Struggling to secure permanent promotion - Civil Service

tinkafairy

Spent the afternoon crying myself into a headache after finding out I had bombed an interview for a permanent SO post that I had been asked to apply for by the vacancy holder. 

I've not had a job interview since last August when I secured a temporary promotion (that ends at the end of August). I've really excelled in this post, won and internal award, getting loads of great feedback from SLT - people saying they enjoy working with me.. but I can't seem to get a permanent role. Before going for the temp promotion I had passed 7 interviews at this grade... But been on the reserve list for all (until they all expired). I just feel truly distraught. Other people that I know are not as good as me are promoted all around me. And it's just so demoralising.

I do have (diagnosed, and sometime ago for all) ADHD, ASD, and dyslexia. But lots of vacancy holders do not like giving the reasonable adjustments I find helpful (lots of reticence in my current department around providing questions in advance. Panels not asking clarifying questions if I have rambled). 

I just don't know what to do. It'll be humiliating to go back to my substantive grade. 

Cherryfudge

I'm so sorry to hear this, I wasn't going to read and run though I don't have a clear answer for you.

I identify as autistic with ADHD as well, and I know that for me, there's always a 'shock' element which I suspect is amplified by my neurodiversity. If that's the case for you, wait to see how you feel over the next day or so because that same brain that's reeling at the moment will stabilise and get you through this. It's also possible you may feel it more if you have an element of rejection sensitive dysphoria. That makes it harder but it doesn't mean you can't get through and come out stronger, more experienced, with still more to offer to a prospective employer.

Some employers are crassly insensitive to giving reasonable adjustments, even when they have had so-called training in neurodiversity. If that's showing at interview stage, it could be an indication of how they would continue, in which case perhaps the best thing is to say 'Sorry, not for me', however good the job looks on paper. You would be forever struggling with the culture of that workplace.

Something else I've noticed is that once people have tried different roles, they don't 'go back'. They don't unlearn the new skills and experiences of the other role. Even if you end up back in your previous post, you will bring more to it than you did before, and any time it in will be not only a consolidation but a fresh insight. Think of it as a launching pad for your next move.

At the moment you are having to deal with lots of negatives and unhappiness. Give yourself time to work through them (they are real) but don't hang on to them. Think of them as steps to the future you: stronger, more skilled, more experienced. Use the next few months well.

Loads of good wishes for the future, this has been one bad day but you've already proved yourself capable and the right post will come up.

Spikeygran

If they are not making reasonable adjustments at interview for your diagnosed issues, surely thats discrimination?

You must have been the best choice for the temporary promotion and if you have had awards and good feedback you are obviously capable of holding the position.  Would it help to have a chat to HR or an independent advisor, union maybe if your a member?   

Can you look for positions in a different department? 

tinkafairy

Honestly, I have in the past (talked to HR) and there is very little that can be done. 

The issue here is also the range of subjectivity in scoring. I also made some silly errors (in one example, because two panel members are in the same directorate as I, I used someone's name not their job title -- which meant the independent could not score me higher as it wasn't clear at what level I was working.) 

I work with the senior vacancy holder (not directly, but fairly closely) and I think she really wanted me in the team. I don't think that impression was out of nowhere. The independent on the panel apparently also has ADHD and offered to give tips on passing interviews (was told by vacancy holder via informal feedback) but they did not ask any follow ups - despite an ask from me (and reiterated by the vacancy holder at the top of the interview) for panel members to do fo to help bring me back to topic as an adjustment. So I'm not inclined to take that up honestly. 

I was offered extra time, but not the questions in advance (they were not comfortable offering that as a panel, and HR guidance says they can say no). So everything was on the day. Yet one of the panel thought I was reading off what I did, for examples that in one case were live that morning. I was also told that I needed to make clear to the independent what some things I said meant/ make more of what a big deal somethings are because it isn't something others do naturally (need to be a bit vague as this specific example is very outing). There's also thing I could have said/ more possibly better examples I could have used but in the moment ... 

I'm trying to not be angry and upset with them, with myself, with everything. Honestly it was not the best timing for the interview - we're down a lot of people in my current team and I've been having to pick up a lot of stuff for my manager. But also a colleague who has been off for the last 6 weeks. I'd been working the day before (a Sunday, a scheduled out of hours requirement) which meant I'd started work at 6am that day. I'd blocked out my diary to allow some prep time beforehand, but had some very urgent, very last minute/ tight timeframe tasks that came in last minute shortly before the interview that needed completing then and there. Which the vacancy holder was aware of. And it wasn't something anyone else would be able to pick up in time. 

