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: PSAB@nt.gov.au

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 writeup 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, eg. 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 directly supervises four applicants who have applied for the role, three of whom have

nominated her as a referee. • One of those applicants is the current incumbent. • She also supervisors both selection panel members.

a) Is it appropriate for a referee to be a selection panel member?

b) Should the 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

Selection panels should review the JD 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.

Refer to the JD Template itself and Determination 3 of 2015- Specification for Northern Territory Public Sector Job Descriptions

SELECTION CRITERIA

To be selected an applicant must meet all essential criterion. 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.

Examples of restrictive / too specific essential criteria:

• Sound working knowledge of the NT Government, 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.

• Takes personal responsibility for the accuracy of their work • Be the first point of contact for the public accessing the service • Experience working in the area of corrections [in a JD for a general lower level role]

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 the panel chair for a position which has attracted a number of applicants, but, based on their applications and referee checks, you don’t see any that you think are standout applicants.

You are aware of someone you think, based on proven performance, 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

SELECTION OUTCOME ADVICE FOR ALL APPLICANTS

Agency Office of the Commissioner for Public Employment

Work Unit Public Sector Appeals & Grievance Reviews

Job Title Director PSA&GR Designation Executive Contract Officer 2 Job Type Full Time Duration Fixed Term - SOAFAA Date Location Darwin Position Number 12507 RTF Closing To: ALL APPLICANTS Thank you for your interest in this position. The applicant selected as most suitable is X. 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 panel member: Ms Y Director Public Sector Appeals & Grievance on

SUMMARY OF THE SELECTED APPLICANT’S MERIT Ms X holds a Graduate Degree in Social Science majoring in Counselling with electives in the area of Human Resource Management. She is an accredited LEADR Mediator with substantial experience in alternative dispute resolution and complaint handling both in a statutory framework and in the HR setting.

Ms X is currently employed since March 2013 at the ECO1 level as the Director of Workforce for Agency X, a position in which she oversights HR services for over 3800 employees, and directly supervises a staff of HR officers. Immediately before commencing in this position she was employed from April 2010 to March 2013 in SAO2 level Senior HR roles with Department of Health and Department of Justice. Prior to that, after a short secondment to the CDU in 2010, Ms X was employed as a Grievance Manager at the PSA&GR unit, as well has having a long career in various other positions in the NTPS commencing in 1992.

Ms X listed in her resume her achievements in 2015/16 which she described as follows:

• Developed and Introduced Culture Climate Surveys to reduce the risk of inappropriate/bullying behaviour occurring in the workplace in response to negative media and high number of complaints alleging bullying occurring in the workplace.

• As project sponsor for the Organisational Culture Project developed the methodology and assisted with the comprehensive project plan and implementation.

• Implemented the Special Measures Plan and continues to drive the initiative. • Introduced and delivered HR Toolbox Sessions to upskill middle managers in applying HR

Processes • Nil adverse action claims in Fair Work Australia • All matters reviewed by the Commissioner for Pubic Employment found the actions by the

38 | P a g e

Agency to be appropriate in the circumstances

These accomplishments have been confirmed by her supervisor and referees, and are viewed by the panel as being relevant to the duties and responsibilities of this vacancy.

Ms X has also acted previously in the Director role, most recently in July and August 2016, and prior to this during other period of employment in the unit. In this capacity she has chaired the Public Sector Appeal Board, conducting promotion, disciplinary and inability appeals, and has participated as a member of the OCPE Management Board, and in so doing has demonstrated excellent skill and capability for the role.

Ms X’s referee contacted by the panel was Mr Z, Agency, who is Ms X’s direct supervisor and has been for several years. Mr Z was very positive about Ms X’s suitability for this role, commenting that she has been a key leader in cultural reform within the Agency and is excellent in engaging with staff in an effective way, with a practical sense of outcomes coupled with the skill to achieve them in a calm conciliatory way. He said that she cannot be faulted in the area of negotiation and people management and has demonstrated high level of skill in trickly dealings at all levels. Mr Z advised the panel that although Ms X is currently employed at the ECO1 level, in his view, over the past few years, she has developed the skills and capabilities demonstrating that she is ready to step up to an ECO2 role. He said she is very open to learning which adds to her capacity and shows a pattern of concentrated growth in skill and learnings. He spoke of her good credibility with staff and said she is viewed as the “go to” person within the Agency. He indicated that she has been a valuable member of the Executive group, contributing actively, especially in the last few years as she has grown more and more into being a senior leader at that level.

The Panel Chair, also has firsthand knowledge of Ms X’s performance, as her supervisor when she recently backfilled in this position for the months of July and August 2016. He advised the other panel members that Ms X had had to deal with a number of difficult matters and had acquitted herself very well and impressed him with her calm and skill in negotiating those sorts of situation. He said in the two months she had performed the job he had had no cause for concern and is convinced that she has to capabilities to step into this role and perform it well.

Ms Y, Director and a selection panel member, has supervised Ms X in several of her past roles, and also was in a position to comment, after the fact, on her performance backfilling in the role in July and August 2016. She advised the other panel members that during that two month period Ms X acted in the role, she chaired both a disciplinary and an inability appeal, as well as a number of promotion appeals. Ms X performed well in this role, including managing a number of complex issues and complications that arose within the processes, and delivering the written decisions as required. Ms X developed an excellent relationship with the staff and competently supervised the work of the two SAO1 officers and the AO4 level Administrative Assistant. She has a strong knowledge of the special measures initiative and simplified recruitment – which are both areas in which she has been involved with development and application – both from the time she worked in this office previously, as well as in the roll-out of special measures within her Agency. Ms Y advised the panel that in her opinion Ms X has excellent negotiation and complaint handling skills and a broad understanding of NTPS processes that will be invaluable in her carrying out this role, and that she has amply demonstrated that she operates at the level required.

In light of her experience, work history, and qualifications, and based on the positive report from her supervisor Mr Z as well as the firsthand knowledge of two panel members about her proven performance and capabilities, the panel has no hesitation in strongly recommending Ms X for the vacancy as clearly the most suitable applicant.

TIPS FOR REDUCING COMPLAINTS FROM APPLICANTS Be Courteous and Think About the Feelings of Applicants

39 | P a g e

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.

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;

40 | P a g e

• contact the relevant agency Human Resources specialist;

• 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

EMAIL

PSAB@nt.gov.au

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.