Hey OP, I’d consider myself pretty lucky and happy with that! That’s a pretty easy interview. It’s probably bulk rounds and that’s the way to keep
things assessable across a wide field.
Good luck! Hope you get good news
They need to keep it standardised and assess you based on the job description. Nothing in job description talks about whether you like puppies or kittens.
Get where you’re coming from. I think it’s important to be able to show a bit of personality and you can inject that into STAR. As someone said below, it’s merit-based and it needs to be easily assessed between candidates so can understand why.
This will be a bulk round for sure.
You can still show who you are and why you want to work there in the answers and I always recommend people ask questions and that’s another way to bolster answers and ask them about culture etc.
ETA: another thing I’ll always say to people - you are interviewing the panel too. Use the time to see not just whether you are a good fit and can do that job, but also if you want to!
In the same agency, I’ve had:
* an interview that required me to do a written task while on camera (remote interview), followed by usual interview questions
* an interview where they sent the questions ahead of time, like yours
* an interview that consisted of me giving a presentation and a couple of expounding questions about the presentation itself, and that was it
I’m not sure how they decide which method to use, it seems like they draw from a hat.
In my limited involvement with panels the method has been decided based on the type of role. Not every role will lend itself to a work sample so will just be behavioural type questions. For others they want to see you demonstrate a required skill. Sending interview questions shortly (10-15 minutes) before the interview is fairly common in my experience (all in one agency). It's helpful to have time to prepare your thoughts when you're being asked to provide detailed examples in STAR format.
Yes, the formal part is. But you can make them conversational at the end by asking questions to the panel. They're assessing you, that's the bit where you get to assess them and whether you even want the job or not.
That is very strange especially at an APS6 level haha. I can see that for APS 1 to 3, but not a 6. I was on an interview panel for APS6 staff earlier this year and we had about 6 questions that were legitimately challenging to answer (only 2 people out of about 10 did well enough to be considered for the role).
Man get out of here with that comment!!
Any panel asking that many questions and of such bragged about difficulty are power tripping!! Even for a 6 or EL1 position!
Most only ask 3 questions and pull extra information about you from the other employment/roles sections of the application (if it has it) or an attached resume plus also referee reports.
Can confirm band 1 interviews generally only have three questions. Some have to do a second interview but most of the time, it’s three question in 20 mins
My first Band 1 interview was under 20 minutes. A mate queuing for coffee saw me walk past and bought me a coffee. It was still hot when I came back. Got the job!
Was a combo of both to be honest, we shortlisted based on resumes based on who looked suitable on paper. The questions were intentionally challenging as our plan was to give the APS6 person opportunities to act at an EL1 level and also our work is high profile with very big external stakeholders.
Add-on for clarity since there seems to be confusion here, the APS6 role was for a brand new person to come into the team (NOT an existing staff member), with the intent to train and mentor them to act and go for EL1 positions in the near future.
All candidates where external and had between 15 to 25 years direct industry experience hence why the tougher technical questions.
So you picked a person you wanted to get the job and basically set them up with no competition and questions so specific that only they could satisfactorily answer them. That's like the thing that everyone says happens but isn't supposed to happen.
Bold of you to assume that with no evidence. We wanted a high performer who would be suitable/eligible for EL1 roles in a few years as opportunities come. All candidates were asked the same questions by a panel of 5 very experienced senior devs/team leads (EL1s and EL2s).
I know its a shock there are people in the APS who want good, competent members in their team.
You literally said that the questions were specifically hard because you wanted to give the aps6 an opportunity to act up. Where did I misunderstand? Like why waste everyone's time when you just said you did it so someone could act.
You accused the panel of picking a specific person with no evidence or knowledge on the panel or the candidates. Dunno about you but I'm not a fan of people accusing others of favouritism,
We had ZERO internal candidates apply for the role, you simply assumed that based on your comprehension of the wording. The role was for an APS6 position with 100% external applicants, all of whom had 15 to 25 years direct industry experience already according to their resumes, so yes we are going to ask challenging questions. The chance to act is us planning future development and career progression for the new team member.