I guess I got something major over the line that was top priority for the department, but at the cost of me being able to get a promotion. I don't know, I think I naively thought that achieving something that the minister and senior leadership wanted would have helped me? 

tinkafairy

Cherryfudge said:

I'm so sorry to hear this, I wasn't going to read and run though I don't have a clear answer for you.

I identify as autistic with ADHD as well, and I know that for me, there's always a 'shock' element which I suspect is amplified by my neurodiversity. If that's the case for you, wait to see how you feel over the next day or so because that same brain that's reeling at the moment will stabilise and get you through this. It's also possible you may feel it more if you have an element of rejection sensitive dysphoria. That makes it harder but it doesn't mean you can't get through and come out stronger, more experienced, with still more to offer to a prospective employer.

Some employers are crassly insensitive to giving reasonable adjustments, even when they have had so-called training in neurodiversity. If that's showing at interview stage, it could be an indication of how they would continue, in which case perhaps the best thing is to say 'Sorry, not for me', however good the job looks on paper. You would be forever struggling with the culture of that workplace.

Something else I've noticed is that once people have tried different roles, they don't 'go back'. They don't unlearn the new skills and experiences of the other role. Even if you end up back in your previous post, you will bring more to it than you did before, and any time it in will be not only a consolidation but a fresh insight. Think of it as a launching pad for your next move.

At the moment you are having to deal with lots of negatives and unhappiness. Give yourself time to work through them (they are real) but don't hang on to them. Think of them as steps to the future you: stronger, more skilled, more experienced. Use the next few months well.

Loads of good wishes for the future, this has been one bad day but you've already proved yourself capable and the right post will come up.

Honestly, it would also be a substantial drop in salary to 'go back' and very difficult to operate in the role. I'm not worried about unlearning skills, I've been happy to take skills from secondments etc. with me and use them going forward. A lot of people I work with across the department and across other government departments assume I am a grade higher than my current role (two above my substantive) due to the level of responsibility I am often asked to take on. I'm often the go to when something urgent is needed/ there is a crisis. But somehow that doesn't show in interview. Or not well enough. This is my worst interview result for an interview at this grade. I usually make the reserve list, not that they ever seem to get used when I'm on them. 

tinkafairy

I just can't sleep now. I keep re-running everything. I'm just so down. And it's not like I can take time off to recoup. I need to secure a substantive post by the end of August. There are very few being advertised, and my confidence of getting anything in my own department is nonexistent now. 

I work so hard, everyone complements what I do and says how key I am. But when it comes to the crunch there's never a job there to back it up. It seems people who do less, get better rewards because they have time to work on getting through the application/ interview process. 

tinkafairy

Spikeygran said:

If they are not making reasonable adjustments at interview for your diagnosed issues, surely thats discrimination?

You must have been the best choice for the temporary promotion and if you have had awards and good feedback you are obviously capable of holding the position.  Would it help to have a chat to HR or an independent advisor, union maybe if your a member?   

Can you look for positions in a different department? 

I've looked at other departments, but many only offer the sort of roles that I am doing/ looking for out of London. I'm not London-based and we can't afford to move our family to London. I have applied for and been on reserve lists for other departments -- but a few are/ were facing recruitment freezes so the reserve list expired. I know I'm well liked and thought of, and often 'borrowed' by some key central departments when they need some extra help. But most do not have permanent posts that can be worked from outside Whitehall. And the few that do, their main non- London offices are nowhere near where I live. 

Emmia

Can I ask, are you applying for every possible job at the grade you want to be substantively, or are you applying for jobs you "really want"?

I was a very high performing HEO, frequently actually doing the role of a G7 (but not for G7 pay) and I found the whole thing incredibly frustrating - I was only applying for jobs I really wanted,  and then either not being sifted or failing the interview... Which would knock me back hard... Not  getting the SEO I took on temporary promotion was especially battering.

However, that role was followed by a role in a new team back at my substantive grade, and actually in hindsight I lucked out there - I got interesting, stretching and challenging work and was supported to do a career development course.

