There has been public disquiet and a brouhaha about high public offices and pressing social matters within recent months—most notably the selection and approval of a Commissioner of Police and Deputy Commissioner of Police. The Government has exercised the right approach in sending the selected candidates for the post of CoP and Deputy CoP back to the PSC. The process adopted was flawed and I will expound on why later.
The selected candidates for the post of CoP and Deputy CoP by the PSC have the right of recourse through the courts like all other short-listed candidates if they feel they have been wronged - this is one of the beauties of living in a democracy as opposed to a theocracy or communist country. One would hope that just as swiftly as the EOC jumped to show avenues of recourse to Ms Nafisah Nakhid that they will also do the same thing for Assistant Commissioners of Police Mr Deodat Dulalchan and Mr Harold Phillip who, according to the Legal Notice provided to the Parliament, were the candidates for the post of CoP and Deputy CoP respectively.
The process adopted by the PSC was ideal but execution was flawed. I speak through the lens of a practitioner having just done the process. Firstly, if the body charged with the responsibility for recruitment decides that all candidates who apply will be considered for both posts (providing they meet the requisite criteria) then from inception that must be stated to ALL. Candidates should also be advised that if they do not wish to be considered for both posts to indicate as such. There are institutions in the USA that have a detailed application process with real-life application questions for all applicants to complete and applicants know that while they apply for a particular post, their candidacy after review by the office of talent management/recruitment will be considered for other suitable posts that align with the academic credentials, skills set and experience. Organisations such as Strive Preparatory, Achievement First and KIPP (Knowledge is Power Preparatory) use this method. The process entails (1) Phone screen from a talent recruiter after candidacy is deemed eligible; (2) phone interview/synchronous platform interview with hiring manager; (3) Interview with hiring committee which involves questions, demonstration or some performance related activity; (4) Final interview with hiring manager.
In the preceding, there are multiple assessors involved but assessors are not allowed to be a part of all facets of the assessment phases to prevent creeping subjectivity. The method used by many progressive institutions is a technique called S.M.A.R.T - Situation Task Action Result is a method for answering behavioural questions. Behavioural interview questions are questions about how you have behaved in the past. Specifically, they are about how you have handled certain work situations. Since past performance can be a good prediction of the future, interviewers ask these questions to see if candidates have the skills and experiences required for the job.
We use like the PSC did - assessment centres which operate on the principle of a “cross-reference” system - there are multiple assessors, evaluating against multiple competencies in multiple exercises. The assessors are not involved in every phase of the assessment to prevent creeping subjectivity and to maintain objectivity.
The key is defining the right competencies and behaviours beforehand so that the exercises will facilitate the relevant behaviour. Once you know the behaviours that you are looking for, it becomes a matter of designing the exercises to easily identify them and candidates are each measured objectively against the same criteria. Some regular “behaviours” sought would include team play, customer focus, influencing, communication skills and leadership.
It is very important that candidates know what they are likely to be faced with prior to the day, otherwise it could come as a total shock and they are unlikely to perform to their full potential! All attendees should be given the same opportunity to demonstrate on the day whether or not they can do the job. As a rule, there are at least three or four different sessions such as group discussion (which lets you see how the group interacts), a role play, which might focus on team-related activities, an ability or psych test and a structured interview.
Most professional assessors operate a standard rating scale against each candidate for each exercise, and then the team of assessors consolidates their findings at the end of the session.
I hope this helps so that when the process is done again we are mindful of international best practice.
Hansen Stewart, via em