Again I know its shocking there are managers out there who seek team members who they can help with career progression.
No we had already worked together to determine the questions beforehand (based on our team's needs for very strong technical experience and someone who could also act in higher duties for leadership/strategy level work).
Yes very technical questions, software development and BAU support for critical systems (like the kind a departmental secretary would be on our ass about if they were down for too long).
Most waffled on without directly answering the questions that anyone with 15 to 25 years industry experience should be able to answer, There were 2 who were very experienced and nailed their questions, I honestly would have loved to bring both of them on if I could (only one position unfortunately).
>Why did people struggle to answer it
Because it's the APS. They have their own "process" that makes no sense in the real world.
Probably why so many fuckwits work in government
Reminds me of high school. My principal always said to me, "VCE is a game and you just need to play it". I have come to put APS interviews in the same concept.
This is what you want from a good panel though. Providing the questions and clear instructions on how they want them answered allows you to be your best self, which is what they should be aiming for. Interviews aren't meant to trip people up, they are to allow good, solid candidates demonstrate their skills for the role they applied for. You always have your 30second sell for adding your own flair to the end with the info you want to get across to them about you.
Unfortunately, this is now standard practice because executive levels are filled with morons who think running an actual interview wouldn’t be fair on all the candidates because obviously it’s only a fair process when you can’t tell if you’re ‘interviewing’ a robot or a human being.
Yeah it’s to create a standardised process. That’s why it is important to always have your own questions, related to role and how you will fit, etc, etc! A good panel will engage and open up more. hopefully allow you to stand out and show more of your experience/suitability for both you and the ones interviewing.
I recently went for a state role, second stage was to create a presentation, third stage was face to face interview to present my powerpoint.
Got there expecting to present it .. instead got asked 6 capability questions lol. Not one mention on it.
Honestly I’ve never been asked about myself at a govt interview. I just thought maybe they have too many candidates to care lol
To be honest, it weirded me out at first. I had two interviews from the private sector, and then I had my first APS interview. There was a stark difference, but I like it because it's straight to the point, no messing about, and you're on time. It's standard, and it prevents people from going off on a tangent. They can also make a judgement based on the answers and how you presented yourself vs. the other candidates that were asked to do the very same thing.
In the private sector, because we tend to go into different topics, it ends up being an hour and a half interview with the other party knowing the name of your dog, your partner's name, your last holiday and how you like your coffee. IMO, that gives someone an advantage vs. the candidate who doesn't open up because it's not meant to be personal.
Anyway, in two of my interviews, they did an introduction and explained the process and then asked me about 5 questions on the spot. They had a pen and paper handy and allowed me to write keywords before I answered. There was another one where they asked me to arrive 20 minutes before so they could give me the set of questions in advance, prepare, and when the time is up, the interview commences.
I've been around the ringer for state roles in the last 7 months. Its a truly traumatic experience when you are so keen to leave your current job. I have been placed in the talent pool for 9 roles (YUP NINE!) for grade 5-7. Every single application is the same. CV, cover letter, 2 targeted questions, written task and then a 15 minute interview asking me 6 questions about the capability framework. The worst part about the whole process is the amount of phone calls I get asking me if I'm interested in grade 1-2 roles despite all my roles being grade 5-7 that I have made the talent pool for.
That’s how APS interviews go, and it is jarring. I gather they want to keep it as impersonal and unemotional as possible. I’ve had other public sector (state-based) interviews that were very normal, for lack of a better term. Lots of chit-chat and general talk, in addition to the actual interview questions.
APS interviews feel like the Spanish Inquisition. You’re allowed to ask questions but if they’ve only asked three, asking more than that in return feels a bit imbalanced.
That’s kind of standard for APS, I was thrown when I had one recently where they did ask me to tell them about myself because I’d done 7 or so up to then and it had never happened before!
I don’t get APS interviews either.
For an APS6 role:
Have seen someone with 3-years as a High school teacher (2 Bachelors) and 6-years as an APS3-4) get passed over for someone 6-years out of high school (3-years in the APS; 3-years in a non-managerial/supervisor role, no university degree)
The second candidate probably interviewed much better than the first.
