HMRC Higher Officer Compliance Caseworker (Belfast) Watch

Anisablue
Badges: 10
Rep:
?
#21
Report 1 year ago
#21
(Original post by Pmakgreb)
Over 90% on both numerical and verbal but SJT let me down. Application on hold after that. My competency based example was strong so hoping I still have a chance of interview. Really surprised at score in SJT as I thought my answers demonstrated good judgement. I was quite moderate with my answers so I suspect to score higher you need to hit both extremes.
Hello everyone i have applied for HO in leeds. Got 67% on maths 38% on english and 48% on the sernario part.so look like we have to wait and see if we all get an interview.there is 80 jobs going leeds so hope i have a good shot just really depends on how many ppl apply.goodlook everyone.im also waitong to se if im getting an interview for desision maker asylum in leed.
0
reply
Cass1988
Badges: 7
Rep:
?
#22
Report 1 year ago
#22
(Original post by bit164)
I just applied for the EO role and got 27%. I've done the CSJT for EO positions before and I usually get over 90%. Really shocked 🙁🙁
It appears to be a common theme. Most I've spoken to in work all have done similar 😔
0
reply
zoedmc
Badges: 10
Rep:
?
#23
Report 1 year ago
#23
(Original post by Cass1988)
It appears to be a common theme. Most I've spoken to in work all have done similar 😔
As long as it it not an automatic fail then an interview is still very possible especially if it goes to soft and you have a strong competency example 🙂
Posted on the TSR App. Download from Apple or Google Play
0
reply
ksq
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#24
Report 1 year ago
#24
I got above 90% for both the numerical and verbal reasoning tests. But the SJT was a major let down with "You scored better than 21% of people who have previously taken this test".

It's an embarrassingly low score. Can somebody help me understand where I'm going wrong. I've submitted two applications with similar results, I've aced the numerical and verbals, but the SJT is consistently below average. I've followed the CS framework in responding to the scenarios (or at least I've tried to).

It would be genuinely helpful if somebody could kindly help me out on making sense of this. Thanks !
0
reply
Pmakgreb
Badges: 5
Rep:
?
#25
Report 1 year ago
#25
(Original post by ksq)
I got above 90% for both the numerical and verbal reasoning tests. But the SJT was a major let down with "You scored better than 21% of people who have previously taken this test".

It's an embarrassingly low score. Can somebody help me understand where I'm going wrong. I've submitted two applications with similar results, I've aced the numerical and verbals, but the SJT is consistently below average. I've followed the CS framework in responding to the scenarios (or at least I've tried to).

It would be genuinely helpful if somebody could kindly help me out on making sense of this. Thanks !
Scored over 90 in both too. 38% in SJT. I was surprised too, I thought my answers were well judged and rational. My guess is they are looking for answers in the extreme like counterproductive and the other end which escapes me at the minute. I scored lowest in delivering at pace. I answered a couple where I said Best to wait for managers to come back, I think to score high they were looking for ‘do it now’ approach. Even though the scenario said there was 3 months to finish the report.
0
reply
ksq
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#26
Report 1 year ago
#26
(Original post by Pmakgreb)
Scored over 90 in both too. 38% in SJT. I was surprised too, I thought my answers were well judged and rational. My guess is they are looking for answers in the extreme like counterproductive and the other end which escapes me at the minute. I scored lowest in delivering at pace. I answered a couple where I said Best to wait for managers to come back, I think to score high they were looking for ‘do it now’ approach. Even though the scenario said there was 3 months to finish the report.
Well done, but that's very unfortunate with the SJT. The difficulty is becoming overly rational about some of the scenarios; there was definitely a few scenarios, which in a real life situation, I could see how certain responses may have been counterproductive (making the situation worse) but also ineffective (unhelpful, but doesn't make the situation worse). And then picking the correct response becomes quite subjective as you can see several potential outcomes to the given response. And same applies to the positive responses. I think you're right, perhaps you have to approach these questions in a robotic black and white fashion, and simply not consider deeply the many alternative outcomes. The key to passing the SJT is simply practice practice practice, and learn the mechanism. Which in my view defeats the purpose of the test. But anyway, I've submitted multiple further applications for the same role, simply to get more practice of the SJT ha!

