORTHERN TERRITORY PUBLIC SECTOR OFFICERS OR ON PERSONS OUTSIDE OF THE NORTHERN TERRITORY PUBLIC SECTOR, A PUBLIC SECTOR OFFICERS HAS A DUTY TO PROVIDE FRANK AND ACCURATE COMMENT. A PUBLIC SECTOR OFFICER MUST TAKE CARE TO AVOID MAKING STATEMENTS WHICH COULD BE REGARDED AS MALICIOUS.”
24 | P a g e
What is malicious information?
Situations in which a report potentially could be regarded as malicious include:
a) where a Public Sector Officer knowingly includes false or doubtful allegations in a report;
b) where the language of the report is excessively strong or weak, in a manner which might
unreasonably mislead the recipient of the report or misrepresent the Public Sector Officer
who is the subject of the report; and
c) where unnecessary material is deliberately introduced or where omissions are
deliberately made so as to create a misleading impression.
Note: Section 64A of the Act provides protection from legal proceedings for persons who, in
good faith, provide a report about the work that has been or is being or is to be performed by
an employee
If a selection panel (or new employer) has a genuine belief that a false or misleading referee report
was provided by an NTPS employee, which directly resulted in the hiring of that applicant over
another, the selection panel should bring the matter to the attention of the referee’s CEO and the
Commissioner for Public Employment, asserting a breach of the Code of the Conduct. It will then
be for the CEO and the Commissioner for Public Employment to determine appropriate action.
NATURAL JUSTICE IN SELECTION MATTERS – EMPLOYMENT INSTUCTION 3
Natural justice in selection matters arises in circumstances where a referee provides seriously
adverse comment about an applicant which information, if unrefuted, would result in an
otherwise most suitable applicant being rejected. In such cases the applicant is entitled to be
made aware of that information and to have a reasonable right of reply including providing names
of other referees to be contacted. The information provided by the applicant must be considered
impartially by the panel before a decision is made about the applicant.
Example of natural justice in a selection process:
In response to Applicant B’s ability to “work all shifts to meet the needs of the department” which is one of the most
important of the selection criteria, the referee said that although Applicant B was a very careful and competent
worker, concerns had been raised regarding her tardiness and absenteeism. Mr X said Applicant B often failed to
attend work, without warning or reason after the fact. He said this was starting to cause difficulties in the workplace
as her team mates resent having to work understaffed.
Mr X said he was unaware of any significant illness stating that it appears she just fails to attend. He said Applicant
B had exhausted all of her sick days and rec leave within 6 months of commencing in the role, and is now unpaid
when she fails to attend work. On the basis of Applicant B’s strong work history as a cleaner and the positive
remarks from Mr X about her actual work performance, the selection panel provided Applicant B an opportunity to
address the issue of her absenteeism prior to making a decision regarding the outcome of the selection process.
Applicant B spoke with the panel on 5 January 2015. Applicant B was unable to address why she was regularly
absent from the workplace, stating that sometimes she “just can’t come to work”. Applicant B agreed that she did
not provide her employer with reasons regarding her absenteeism. The selection panel advised Applicant B that of
all the selection criteria, the ability to “work all shifts to meet the needs of the department” was the most important
at the PH5 level as staff generally worked alone to complete tasks.
Although further opportunities were offered to Applicant B to address the adverse comments of her referee, she
was unable to provide an explanation as to her inability to attend work regularly.
25 | P a g e
STEP 4 – FURTHER ASSESSMENT
REQUESTING WORK SAMPLES AND PERFORMANCE EVALUATIONS
Actual samples of applicant’s work product can be very useful as an assessment tool and panels
should feel free to request them from either applicants themselves and/or referees.
As the NTPS puts in place Performance Development Plans of various types, those regular written
reports, tied closely to the Capability and Leadership Framework may become an important source
to inform selection processes.
INTERVIEWS
It is not mandatory to conduct Interviews as a part of NTPS selection processes
If the panel understands that it is possible to make a merit based selection without
conducting an interview, perhaps they will be more likely to remember that they should not
place too much reliance on interview performance.
26 | P a g e
Don’t Interview if you don’t have to
The decision to interview (or not) needs to be a discussion between panel members. It
should not be an automatic next step after applications or referee checks.
Remember: An interview is at most a possible tool to gather some information. Do you need
more information of that sort? Don’t interview if you don’t need to e.g. existing employees,
incumbents, applicants whose capabilities are well known.
