Being interviewed by young people

SueC_2

lynzpower wrote: »

I too have worked in "engagement" with some vulernable young people, children, people with poor MH prognoses etc there are scores of ways to engage service users, this seems to be the most bonkers to me as any which way you look at it is loaded with risk.

lynzpower wrote: »

Edited to say, I think its great for people to see how interviews work. I also think it is useful for them to present questions then someone who is skilled can reject the questions and say why we cant ask those question but free for all when they can ask offensive unchecked questions in an interview setting is not right.

Don't these two comments contradict each other?

lynzpower

No they dont,because the statements and the questions would be vettd by someone experienced in employment law and discrimination - "ie, no we cant ask that question because:" therefore removing all traces of risk associated.

Leaving children ( for exmaple) to have unfettered freedom to ask what they want in these cases that Fengirl is talking of, leaves the organisations- especially charities absolutely Wide open.There was no risk minimisation and it was thought of as "a good thing" that they were participating, even if thier participation was unacceptable

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/8599485.stm

SueC_2

lynzpower wrote: »

No they dont,because the statements and the questions would be vettd by someone experienced in employment law and discrimination - "ie, no we cant ask that question because:" therefore removing all traces of risk associated.

Leaving children ( for exmaple) to have unfettered freedom to ask what they want in these cases that Fengirl is talking of, leaves the organisations- especially charities absolutely Wide open.There was no risk minimisation and it was thought of as "a good thing" that they were participating, even if thier participation was unacceptable

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/8599485.stm

I think perhaps we've been at cross purposes all along. At no point did I mean to imply that I thought the 'young people' should be deliberately let run loose to to abuse the candidate in whatever way they saw fit. I apologise if any of my posts created that impression.

terra_ferma

lynzpower wrote: »

No they dont,because the statements and the questions would be vettd by someone experienced in employment law and discrimination - "ie, no we cant ask that question because:" therefore removing all traces of risk associated.

Leaving children ( for exmaple) to have unfettered freedom to ask what they want in these cases that Fengirl is talking of, leaves the organisations- especially charities absolutely Wide open.There was no risk minimisation and it was thought of as "a good thing" that they were participating, even if thier participation was unacceptable

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/8599485.stm

You hit the nail on the head, there is a big difference between letting children/yp make it up as they go along, and a well structured process with people who are supported and skilled.

Clients/service users panels are very common practice and in most cases all goes well. When it doesn't it's because the organisation did not their job properly.
I've been interviewed by service users and it went well. I've also had service users sitting with me on panels, but they received some HR training, and there were clear boundaries. The gave useful insight.

Personally I would not use them for admin posts, but maybe in this case there is a reason.

foreign_correspondent

...asking young people to do this without proper support and guidance would be setting them up to fail and it would be unfair on them as well as the candidates...

When I have been involved in this process it has involved quite a lot of preparation work, helping young people understsand the whole R&S process, and think about interviews - what the point of them is, what we hope to find out etc..

Then planning sessions have been aimed at developing questions - starting with what they might want to ask (and what might be out of bounds), and how they might ask (use of language, open and closed questions etc) - discussions around how it may feel to be a candidate, and what sort of behaviour you would expect from panel mambers and candidates is also really useful.

I have been for interviews with adults in managerial positions who have asked some terrible questions (poorly planned, irrelevant, personal etc) - so the problem is less about the age of the interviewer and more about their level of awareness and understanding!

I have also worked with disaffected 15 year olds who have interviewed like real professionals - and who have made some really insightful and thoughtful judgements. (One kid was such a natural - welcoming candidates, shaking hands and explaining the interviewing process like she had been working in HR for years... )

foreign_correspondent

Oh - and OP - it would be useful to think of some questions to ask them at the end too - even if it is just what they get from using the organisation, or how long they have been involved... or maybe how they see your job - are kids allowed in the office, are they involved in planning, budgets, funding bids etc..? depending on the organisation you may find that you spend more time engaging with the kids than you expect!

ali-t

like foreign correspondent I have also been involved in preparing young people to be on interview panels and it is a carefully constructed process where YP who are involved in a service can have a say in who will work well in that service. Although the OP's post may not involve direct work with YP, unless she is in an office shut away from the client group, there will be an expectation that she is able to interact with the young people.

I have also been interviewed by young people as part of a 2 phase interview and with young people on the main panel and both interviews were great. It is weird because you have to make a point of not using jargon or demonstrating your up to date knowlege of the workings of the sector in the same way as you might with a normal interviewer but it is a good experience to have been involved in.

From memory the type of questions related to things like 'how do you think you will fit in with the values of x organisation' or 'tell me about a time when you did x well in previous employment'.

I think most of you are caving into the stereotypes about young people and not really getting the concept of why they are involved. It is about service user inclusion, appropriate consultation, organic development and ensuring the needs of service users are met by organisations.

paulwellerfan

my experience is the same as the other two posters. when i was interviewed for my post as a social worker- i was first interviewed by a panel of managers then a childrens panel ( its very common in social sevices these days)
now a few years down the line i am part of that childrens panel and guild the young people in the questions to make sure they are suitable. the young people love it- as one day they could possibly say i picked you casue i thought you would be a good social worker... however the managers have the final say on whoses actually picked for the job.