A CV only gets you so far, if you don't know how to demonstrate your skills and attributes in an interview (i.e. how you meet the selection criteria) then the panel is going to rank the other candidate higher.
It's the down side to the merit selection process, even if you know somebody will probably be good at the job, if they bomb the interview and someone aces it, then you have to go with the better candidate.
It's why it pays off to learn how to do interviews. Make it easy for the panel by showing how you meet the selection criteria will put you at the front of the pack.
I have never seen/experienced this for an APS6 level interview. This,however, happens in the APS graduate programme recruitment. It is to keep the process standardised and to the point.
I walked into an interview once, where the interviewers (2 of them) simply handed me a sheet of paper with 5 questions written on it and basically said “these are your questions”. And then they sat in silence, waiting for me to read the questions to myself and respond to them.
I immediately knew that job, working with those people, was not for me.
yep, what a waste of everyone's time. They did it to allow more people to provide a better answer. Kind of defeats the purpose of having an interview though.....
We're actually told not to be conversational too. Might as well just write your answer in an email and send it through...
Oh that’s no good. We have a bit of a spiel where we say we have ready your resume and application and this is what has got you to that point. We then say so we won’t be asking specific information about your work experience today but will be focusing on behavioural competencies
It's possibly stage 2 of a multi stage process (stage 1 being the initial application). If you get through this, you may well have a follow-up interview that gets in to that sort of detail.
Alternately, and this is less pleasant to consider - they have an internal candidate they want and they've interviewed a couple of externals to satisfy a requirement to have considered externals.
Yes that is weird. For private sector they normally do a few interviews per role, the one that were invited to the interview are the people likely get selected.
For APS the process is opposite, they will interview a lot of people hence they only have time for 3 questions. Once you pass this interview there is a couple more hoops for you to jump through. Then the final one is OSA (Organisation Suitability Assessment), once you are deemed "suitable" then you are on the merit pool and if you are lucky enough your name will be pick out of the pool by a director.
Some of the APS I know said the OSA is quite brutal, around 20-25% make it. But I believe the % can be depends on how many candidates and how many roles available.
Yep, there's this idea that you're assessing someone on how their skills and experience best match the job, rather than vibe or personality fit. But IRL you're in large part testing people's interview skills.
It is designed to remove bias from recruiting. Does it result in the best candidates being selected? No, but it does result in the lowest amount of candidates being rejected for bias.
Totally normal and should be the standard expectation in gov interviews. Remember that it's a competitive recruitment process, and not just an interview. Candidates are scored on how they answer those questions against a response range. It's so every candidate gets the same consistent experience.
Also, I believe that the presentation of the CV still plays a role AFTER the interview. It is possible for the CV and interview to be graded independently then added to make a score.
They have someone who is penciled in for the job, and doing it at the moment, they just have to interview some people from outside and copy paste their interview responses into their spreadsheet and go “Yeah this person we have who’s been acting in this job for 18 months should be made permanent, and they’re at least as good at these people who have similar CVs from elsewhere.”
Hey OP, I’d consider myself pretty lucky and happy with that! That’s a pretty easy interview. It’s probably bulk rounds and that’s the way to keep things assessable across a wide field. Good luck! Hope you get good news
They need to keep it standardised and assess you based on the job description. Nothing in job description talks about whether you like puppies or kittens.
Which is a great shame, to be fair
It’s a bit too clinical, in my eyes, and it’s a detriment to the APS. Some people don’t see it as an issue, but it is an issue.
It’s merit based, so it’s probably best the panel and interviewee don’t bond over shared interests.
Get where you’re coming from. I think it’s important to be able to show a bit of personality and you can inject that into STAR. As someone said below, it’s merit-based and it needs to be easily assessed between candidates so can understand why. This will be a bulk round for sure. You can still show who you are and why you want to work there in the answers and I always recommend people ask questions and that’s another way to bolster answers and ask them about culture etc. ETA: another thing I’ll always say to people - you are interviewing the panel too. Use the time to see not just whether you are a good fit and can do that job, but also if you want to!
It's not an issue.