Ask yourself “why are we asking this, does it measure actual merit or just the ability to
answer questions?”
It is not a Requirement to ask all the Applicants the same Questions
The fact that this myth is so prevalent suggests that interviews might have ceased to be a
way to find out useful information from an applicant, and instead moved to a “right or wrong
answer” approach.
Panels should feel free to ask anything they want that will help them to better assess the
actual merit of the particular candidate and give the applicant a better chance of providing
useful information.
Things to Consider
Interviews of applicants should be used to discuss issues specific to particular applicants, not
to ask a series of identical questions to then ‘rate’ the applicants on the quality of their
answers.
Interviews should be a two way street. Applicants should be encouraged to be involved in
discussion with the panel about themselves, and the role, and the organisation. Perhaps, if
the panel wants meaningful answers, not affected by nervousness, consider telling the
candidates well in advance, perhaps some days before, exactly what the panel is interested
in hearing about (might save many a sleepless night for applicants).
Also consider that questions you might have once thought suitable to ask applicants would
be very good ones to ask a referee e.g. “How does X cope with and manage workplace
situations when there is a heavy workload and conflicting priorities?”
An interview is just a tool to gather more information if you need it! Don’t
do it automatically and if you do interview, don’t do it by giving a set of
identical questions and scoring the answers.
27 | P a g e
HOW DO SELECTION CRITERIA AND THE MERIT PRINCIPLE INTERACT?
It is mandatory that a selected applicant must meet all the essential selection criteria - But:
Meeting the essential selection criteria does not of itself equate to merit for a position
Generally, all shortlisted applicants will meet the selection criteria.
The test in merit selection is not just who meets criteria, but is who is the most suitable, having
regard to the components of merit: knowledge, skill, qualifications and experience, and
potential.
ASSESSING KNOWLEDGE, SKILL, QUALIFICATIONS, EXPERIENCE AND
POTENTIAL FOR FUTURE DEVELOPMENT
The components of merit do not have to be given equal weight – For example there will be
some instances in which existing knowledge and experience are most important, others where it
better suits the needs of the workplace to take someone less experienced but more skilled or with
the qualifications and proven potential to soon surpass the skill level of other more knowledgeable
and experienced applicants.
Knowledge refers to what an applicant already knows relevant to the role, for example: facts,
information, the theoretical or practical understanding of a subject and how the work is to be
performed.
The merit principle is that the employment of a person as an employee, or the promotion or transfer of an employee, under the PSEMA must be based solely on the person's suitability:
to perform the relevant duties; and
for employment in the relevant workplace; and
for employment in the Public Sector.
A person's suitability is to be determined having regard to the person's:
knowledge; and
skills; and
qualifications and experience; and
potential for future development
potential for future development
28 | P a g e
Skill is a broad term and can relate to any skill critical to perform the role. Skills can include
interpersonal skills, ability to take reasonable direction, team playing skills, customer service skills,
comply with the NTPS code of conduct and can also include clear communication skills, written
skills, management skills or leadership skills. For applicants applying for technical and professional
based roles, skills will be specific to the role such as patient care, policy development, mediation
skills or IT programming.
Qualifications and Experience – These two factors of merit are contained in the definition of merit
as one category – in recognition of the fact that sometimes qualifications can be as valuable to
capabilities as experience, or visa versa. It is for panels to assess, in the context of the role to be
filled, how much weight should be given to each of these factors. Experience alone is not a
sufficient basis for selection (or otherwise seniority would suffice as a test of merit). However it is
reasonable at higher levels to require successful applicants to have had the benefit of some
relevant experience.
Potential for Future Development - The weight to give potential is a judgement decision based on
whether or not someone is sought for that particular role who may be capable of developing
beyond expectations and offering more than is required.
Decisions about potential must be supported by evidence. Potential is more than just a “feeling
about someone” or because they have presented “dynamically and passionately” at an interview.
Potential is indicated by descriptions of capabilities such as “absorbs knowledge like a sponge”,
“was able, within a very short time, to be one of our most skilful workers”, “innovative”, “flexible and
able to achieve good outcomes”, “intelligent and intuitive”. For example, if referees provided
evidence that the applicant: had put in place strategies to improve team moral, mainstreamed
policies, introduced new databases, increased staff retention by 70%, re-written a training manual,
then it would be reasonable to assume that the applicant’s potential to achieve similar outcomes in
the new workplace is likely.