p.s. did you get a breakdown of your scores for each competency? i.e. how did you determine your performance specific to delivering at pace

thank you
0
reply
zoedmc
Badges: 10
Rep:
?
#27
Report 1 year ago
#27
(Original post by ksq)
Well done, but that's very unfortunate with the SJT. The difficulty is becoming overly rational about some of the scenarios; there was definitely a few scenarios, which in a real life situation, I could see how certain responses may have been counterproductive (making the situation worse) but also ineffective (unhelpful, but doesn't make the situation worse). And then picking the correct response becomes quite subjective as you can see several potential outcomes to the given response. And same applies to the positive responses. I think you're right, perhaps you have to approach these questions in a robotic black and white fashion, and simply not consider deeply the many alternative outcomes. The key to passing the SJT is simply practice practice practice, and learn the mechanism. Which in my view defeats the purpose of the test. But anyway, I've submitted multiple further applications for the same role, simply to get more practice of the SJT ha!

p.s. did you get a breakdown of your scores for each competency? i.e. how did you determine your performance specific to delivering at pace

thank you
There’s a report in the feedback section

My advice have the competency to hand for the grade applying for and don’t be afraid to put the same response more than once or twice if you feel all responses are ineffective for example
Posted on the TSR App. Download from Apple or Google Play
0
reply
Pmakgreb
Badges: 5
Rep:
?
#28
Report 1 year ago
#28
(Original post by ksq)
Well done, but that's very unfortunate with the SJT. The difficulty is becoming overly rational about some of the scenarios; there was definitely a few scenarios, which in a real life situation, I could see how certain responses may have been counterproductive (making the situation worse) but also ineffective (unhelpful, but doesn't make the situation worse). And then picking the correct response becomes quite subjective as you can see several potential outcomes to the given response. And same applies to the positive responses. I think you're right, perhaps you have to approach these questions in a robotic black and white fashion, and simply not consider deeply the many alternative outcomes. The key to passing the SJT is simply practice practice practice, and learn the mechanism. Which in my view defeats the purpose of the test. But anyway, I've submitted multiple further applications for the same role, simply to get more practice of the SJT ha!

p.s. did you get a breakdown of your scores for each competency? i.e. how did you determine your performance specific to delivering at pace

thank you
I scored above average for making effective decisions. Middle section for leadership and below average for delivering at pace and partnerships which is surprising as that is what I do best in my current role.
0
reply
Billy9
Badges: 5
Rep:
?
#29
Report 1 year ago
#29
(Original post by Pmakgreb)
Scored over 90 in both too. 38% in SJT. I was surprised too, I thought my answers were well judged and rational. My guess is they are looking for answers in the extreme like counterproductive and the other end which escapes me at the minute. I scored lowest in delivering at pace. I answered a couple where I said Best to wait for managers to come back, I think to score high they were looking for ‘do it now’ approach. Even though the scenario said there was 3 months to finish the report.
was your 38% instant fail or on hold?
0
reply
tom the student
Badges: 10
Rep:
?
#30
Report 1 year ago
#30
(Original post by ksq)
I got above 90% for both the numerical and verbal reasoning tests. But the SJT was a major let down with "You scored better than 21% of people who have previously taken this test".

It's an embarrassingly low score. Can somebody help me understand where I'm going wrong. I've submitted two applications with similar results, I've aced the numerical and verbals, but the SJT is consistently below average. I've followed the CS framework in responding to the scenarios (or at least I've tried to).