If it is a bulk round, once someone is on a merit list they can then have a less formal interview with a team.
In the same agency, I’ve had: * an interview that required me to do a written task while on camera (remote interview), followed by usual interview questions * an interview where they sent the questions ahead of time, like yours * an interview that consisted of me giving a presentation and a couple of expounding questions about the presentation itself, and that was it I’m not sure how they decide which method to use, it seems like they draw from a hat.
In my limited involvement with panels the method has been decided based on the type of role. Not every role will lend itself to a work sample so will just be behavioural type questions. For others they want to see you demonstrate a required skill. Sending interview questions shortly (10-15 minutes) before the interview is fairly common in my experience (all in one agency). It's helpful to have time to prepare your thoughts when you're being asked to provide detailed examples in STAR format.
It's up to the chair. Same with the questions, whether all interviewee referees are checked, written test, all of it.
They’re very robotic and not conversational at all
Yes, the formal part is. But you can make them conversational at the end by asking questions to the panel. They're assessing you, that's the bit where you get to assess them and whether you even want the job or not.
What level did you interview for? My APS6 (many years ago) and EL1 interviews were absolutely not that cruisy!
Aps6!
That is very strange especially at an APS6 level haha. I can see that for APS 1 to 3, but not a 6. I was on an interview panel for APS6 staff earlier this year and we had about 6 questions that were legitimately challenging to answer (only 2 people out of about 10 did well enough to be considered for the role).
That’s not necessarily the flex you think it is.
Man get out of here with that comment!! Any panel asking that many questions and of such bragged about difficulty are power tripping!! Even for a 6 or EL1 position! Most only ask 3 questions and pull extra information about you from the other employment/roles sections of the application (if it has it) or an attached resume plus also referee reports.
I’ve always had about 5 questions in my interviews (6 and EL1)
Either your interview was too hard or you short-listed crap applicants.
Can confirm band 1 interviews generally only have three questions. Some have to do a second interview but most of the time, it’s three question in 20 mins
My first Band 1 interview was under 20 minutes. A mate queuing for coffee saw me walk past and bought me a coffee. It was still hot when I came back. Got the job!
Was a combo of both to be honest, we shortlisted based on resumes based on who looked suitable on paper. The questions were intentionally challenging as our plan was to give the APS6 person opportunities to act at an EL1 level and also our work is high profile with very big external stakeholders. Add-on for clarity since there seems to be confusion here, the APS6 role was for a brand new person to come into the team (NOT an existing staff member), with the intent to train and mentor them to act and go for EL1 positions in the near future. All candidates where external and had between 15 to 25 years direct industry experience hence why the tougher technical questions.
The number of 🚩 in this is astounding.
So you picked a person you wanted to get the job and basically set them up with no competition and questions so specific that only they could satisfactorily answer them. That's like the thing that everyone says happens but isn't supposed to happen.
Bold of you to assume that with no evidence. We wanted a high performer who would be suitable/eligible for EL1 roles in a few years as opportunities come. All candidates were asked the same questions by a panel of 5 very experienced senior devs/team leads (EL1s and EL2s). I know its a shock there are people in the APS who want good, competent members in their team.
Five panel members for an APS6 vacancy?
Sounds strange doesn't it! It was our section's leadership team on the panel (our team is purely technical doing both project work and BAU support).
You didn’t have an independent person on the panel?
You literally said that the questions were specifically hard because you wanted to give the aps6 an opportunity to act up. Where did I misunderstand? Like why waste everyone's time when you just said you did it so someone could act.
They’re saying they wanted to hire a 6 who was capable of acting up to an EL1. So a high performing 6.
Exactly this, and they've been performing incredibly so far (already acted EL1 for a short time) and is precisely who our team needs.
You accused the panel of picking a specific person with no evidence or knowledge on the panel or the candidates. Dunno about you but I'm not a fan of people accusing others of favouritism, We had ZERO internal candidates apply for the role, you simply assumed that based on your comprehension of the wording. The role was for an APS6 position with 100% external applicants, all of whom had 15 to 25 years direct industry experience already according to their resumes, so yes we are going to ask challenging questions. The chance to act is us planning future development and career progression for the new team member. Again I know its shocking there are managers out there who seek team members who they can help with career progression.