If potential for future development is one of the factors that weight is given to by a selection panel
in relation to one applicant, the potential of other applicants must be given similar consideration. In
other words, potential cannot be the basis for hiring an applicant who is lesser skilled, experienced
or knowledgeable, unless there is a good basis for concluding that the applicant with ‘potential’ will
soon be superior to the another applicant, whose demonstrated performance to date suggests that
they do not have the potential to go on improving.
EXPERIENCE AND KNOWLEDGE VS SKILL AND POTENTIAL?
Real Life Example: A selection panel was filling an AO3 level administrative position which for the
previous 9 months had been filled by an incumbent already at the AO3 level with over ten years’
experience in the NTPS. Reports of the incumbent’s work performance in the vacancy were that
she had performed capably with no performance issues, but there was nothing to suggest after 9
months in the job that she had more to offer to the role than the basic requirements.
There was another applicant who had virtually no work experience, due to having just completed
tertiary studies. This applicant’s referees, academic record and general history (e.g. - successfully
running a charitable fund raising drive including designing the website, using social media, and
working closely with a large group of stakeholders), confirmed that she had a strong work ethic,
high level of intelligence, ability to learn quickly, outstanding computer and technological skills,
29 | P a g e
exceptional organisational skills, and an ability to relate very well to diverse groups. These were all
attributes that would bring extra value to the job and the workplace, and the selection panel
believed demonstrated tremendous potential.
The panel chose to put more weight on that applicant’s proven and demonstrated skill and
potential, rather than on the incumbent’s experience and existing knowledge of the job. This
decision was found on review to be a supportable application of the merit principle.
DEMONSTRATED WORK PERFORMANCE & PAST WORK HISTORY TO ASSESS
MERIT
The best source for assessment of applicants should be their known and demonstrated work
performance.
Knowing about past performance can alert you to both strengths and weaknesses that may
not be evident or accurate based on an application and / or interview.
Any employee should be able to rely on the fact that their day-to-day performance on the
job will count towards their achieving promotion.
If the main source for assessing the merit of applicants is to be their demonstrated work
performance, then work samples and history, and referee reports become very important in
the selection process.
Referee reports should be one of the most useful, reliable and valuable tools in merit
selection.
By knowing what information to ask for, panels can add tremendous value to the assessment
process.
30 | P a g e
WRITING THE SELECTION REPORT
IT’S TIME TO REPORT TO THE DELEGATE INFORMATION ABOUT THE
APPLICANTS, THE SELECTION PROCESS AND THE REASONS WHY THE PANEL
CHOSE THE APPLICANT THEY DID!
It’s not as hard as you think! Provide the Delegate the names of all applicants, with a short note as
to reasons for not shortlisting. For applicants that warranted further consideration the Delegate will
want a short, summary of their claims – e.g. work experience, level, qualifications, etc. and notes of
the referee information for those who had referees contacted. Remember, this can be written in dot
points or narrative form. Focus on the applicants’, knowledge, skill, qualifications, experience and
potential for future development. Then in the comparison section provide the Delegate with the
reasons why the successful applicant was preferred over the other applicants, with particular
reference their skill and outstanding capabilities reports.
31 | P a g e
Here’s an example for a SAO1 position:
In the section describing her claims and referee information:
Y is a nominal AO7 with the NT Ombudsman. She is currently acting in an AO7 position, on a 12
month fixed term contract.
Y has completed two periods of HDA at the SAO1 and SAO2 level between 2012 and 2014. One of
the HDA opportunities was in the role of Director within this unit; for a period of 3 months in 2014
(SAO2).
Y has a Bachelor of Business, is LEADR (Mediation) Trained and is currently completing her
Graduate Diploma in Management at CDU.
In relation to Criterion 2: extensive experience, knowledge and skill in effective handling and
resolution of complaints within a statutory framework - the panel notes that Y has more than 10
years’ experience in the area of complaint handling within a statutory environment, previously having
worked at the NT Anti-Discrimination Commission from 2008-2010 in the role of AO7 Conciliation
Officer and more recently at the NT Ombudsman from 2010 until 2013 in the role of Manager,
Complaints.
Her knowledge of statutory complaint environments is considerable.
Prior to her arrival in Darwin, Y was employed as a Senior Investigation/Conciliation Officer with the
Australia Human Rights Commission (Sydney) where she was responsible for the investigation and
conciliation of race and disability discrimination complaints.