A little under 2 years later I got a substantive SEO in a different department, essentially by applying for anything vaguely suitable as "practice". However, this promotion job was so easy by comparison to my previous HEO role that I found it incredibly frustrating, and  I knew I had to push on to G7.

Within a year of that promotion to SEO I'd applied for and got a G7. In deciding to go for a G7 I again simply applied for every G7 that broadly fitted my skill set and behaviours, or that I was 70% certain I could do. I decided not to wait for the "perfect job". 

I failed a couple of interviews, was merit listed for a few more and was eventually offered two jobs, one of which I decided in the interview I wasn't taking if they offered (due to the hiring manager) and a G7 back at my old department, working for someone I'd worked for before.

I'm currently in the process of gearing myself up to start applying for G6, again applying for things that broadly fit my skill set, and applying for everything that I'm 70% confident I can do. The aim is the SCS within the next 3 - 5, years, depending on how I develop at G6.

From the perspective of the interviewers I can see why you're not getting the questions in advance - since a lot of interviewing moved onto Teams there's been a noticeable rise in people quite clearly reading prepared answers, and if you know the questions, but other candidates don't, it's not fair. In addition lots of people don't declare dyslexia or ADHD (or other conditions) at the application and interview stage.

Similarly, clarifying questions can place the panel on a sticky wicket. As a panel member you can't guide the candidate to the answer, and that's what clarifying questions arguably do, this is why you're not interrupted, even if you've gone off course. It can be incredibly frustrating as an interviewer to try to get the best out of a candidate whilst also ensuring a fair process for everyone. 

TELLIT01

I worked in the Civil Service for a few years and there always seemed to be somebody on a temporary promotion, and everybody knew it was just that 'temporary'.  There is no shame or humiliation in returning to a substantive roll after a temporary assignment.  

The fact of being in a temporary role has never meant it was automatic that the person would get the substantive role in the event of the job becoming available.  The standard recruitment process is followed, and that means others who weren't interested in a temporary upgrade will also be applying.

Emmia

tinkafairy said:

Spikeygran said:

If they are not making reasonable adjustments at interview for your diagnosed issues, surely thats discrimination?

You must have been the best choice for the temporary promotion and if you have had awards and good feedback you are obviously capable of holding the position.  Would it help to have a chat to HR or an independent advisor, union maybe if your a member?   

Can you look for positions in a different department? 

I've looked at other departments, but many only offer the sort of roles that I am doing/ looking for out of London. I'm not London-based and we can't afford to move our family to London. I have applied for and been on reserve lists for other departments -- but a few are/ were facing recruitment freezes so the reserve list expired. I know I'm well liked and thought of, and often 'borrowed' by some key central departments when they need some extra help. But most do not have permanent posts that can be worked from outside Whitehall. And the few that do, their main non- London offices are nowhere near where I live. 

There's a big push to regionalise the Civil Service currently, but that is focused on city hubs in places like Darlington, Leeds, Liverpool, Manchester and Birmingham - so you need really to be living within commuting distance of one of those places. I'd say that Whitehall is a tricky place at the moment for building a CS career because of this push.

gm0

There are some harsh realities in play.  Promotion selection in many cultures can be affected by lots of different factors. 

Prior demonstration of competence/capability/experience and readiness via secondment to more responsibilities for next level management or leadership being a small part. But not definitive in achieving selection.  Theoretically table stakes but not always.  And regularly not the overriding thing.

Many things get overlaid.  It isn't entirely fair.  Nor does it say fair on the tin.  Even if people naively have expectations of the process that it should be - either for a version of "fair" as they understand it i.e a personal world view - be it meritocracy on prior output, or DEI goals to right past wrongs.  Perceived fairness is personal around the individual decision and weighting and collective. Or it's a system perception from reading the HR manual platitudes - which just may not be honoured entirely in the live process.  It will be flexible enough to get the answer that is wanted.  The SCS one certainly is.

I am saying that a "reasonable adjustments" lens - that they are not walking the talk on that - is fine so far as it goes around interview and appointment. I am not suggesting that it isn't a factor here. Just that there is more.  And over focusing just on that may not in fact help you achieve what you want.