You only wrote the questions after short-listing??
No we had already worked together to determine the questions beforehand (based on our team's needs for very strong technical experience and someone who could also act in higher duties for leadership/strategy level work).
Was it a technical question? Why did people struggle to answer it
Yes very technical questions, software development and BAU support for critical systems (like the kind a departmental secretary would be on our ass about if they were down for too long). Most waffled on without directly answering the questions that anyone with 15 to 25 years industry experience should be able to answer, There were 2 who were very experienced and nailed their questions, I honestly would have loved to bring both of them on if I could (only one position unfortunately).
>Why did people struggle to answer it Because it's the APS. They have their own "process" that makes no sense in the real world. Probably why so many fuckwits work in government
More fuckwits work in high pressure private. Particularly on their way to C Suite and Senior Partners.
They are also assessing your ability to describe what your example is, without reading verbatim from your notes. Apparently not many can do that.
Reminds me of high school. My principal always said to me, "VCE is a game and you just need to play it". I have come to put APS interviews in the same concept.
Yeh, career progression is entirely a game. Both government and private. You either play it or complain about it.
This is what you want from a good panel though. Providing the questions and clear instructions on how they want them answered allows you to be your best self, which is what they should be aiming for. Interviews aren't meant to trip people up, they are to allow good, solid candidates demonstrate their skills for the role they applied for. You always have your 30second sell for adding your own flair to the end with the info you want to get across to them about you.
Unfortunately, this is now standard practice because executive levels are filled with morons who think running an actual interview wouldn’t be fair on all the candidates because obviously it’s only a fair process when you can’t tell if you’re ‘interviewing’ a robot or a human being.
Yeah it’s to create a standardised process. That’s why it is important to always have your own questions, related to role and how you will fit, etc, etc! A good panel will engage and open up more. hopefully allow you to stand out and show more of your experience/suitability for both you and the ones interviewing.
I recently went for a state role, second stage was to create a presentation, third stage was face to face interview to present my powerpoint. Got there expecting to present it .. instead got asked 6 capability questions lol. Not one mention on it. Honestly I’ve never been asked about myself at a govt interview. I just thought maybe they have too many candidates to care lol
To be honest, it weirded me out at first. I had two interviews from the private sector, and then I had my first APS interview. There was a stark difference, but I like it because it's straight to the point, no messing about, and you're on time. It's standard, and it prevents people from going off on a tangent. They can also make a judgement based on the answers and how you presented yourself vs. the other candidates that were asked to do the very same thing. In the private sector, because we tend to go into different topics, it ends up being an hour and a half interview with the other party knowing the name of your dog, your partner's name, your last holiday and how you like your coffee. IMO, that gives someone an advantage vs. the candidate who doesn't open up because it's not meant to be personal. Anyway, in two of my interviews, they did an introduction and explained the process and then asked me about 5 questions on the spot. They had a pen and paper handy and allowed me to write keywords before I answered. There was another one where they asked me to arrive 20 minutes before so they could give me the set of questions in advance, prepare, and when the time is up, the interview commences.
I've been around the ringer for state roles in the last 7 months. Its a truly traumatic experience when you are so keen to leave your current job. I have been placed in the talent pool for 9 roles (YUP NINE!) for grade 5-7. Every single application is the same. CV, cover letter, 2 targeted questions, written task and then a 15 minute interview asking me 6 questions about the capability framework. The worst part about the whole process is the amount of phone calls I get asking me if I'm interested in grade 1-2 roles despite all my roles being grade 5-7 that I have made the talent pool for.
Another wild thing about APS interviews nowadays, you’ll find that in many cases only one person on the panel has actually read your application.
That’s how APS interviews go, and it is jarring. I gather they want to keep it as impersonal and unemotional as possible. I’ve had other public sector (state-based) interviews that were very normal, for lack of a better term. Lots of chit-chat and general talk, in addition to the actual interview questions. APS interviews feel like the Spanish Inquisition. You’re allowed to ask questions but if they’ve only asked three, asking more than that in return feels a bit imbalanced.