In relation to Criterion 3: high level management experience including strong conflict resolution skills
and the management of stakeholders and clients - Y has 5 years leadership and management
experience.
Y’s referees included the Director of the unit, who has supervised her for 10 months, and also
another senior public servant and stakeholder Mr Manager who has known Y for more than 2 years
and has dealt with her in her current capacity and also in her management role at NT Ombudsman.
The Director described Y’s leadership style as ‘natural, friendly and involved’. She confirmed that
she is a very skilled mediator and has recently, at the request of agencies, handled several delicate
and complex matters achieving excellent outcomes.
The Director said she sought feedback from staff, following Y’s HDA as Director for 3 months and
said staff were very complimentary of Y’s attention to detail, open and engaged manner and her
ability to communicate with influence and engage staff in new projects.
Mr Manager said Y was a skilled complaint handler and mediator and said that in his view she has
tremendous potential to progress to higher levels, due to her intelligence, skill, and demonstrated
ability.
Mr Manager also said Y understood the importance of strong relationships with stakeholders and
that this was evident in her dealings with agency staff and was well received.
In the Comparative Section:
Context: It was essential that the successful applicant meet all of the essential selection criteria to a high
standard however particular weight was placed on the applicants’ ability to meet criteria 2 and 3 as these
were the most important of the 8 criteria. On this basis the recommended applicant is Y who is a
standout applicant, both with relevant past work experience, and qualifications. While other applicants, in
particular Mr X, had skills and work history of interest to the panel and the unit, none were of the same
calibre with respect to direct workplace experience, years of management and leadership experience,
periods of time acting at or above the level, and potential for future growth, as confirmed from referees
who also advised that she works to a very high capability level with outstanding skills.
32 | P a g e
Narrative Based Selection Report Dot Point Based Selection Report
J is a nominal P1 Welfare Officer but has been acting on higher duties, in the role of Principal Officer (P3) since November 2014 (i.e. 6 months to date). She has a Bachelor of Social Science, a Cert III in Conflict Resolution and is currently completing her studies in Cert IV Public Sector Management. J’s past work experience includes Senior Case Manager with the Department of Children and Families, a role she held for 3 years between 2009-2012. J commenced her employment with the Department of Correctional Services in 2012 as a P1 Welfare Officer. She has had numerous acting opportunities at the P2 and P3 level and it is widely accepted among her peers and management that she works to the P2 level on a daily basis and her case load reflects this. Agency advises that there are minimal roles at the P2/P3 level and this is the reason for her delayed promotion. J’s work history has required her to have and utilise very good communication skills both oral and written, and she has specific experience dealing with ethnically diverse clients and also those with challenging behaviours including violence and mental health issues.
Referees for J included the Panel Chair Mr L who is currently managing J at the P3 level and Panel member Ms E who manages all the P1 and P2 Welfare Officers within the Unit. The other panel member, Superintendent L, has also had the opportunity to observe and interact with J while performing duties at the P2 and P3 level. All three referees agree that J is excellent at her job, has strong conflict resolution skills, superior knowledge of the agency guidelines and protocols, consistently demonstrates exactly the qualities sought in the role – in particular the ability to prioritise a very heavy workload with accurate attention to detail, comprehends personal safety issues, and works with limited supervision. Mr L and Ms E stated that they were especially impressed with J’s written skills which she utilises in handling sensitive matters with difficult clients. The Superintendent stated that in his view, the P3 work load, was at times, unrelenting and that J had coped remarkably well with the constant pressure of managing staff and clients, with limited direction and assistance, during a particularly busy period. He also said he was impressed with her ability to secure her place within the management team in such a short time period.
J truly fits the description of a ‘well-performing
incumbent’ and long serving agency employee with
potential for future development. She is strongly
recommended by both referees, and also by the
other panel member based on her knowledge of the
Jenna’s most recent performance.
Nominal P1 Has performed higher duties at P2 & P3 level Currently incumbent, acting on higher duties at
the P3 level (since November 2014)
Qualifications
Bachelor of Social Science Cert III in Conflict Resolution Cert IV Public Sector Management (not
completed)
Work experience includes
Senior Case Manager with the Department of Children and Families (2009-2012)
Commenced with Department of Correctional Services in 2012 as a P1 Welfare Officer.