It would be genuinely helpful if somebody could kindly help me out on making sense of this. Thanks !
In order to score well in the SJT you need to study the competencies. Unless you already know them well, making a ‘rational’ decision based on your own judgement doesn’t seem to cut it. This seems to burn particularly those who are already in work and are putting their experience into practice.
On the Civil Service Competency Framework document, it lists Effective and Ineffective criteria for each Level (Level 2 for EO and Level 3 for HEO) and if you refer to that whilst doing it, you will score highly. If you have this open, you can usually work out which competency or competencies each scenario is focussing on and rank the options based on what the document lists as Effective and Ineffective behaviours. For example the Making effective decisions and Collaborating and Partnering focuses quite heavy on drawing conclusions from a wide range of sources and valuing each and every contribution and work someone does without taking credit for it. This translates as trying to work with as many people as possible even when this could take longer or be an unpopular decision with others. Delivering at pace focusses on addressing poor performance face-on and not letting it drag your team down. In the responses then if someone is performing poorly in your team, monitoring them over the next few weeks would be ineffective as it isn’t addressing it face-on even though by doing so you could be preserving relationships or using current experience in doing this.

It really is all in the competencies and what their own documentation sets out about what’s expected from them.

I hope this helps!
3
reply
Pmakgreb
Badges: 5
Rep:
?
#31
Report 1 year ago
#31
(Original post by Billy9)
was your 38% instant fail or on hold?
I’m on hold
0
reply
Pmakgreb
Badges: 5
Rep:
?
#32
Report 1 year ago
#32
(Original post by tom the student)
In order to score well in the SJT you need to study the competencies. Unless you already know them well, making a ‘rational’ decision based on your own judgement doesn’t seem to cut it. This seems to burn particularly those who are already in work and are putting their experience into practice.
On the Civil Service Competency Framework document, it lists Effective and Ineffective criteria for each Level (Level 2 for EO and Level 3 for HEO) and if you refer to that whilst doing it, you will score highly. If you have this open, you can usually work out which competency or competencies each scenario is focussing on and rank the options based on what the document lists as Effective and Ineffective behaviours. For example the Making effective decisions and Collaborating and Partnering focuses quite heavy on drawing conclusions from a wide range of sources and valuing each and every contribution and work someone does without taking credit for it. This translates as trying to work with as many people as possible even when this could take longer or be an unpopular decision with others. Delivering at pace focusses on addressing poor performance face-on and not letting it drag your team down. In the responses then if someone is performing poorly in your team, monitoring them over the next few weeks would be ineffective as it isn’t addressing it face-on even though by doing so you could be preserving relationships or using current experience in doing this.

It really is all in the competencies and what their own documentation sets out about what’s expected from them.

I hope this helps!
You see this is where it’s subjective. A different manager might find something someone else finds effective as counterproductive.

I think the SJT should not be taken too seriously as a shortlisting exercise for the simple reason that you provided. People can just sit and make decisions based on what they think the assessor wants to hear.

But then again I would say that 😉
0
reply
ksq
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#33
Report 1 year ago
#33
Thanks for your detailed responses guys. I'm certainly beginning to understand where I'm going wrong following your replies. I bloody knew it. It is very much learning the mechanism, identifying the correct responses, and not necessarily in a rational manner based on actual experiences. I agree with the above there is risk of subjectivity in becoming overly rational, so the key is matching relevant outcomes inline with those printed on the framework. In all honesty it's such a deceptive test, and I'm guessing most people are following a similar formula, as opposed to giving responses solely on one's own judgement. Really appreciate the input guys, it's very helpful!
0
reply
ksq
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#34
Report 1 year ago
#34
again, thank you for your detailed reply tom, this is most helpful of you. may i kindly ask. what are your thoughts on determining whether something falls into counterproductive and ineffective, or effective and productive (the four categories). I mean say a certain outcome is quite clearly a negative response, there are some which can be both counterproductive or just ineffective, depending how you view the scenario. do you have any advice on determining which response is the preferred outcome in-line with the framework, considering the framework only sets out effective vs ineffective, and none in between. does this make sense?