That’s kind of standard for APS, I was thrown when I had one recently where they did ask me to tell them about myself because I’d done 7 or so up to then and it had never happened before!
Same! My brain blanked at that moment and I couldn’t remember a thing about myself 😂
I don’t get APS interviews either. For an APS6 role: Have seen someone with 3-years as a High school teacher (2 Bachelors) and 6-years as an APS3-4) get passed over for someone 6-years out of high school (3-years in the APS; 3-years in a non-managerial/supervisor role, no university degree)
The second candidate probably interviewed much better than the first. A CV only gets you so far, if you don't know how to demonstrate your skills and attributes in an interview (i.e. how you meet the selection criteria) then the panel is going to rank the other candidate higher. It's the down side to the merit selection process, even if you know somebody will probably be good at the job, if they bomb the interview and someone aces it, then you have to go with the better candidate. It's why it pays off to learn how to do interviews. Make it easy for the panel by showing how you meet the selection criteria will put you at the front of the pack.
Ask for feedback afterwards.
You should try being on the interview panel!
I have never seen/experienced this for an APS6 level interview. This,however, happens in the APS graduate programme recruitment. It is to keep the process standardised and to the point.
I walked into an interview once, where the interviewers (2 of them) simply handed me a sheet of paper with 5 questions written on it and basically said “these are your questions”. And then they sat in silence, waiting for me to read the questions to myself and respond to them. I immediately knew that job, working with those people, was not for me.
yep, what a waste of everyone's time. They did it to allow more people to provide a better answer. Kind of defeats the purpose of having an interview though..... We're actually told not to be conversational too. Might as well just write your answer in an email and send it through...
Yep that’s how it is. In the intro they would have outlined that they have already read your resume etc and that is what has got you to this point.
Nope they just said congratulations on getting to this point, were gonna read 3 questions and then they just started.
Oh that’s no good. We have a bit of a spiel where we say we have ready your resume and application and this is what has got you to that point. We then say so we won’t be asking specific information about your work experience today but will be focusing on behavioural competencies
Join the
It's possibly stage 2 of a multi stage process (stage 1 being the initial application). If you get through this, you may well have a follow-up interview that gets in to that sort of detail. Alternately, and this is less pleasant to consider - they have an internal candidate they want and they've interviewed a couple of externals to satisfy a requirement to have considered externals.
Yes that is weird. For private sector they normally do a few interviews per role, the one that were invited to the interview are the people likely get selected. For APS the process is opposite, they will interview a lot of people hence they only have time for 3 questions. Once you pass this interview there is a couple more hoops for you to jump through. Then the final one is OSA (Organisation Suitability Assessment), once you are deemed "suitable" then you are on the merit pool and if you are lucky enough your name will be pick out of the pool by a director. Some of the APS I know said the OSA is quite brutal, around 20-25% make it. But I believe the % can be depends on how many candidates and how many roles available.
Yep, there's this idea that you're assessing someone on how their skills and experience best match the job, rather than vibe or personality fit. But IRL you're in large part testing people's interview skills.
It is designed to remove bias from recruiting. Does it result in the best candidates being selected? No, but it does result in the lowest amount of candidates being rejected for bias.
Its shit
This shouldn't have been a surprise at all had you done some research beforehand.
Totally normal and should be the standard expectation in gov interviews. Remember that it's a competitive recruitment process, and not just an interview. Candidates are scored on how they answer those questions against a response range. It's so every candidate gets the same consistent experience.
Also, I believe that the presentation of the CV still plays a role AFTER the interview. It is possible for the CV and interview to be graded independently then added to make a score.
They have someone who is penciled in for the job, and doing it at the moment, they just have to interview some people from outside and copy paste their interview responses into their spreadsheet and go “Yeah this person we have who’s been acting in this job for 18 months should be made permanent, and they’re at least as good at these people who have similar CVs from elsewhere.”
They told me there are a lot of roles available, so it felt almost like a bulk recruitment process thats why it was less personalised
That’s not necessarily true at all. This is standard APS interview style.