Higher duties as P2 Senior Welfare Officer Higher duties as P3 Principal Officer
Referees
Panel Chair Mr L currently manages J in her role as Principal Officer (P3)
Panel member Ms E manages all P1 and P2 Welfare Officers within the Unit and managed Jenna also.
Panel member Superintendent L, has observed J while performing duties at the P2 and P3 level.
All three referees agree that J has the following skills:
Exceptional oral communication skills and has specific experience dealing with diverse and challenging clients;
Demonstrated excellence as a Welfare Officer , Snr Welfare Officer and now in the role as Principal Officer;
Strong conflict resolution skills; Superior knowledge of agency guidelines and
protocols; Consistently demonstrates ability to manage
heavy workloads; Accurate attention to detail and ability to work
safely; Ability to work with limited supervision; Superior written skills;
The superintended described the P3 work load as “unrelenting” and said Jenna had coped remarkably well with this constant pressure. He also said J had secured her place in the management team within a relatively short period.
Referees agreed that J was ‘well-performing incumbent’ and an employee with great potential.
33 | P a g e
DRAFTING A CONTEXT STATEMENT FOR USE IN SELECTION REPORT
Summary of Most Important Capabilities Sought
EXAMPLES:
This vacancy is a busy workplace with emphasis on customer service, often with challenging
clientele. For this reason the panel gave particular weight to proven experience and skill
working in similar environments, and evidence of applicants’ ability to communicate well with
diverse groups of people and difficult customers.
The panel was aware that this workplace is soon to undergo a major change in structure and
functions and therefore put more weight on applicants’ proven ability to effectively manage
change and achieve good results when leading a team through transition periods.
This job requires high level technical skills and so the panel’s emphasis was on technical
knowledge, education, qualifications and proven ability to provide technical expertise.
This work unit intends to develop a new program offering mediation and conflict resolution
services and therefore put extra weight on applicants’ proven experience and skill in
alternative dispute resolution.
The workplace already has a number of highly knowledgeable and experienced employees
who will be able to impart their knowledge to the successful applicant. Therefore the panel
decided to place more emphasis on skill, potential and proven innovation with the ability to
develop solutions to problems through new approaches.
PANEL RECOMMENDATION – SELECTED OR SUITABLE BUT NOT SELECTED
Applicants Are Not Rated as Unsuitable
The selection panel should bear in mind that the purpose of a selection process is to select the
persons who are best for the job, not to rank all of the applicants in order. It is not necessary to rate
applicants as “unsuitable” (which can have a very demoralising effect on employees).
Use the following terms:
Selected – “The Panel determined that X is the most suitable candidate and recommends
his / her selection”.
Suitable but Not Selected – “Although not the most suitable in this field Y is
recommended for selection should this or an identical vacancy become available within 6
months.”
Not Selected - For other applicants just state: “Not Selected”, i.e. no need to rank or rate
them as suitable or unsuitable.
34 | P a g e
RANKING OF APPLICANTS / PUBLIC SECTOR INSTRUMENT 21
Public Sector Instrument 21 allows the option for other suitable applicants to be placed in the same
position or an identical one, if a vacancy arises within six months. For this reason, panel could, if
they identify other suitable applicants, note this fact. Other than for this reason there is no need to
rank or rate other applicants at all, beyond recording that they are not the successful applicant on
this occasion.
IT IS NOT THE PANEL’S JOB TO GIVE PERFORMANCE FEEDBACK
The panel’s role is to select the best applicant, not to become the performance manager of
every single applicant. Reports on unsuccessful applicants are not required because
information provided is about the merit of the selected applicant and why they are superior.
If the decision is based on a clearly superior applicant being the obvious front runner, and not
on flaws or shortcomings in the unsuccessful applicant, there is not a natural justice issue
since the decision is not because of the adverse information, but is because evidence is that
another applicant is better.
SOAFAA–SELECTION OUTCOME ADVICE FOR ALL APPLICANTS
The panel also has the very important task to complete the SOAFAA which is a detailed summary
of the selected applicant’s merit and the reason for the selection.
The SOAFAA is a separate document for use by DCIS Recruitment to attach to the Notification
letters sent to all applicants telling them who was selected.
The purpose of the SOAFAA is to allow all applicants to conduct a self-evaluation of their merit by
comparison to the selected applicant, rather than requiring panels to provide detailed individual
evaluations to each applicant.