(Original post by tom the student)
In order to score well in the SJT you need to study the competencies. Unless you already know them well, making a ‘rational’ decision based on your own judgement doesn’t seem to cut it. This seems to burn particularly those who are already in work and are putting their experience into practice.
On the Civil Service Competency Framework document, it lists Effective and Ineffective criteria for each Level (Level 2 for EO and Level 3 for HEO) and if you refer to that whilst doing it, you will score highly. If you have this open, you can usually work out which competency or competencies each scenario is focussing on and rank the options based on what the document lists as Effective and Ineffective behaviours. For example the Making effective decisions and Collaborating and Partnering focuses quite heavy on drawing conclusions from a wide range of sources and valuing each and every contribution and work someone does without taking credit for it. This translates as trying to work with as many people as possible even when this could take longer or be an unpopular decision with others. Delivering at pace focusses on addressing poor performance face-on and not letting it drag your team down. In the responses then if someone is performing poorly in your team, monitoring them over the next few weeks would be ineffective as it isn’t addressing it face-on even though by doing so you could be preserving relationships or using current experience in doing this.

It really is all in the competencies and what their own documentation sets out about what’s expected from them.

I hope this helps!
0
reply
The.Deer.Hunter
Badges: 5
Rep:
?
#35
Report 1 year ago
#35
(Original post by ksq)
The key to passing the SJT is simply practice practice practice, and learn the mechanism. Which in my view defeats the purpose of the test. But anyway, I've submitted multiple further applications for the same role, simply to get more practice of the SJT ha!
How did it allow you to keep retrying the test for the same role?
0
reply
ksq
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#36
Report 1 year ago
#36
(Original post by The.Deer.Hunter)
How did it allow you to keep retrying the test for the same role?
I'm applying for the same role but at different locations.
0
reply
The.Deer.Hunter
Badges: 5
Rep:
?
#37
Report 1 year ago
#37
(Original post by ksq)
I'm applying for the same role but at different locations.
When I tried different locations I just get 'application under review', no chance to do the tests again.

I thought;

(Original post by zoedmc)
If you apply for multiple locations you’ll be interviewed on your first location and your score gets applied to the other locations you’ve applied to
So I hope I haven't missed out on other locations through a glitch!
0
reply
zoedmc
Badges: 10
Rep:
?
#38
Report 1 year ago
#38
(Original post by The.Deer.Hunter)
So I hope I haven't missed out on other locations through a glitch!
This is from the job advert:


Name:  CECCF76F-AFE7-4069-AF8A-2FE499E5C808.jpg.jpeg
Views: 142
Size:  38.0 KB
Posted on the TSR App. Download from Apple or Google Play
0
reply
ksq
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#39
Report 1 year ago
#39
(Original post by The.Deer.Hunter)
When I tried different locations I just get 'application under review', no chance to do the tests again.

I thought;



So I hope I haven't missed out on other locations through a glitch!
Perhaps it's a glitch. Admittedly I've been able to repeat the tests for Glasgow + Edinburgh for the EO and HEO positions, but for Leeds and Manchester the application went to straight to 'under review' status as with yourself, and I can confirm I have not been able to repeat these tests yet. SO as the above post indicates, it may not be possible to repeat. But nothing to lose either way.
0
reply
ksq
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#40
Report 1 year ago
#40
As an update from earlier, my SJT score has significantly improved. Completed another application for a different role and here is the result "You scored better than 42% of people who have previously taken this test." Which meets the required standard! Well well well. I appreciate the various inputs and advice offered in this thread. The conclusion is quite simple. Briefly suspend your logic and experiences, and exclusively implement the framework criteria only. Even when some scenarios could be dealt with differently according to your own experiences, stick to the framework. I'll apply some more and see how I progress...
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

How did your AQA A-level Biology Paper 3 go?

Loved the paper - Feeling positive (207)
14.84%
The paper was reasonable (777)
55.7%
Not feeling great about that exam... (308)
22.08%
It was TERRIBLE (103)
7.38%

Watched Threads

View All