Civil service interview - glaring error

[PriOn1]

I had a civil service interview recently, mostly with technical questions.

It mostly went okay, but there was one question where we were supposed to be in a scenario where we were dealing with a member of the public.

The interviewer asked me a question about something and I didn’t know the correct answer. If I was really in the scenario and dealing with a member of the public, I would have answered that I didn’t know, but would ring them back.

But I forgot the scenario and said that at a guess, I thought such and such.

My answer was way off and, had I really been in that scenario, I have enough experience to know I would never have guessed as the answer as gave was actually unsafe. If I were to give that reply in real life, I should genuinely be in trouble, but I know I wouldn’t.

Is it worth contacting them to tell them I know I cocked up, or should I just leave it? The only reason I am considering it is that I have read that the interviews are point based and that you can fail if you get below a certain mark on some questions and I think an unsafe answer might potentially put me in that category. I really want this job, so is there anything I can do now?

If any civil service interviewers, past or present, could give advice, I would really appreciate it.

Since she realised immediately afterwards that she had got the question format wrong (role play not straight question) and that was where the problem laid.

It says something about your character that there are situations where you feel justified in making up an answer instead of just admitting that you don't have the information off the top of your head and suggesting an information source. Even in the other scenario you gave, it would be better to say, "I don't have the actual figures to hand, but I know that some research has been done by X and Y." rather than saying, "ooh, I guess it's 30%" and crossing your fingers behind your back.

I'm in the civil service and do a fair amount of interviews. You need to score 4 across each behaviour so yes you can fail on 1 question if it doesn't meet the bar.

However I agree you shouldn't ring - that will not be welcomed and the scores can't be changed after the sift.

However, I have sometimes given a 4 (even when the actual answer didn't warrant it) if I thought they were a great candidate and wanted to employ them.

Civil servant here. There’s no point in calling them they can only mark what you said on the day. In my department, which isn’t a UK Government department though they are all similar, you have to get a minimum score for each competency to pass. If a candidate gets too low a score on one it’s an automatic fail.

How on Earth was that answer ‘arsey’?
I thought it was a well-written and useful reply, perhaps you need to be a little less soft and a little more appreciative of people taking the time to reply - even if it’s not what you want to hear.

Same as @Malarandras , you have to exceed the threshold in every competency area, so you can have a candidate who does well in the others but completely bombs one competency/behaviour question , they wouldn't be offered or merit listed.
You are also scored solely on performance during the interview (and any other assessments that are part of the recruitment process some have them others don't), otherwise it would give an unfair advantage to internal applicants.

Oh, I've lead a lot of civil service recruitment

Alright. I'm not interested in being forensic. My advice was for if she's made a potentially grave error at interview, fully realises this, and wanted advice from CS managers whether it would be worse for her to get in touch.

Soz- thought that was to me.

To counter that, there were at least two of the (I think) four questions that I know I gave highly competent replies to as they related to highly complex work I do regularly in my current job.

There were two areas, one of which I could do standing on my head, the other will take a little adjustment because the UK situation and laws are slightly different from where I currently work.

The basic thing was something I also demonstrated strong competence in once prompted as it was something I had worked with a lot years ago.

And yes, I cocked up the interview, but I am not fundamentally incompetent and I know this because I am highly regarded in my current and various previous roles.

And yes, this is exactly what I am asking. Thank you very much for your response. I had not, for a second considered phoning. It would absolutely be an e-mail, such as you outlined.

Clearly even among civil service interviewers, there is no consensus.

Yes, I can honestly say it was completely out of character and stupid.

Thank you. It definitely was not arsey and I was surprised to be accused of that.

Also, I had interpreted the plea for civil service interviewers as meaning that potential people who could have been involved with the interview or with other current interviews would be answering. That would be unprofessional. There is nothing unprofessional about any of the answers on this thread though.

The Civil Service can be tough. If comments on a forum (a comment where I was on your side and was just using the information you had given) hurt your feelings so much, you need to get more resilient.

Thank you, I will. I was offered a different job the day before. I just really want the civil service one and I am frustrated at having made such a rookie error.

It seems there is some leeway however, if they want to employ me, which for various reasons, I hope they do.

I apologize. There was a misunderstanding. I didn’t for a moment think the people who interviewed me would be reading, indeed I hope they are not, though I have been aware it’s not impossible throughout. It was very much a general question and I thought in point two that you were saying I was unprofessional even to ask, which I don’t believe I was.

Unfortunately on Mumsnet there are often people who are ready to see the worst in everything and are all too ready to criticize, even when people are obviously looking for help and reassurance.

Sorry, previous reply was for @Feliciacat

Thank you for the apology. It is completely accepted. When I said wildly unprofessional, I meant it would be wildly unprofessional for current interviewers who may have been involved with your interview to answer. Everything else in this thread has been fine and I hope the answers help you.

With regard to saying if you answered dangerously then they wouldn’t give you the job; I just was thinking of an interview I had with the NHS where I did a great interview and answered all questions well except one (they told me this). They didn’t give me the role because there was one question that I answered dangerously and they said I needed more knowledge to get the job. That was fair of them. I wasn’t meaning you didn’t deserve the job at all.

I do hope it goes well. From other replies on the thread, perhaps it will! Keep us updated.

They didn’t give me the role because there was one question that I answered dangerously and they said I needed more knowledge to get the job.

This is absolutely my concern. I will understand and accept it if I don’t get the job. It would just be very sad.

There were extenuating circumstances and they even offered to postpone, but I chose to go ahead. As someone else said, you live and learn.

I’m a civil servant and sometimes interview for roles on my team. It’s absolutely fine to ask questions on here about how civil service interviews work - they’re a whole other world and it’s understandable if people have questions about them.

OP, this depends on so many things including how competitive or hard-to-fill the role is, how you did on the other questions, and whether you obviously brain farted or said something completely unacceptable. But you definitely can’t add things later, sorry. Best of luck.

Don't ring as it won't change anything.

However if they're using competency's or behaviours you can fail one section and even if you excel in others you'd still fail the interview. It's harsh and in my opinion doesn't recruit the strongest candidates but they need an objective measurable system as they face so much scrutiny.

No, you can't ring them.

If she has a phone number for them then of course she can. If she decides on balance it's the best thing for her to do. Or email. Or write. There's no law against it, worst thing is she doesn't get the job that she mightn't get anyway.

There is, IMO, far too much reluctance from people to take some control of their own lives instead of passively waiting to be told what to do or no thank you. For me, for every time being a little bit 'freestyle' when it seemed necessary during an application or interview process that then didn't go well, there's been another that did.

It's not the people who always play by (what they perceive to be) the rules that get on, you know.

@peachtoiletpaper gives great advice IMO, and hasn't let the OP or anyone else into 'secrets' that they shouldn't have. (There shouldn't be any secrets to getting through applications, test centres, interviews or for promotions anyway, other than the actual model answers to specific scenarios, as that disadvantages some candidates more than others).

Competence-based interviews where people are asked about what they would do are dubious and shouldn't be the only thing relied upon - they don't demonstrate competence in real life, they demonstrate being able to talk about being competent which may overlap with being competent to a greater or lesser degree and which overinflates the chances of people who are good talkers. Maybe the explosion in this type of interview is why so many people these days seem to actually be quite incompetent at doing their job, to no-one's benefit including theirs.🤔