This means that, instead of panels completing extensive write-ups telling applicants all about
themselves (which is of little assistance in helping them to understand why they weren’t selected),
all applicants are instead be given details, for self-comparison purposes, about the selected
applicant. This will allow them to see why that person was chosen as most suitable and then, by
extension, for them to better understand why they were not the most suitable in comparison. All
applicants are advised, both on the JD and on the NT Jobs website, that, if selected, detailed
information about their merit will be provided to all other applicants.
35 | P a g e
SELECTION OUTCOME ADVICE FOR ALL APPLICANTS
Paste over the table below with the first five lines of the JD Information for this vacancy
Agency Work Unit
Job Title Designation
Job Type Duration
Salary Location
Position Number RTF Closing
To: ALL APPLICANTS Thank you for your interest in this position. The applicant(s) selected as most suitable is (are) Insert selected applicant’s name or names. To assist you in understanding the reasons for the selection decision, provided below is a summary of the selected applicant’s merit, that is, overall suitability for the relevant vacancy having regard to knowledge, skill, qualifications and experience, and potential for development. Information about the selected applicant’s merit is provided to all applicants to ensure transparency in the process, and allow applicants to conduct a ‘self-comparison’ between themselves and the selected applicant. It is intended that, after considering the information about the selected applicant’s merit, you will fully understand the reasons for the selection decision. However, if you would like to obtain more information or further discuss the reasons for the selection decision, you may also contact the panel chair: Insert panel chair’s name and phone number.
SUMMARY OF THE SELECTED APPLICANT’S MERIT
Insert here a summary of the merit of the selected applicant including details of:
experience, work history including level
education and other qualifications
capabilities and skill
detailed summary of information provided by relevant referees attesting to the merit of the selected applicant
who the referees were, i.e. job title, length of time as supervisors, working relationship and include name of the referee if they are an NTPS employee
Include sufficient information that anyone reading the report will be easily able to understand the basis for the decision and the conclusion that the applicant is the most suitable applicant, and do not include negative information. TIP: CUT AND PASTE THE INFORMATION ABOUT THIS APPLICANT FROM THE SELECTION REPORT. THIS SHOULD PROVIDE ALL DETAILS NEEDED FOR THE SOAFAA (SELECTION OUTCOME ADVICE FOR ALL APPLICANTS) TO AVOID THE PANEL HAVING TO WRITE A SEPARATE REPORT. NOTE: DELETE ANY NEGATIVE INFORMATION (e.g. CRIMINAL HISTORY) OR ADVERSE COMMENTS FROM REFEREES AS THIS TYPE OF INFORMATION MUST NOT APPEAR IN THE SOAFAA
36 | P a g e
THE BELOW FICTIONAL EXAMPLE SOAFAA FOR AN AO5 COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT OFFICER POSITION IS TO BE REPLACED WITH THE PANEL’S SOAFAA ABOUT THE SELECTED APPLICANT: The selected applicant is X who has a Bachelor degree in Communications granted from Monash University in 2002 and had worked for over 8 years in public relations roles in the private sector, before he was employed in this work unit in July 2013. He commenced at the AO4 level Support Officer role, and since July 2015 has been acting on higher duties performing all of the duties and responsibilities of the AO5 Community Engagement position. In this role X has produced public information in the NTG environment, specifically the production of high quality newsletters, web content and safety bulletins, and has been responsible for developing and launching new initiatives and working directly with volunteers. His work in the unit has provided him with experience in project monitoring and reporting, extensive knowledge of the NTG WH&S requirements and case management, and required him to perform all aspects of the role of Community Engagement officer as required in this position. Four referees provided information about X’s performance in the role. These were: the Executive Director who is X’s direct supervisor; the Captain of Livingston Volunteer Brigade who is also a member of the Volunteer Consultative Committee; the Captain of Alice Springs Volunteer Brigade; and the panel chair, a Senior Policy Officer in the unit, who has had the opportunity to closely observe X’s performance over the past 20 months. All of the referees recommended X very highly, citing many examples of his initiative, enthusiasm, potential, high level of skill and outstanding accomplishments in carrying out the role of Community Engagement Officer. Examples included his work on designing and launching a newsletter; totally revamping the website; taking a key role in establishing and liaising effectively with the Volunteer Consultative Committee; and in providing direct assistance to the Brigades in things such as preparing grant applications, and in being available and approachable to provide competent advice. One referee mentioned that X initially had some problems in his communication manner with ‘difficult’ clients, but that following coaching and mentoring there has been great improvement. Note: The information in red appeared in the Selection Report to the Delegate but would be removed from the SOAFAA because it is negative information about the selected applicant. When giving referee reports, both of the Brigade Captains could not speak highly enough of the changes that have occurred since X took over the Community Engagement role – describing him as “a breath of fresh air”, “doing the work of ten people”, “of invaluable assistance”, “instrumental in implementing open lines of communication with volunteers” and “amazing.” X’s direct supervisor, as well as reinforcing the view of these independent referees, also detailed X‘s capabilities in such things as drafting documents including Ministerials, and in his ability to work effectively in a very busy and stressful environment with minimal supervision. He stated X has excellent communication skills and interpersonal strengths which he has amply demonstrated in working directly with the volunteer groups, and he confirmed that X has already achieved a very high level of success in that area, with very positive engagement with those important stakeholders. His opinion is that X operates already at the expected level of capability for an AO5 officer or above, and that his own ability to deliver the work of the unit would be significantly impaired if X was not in the role. This high opinion of X’s capabilities and skill was confirmed by the panel chair, who has also supervised X while acting in the position. X has demonstrated through his performance over a significant period, as verified by four well-placed referees, that he is an outstanding applicant who is highly suitable.
___________________ ___________________ ___________________ ***Panel Chair Name*** ***Panel Member Name*** ***Panel Member Name*** ***Job Title*** ***Job Title*** ***Job Title***
37 | P a g e
TIPS FOR REDUCING COMPLAINTS FROM APPLICANTS
Be Courteous and Think About the Applicants’ Feelings – High Standard of Candidate Care
Selection panels should let applicants know what is going on in the selection process. Remember
that other than what they hear from the panel, the only communication applicants receive is the
final letter from eRecruit advising them of the outcome, and the SOAFAA.
If the selection process you are involved in takes a long time (i.e. more than 4 weeks) those
applicants have no idea what is occurring and are left in limbo. This sometimes leads to good
applicants taking jobs elsewhere because they have no idea they are even being considered. It
also can lead to distress when in-house applicants get nothing more than a curt letter from
eRecruit advising them that they were unsuccessful, rather than the courtesy of an explanation
from the selection panel.
If you have a small field of applicants consider phoning them personally to let them know you
appreciate their having applied, or in larger fields email applicants to keep them apprised. Also
consider a call or an email about the outcome, rather than leaving that solely to eRecruit.
There is often a delay between advising eRecruit and notification letters being sent. Be careful of
creating a situation where an applicant is selected and announced prior to the unsuccessful
applicant learning of the outcome. It is upsetting to someone who has applied for a job to have it
suddenly announced without warning that another person has won it.
TIME FRAME FOR SELECTION PROCESSES
The panel chair should ensure that all panel members are advised to review and consider
applications as they are received, and to advise the panel chair if they identify referees they might
wish to contact as the first step in the assessment process. In this way the panel chair can arrange
to have potential referees ready to speak to the panel when the panel first meets, which should
ideally be in the week after advertising closes.
By planning well during the application period, and having arrangements in place to begin contact
with referees at the panel’s first meeting, the selection panel may be able to complete selection
processes within two weeks or less from the date of closing of applications.
SELECTION PROCESSES WILL BE FINALISED WITHIN A MAXIMUM OF 6 WEEKS
FROM THE DATE THE POSITION IS ADVERTISED UNTIL NOTIFICATION OF THE
OUTCOME, UNLESS THERE ARE EXCEPTIONAL CIRCUMSTANCES.
38 | P a g e
WHAT IF AN APPLICANT IS UNSATISFIED WITH THE OUTCOME?
Applicants who dispute the decision of the panel might wish to:
clarify with the panel the reasons for the decision that the selected applicant was the most suitable;
contact the relevant agency Human Resources officer;
contact the Public Sector Appeals & Grievance Reviews for advice
CONTACT DETAILS
PUBLIC SECTOR APPEALS & GRIEVANCE REVIEWS
Public Sector Appeals & Grievance Reviews Unit
ADDRESS
Charles Darwin Centre, Level 10 19 The Mall
DARWIN NT 0800
PHONE 8999 4129
INFORMATION & TEMPLATES https://ocpe.nt.gov.au/nt-public-sector-employment/Information-about-ntps-
employment/applying-for-and-filling-jobs
Thank you for your participation.
If you have any further questions please do not hesitate to contact our office for support.