Subjectively particular 4s, 5s and 6s may take a view that another candidate - incidentally one without your RA requirements is preferable. To them. Because they have options - sufficiently equally qualified with different strengths and weaknesses, or candidate X broadens team diversity at level - so identity mix thumbs on the scales - or whatever it is.  Preferable.  If they can justify that choice from the selection offered within process and criteria and have the form filling lined up. Off they go.  Job done. No foul.  You remain a good and useful T/Prin, substantive HEO/SEO (in old money) with some well known strengths (and weaknesses). Very useful.  

SSC blended internal and external recruiting is particularly bizarre if you are used to corporate.  Been there. Done that.

Let's unpack a few other overarching influencers on preferred candidates.

Identity has skewed selection weightings. Applying discrimination just in a different slant - to progress the identity targets you want.  Obviously this can work for or against you based on your identity, situation and the organisation demographics at target level.   It's not the substantive point of discussion here. But an example of an overarching "reweighting" in flight criteria. It's a hot culture war button so let's not get into the rights and wrongs and subtleties of it here.  It's a planned thing. It happens.  The processes have sufficient flexibility to allow it.

Much more common is the strong desirability of keeping highly effective cheaper experienced "worker bees" especially expert, flexible sweepers - doing what they do well.  

Promote an SME "doing a job" rather than "managing" without doing as much of what they used to do.  Generic team leader capable duffers I have plenty.  Actual SMEs not so much.  The flexible expert problem solver trap.

If holding them back can be achieved without them exiting the organisation in a huff.  It's a good answer.  For the boss. And the organisation.  You let and encourage them to take a run at promotions as it helps keep them believing it's possible and is good practice.  And because it's policy and the right thing to do - and to support them as one of your staff.  But you don't lift too much of a finger to make the inconvenient (to you) thing happen where they exit on and up.  Hard to backfill.  Meanwhile they do their job and secondments well. And they don't get a promotion.  And they don't leave.   The numbers are a bit better if you aren't fully paying them (CS and private sector can vary on this one).  A squeakier ambitious extrovert generalist wheel albeit a less useful one day to day gets the promotion. And the SME is sad - but returns to work.

From the organisation's perspective the SME is harder to replace.  And this outcome is a win.  For the SME it becomes an unwelcome pattern which repeats.  The leader should of course be working on the team with the SME on apprentices around various activities.  To make them easier to lose. Nobody is really indispensable. But that doesn't make losing your key workers convenient either.

On this - a long time ago I had a conversation with senior leaders in an organisation where I worked about this very thing. As I reviewed my (significant) achievements and my own ongoing career blockages.  And the apparent disconnect between what I had achieved and future rewards.  In the end it came down to "because we can".  We know you enjoy your job here and likely "won't leave".  You lack credibility on that threat.  And are useful doing what you do. So.....we respond to the incentives as they are.

Believing the process was "fair" and had integrity on a what have you achieved and demonstrate dimension was *my* mistake of misunderstanding and not keeping them awake at night.  My persistent naivety in the face of knockbacks was in fact slightly amusing.  Going around believing in stated core values like that. Repeating the same behaviour and expecting a different result. Bless.

In gaming circles people talk about the "meta" - as a term for the embedded rules that underpin a particular (apparent) visible system.  

Presenting yourself credibly as a flight risk (if thwarted), motivated and ambitious, qualified at next level, not too essential where you are.  Requires a thoughtful approach to the meta, and the influencing and deciding audience. It's a game.  Culture does vary this a bit but some aspects are universal.  

Aside from corporate experiences.  I've been through the full process myself for senior civil service appointment at 3.  Panel interview with independent non civvie NEDS and the civil service commissioners.  

They picked the wrong shortlist.  Wasted my time extensively over multiple steps.  And recommended the wrong person (not me as it goes) so Cabinet Office just cancelled the entire appointment process at the end and overrode the department.  Wasting everyone's time. All candidates. Officials.  NEDs the lot.  And then slipped in another golden child external candidate they liked - entirely outside of the process.  The CS Commissioners just sat and watched the integrity of the process they apparently supervise burn and warmed their hands.  Why they turn up and waste everyone's time with the little integrity speech beats me.

Nobody kicks off about UK gov stuff like that in a politically directed world.  You might want to work in this town again temp or perm.  I'm retired now. So now don't care about telling the anecdote.  An old perm sec I know just laughed at my story and said ah X likes to run the process forwards. Sweet. The other captains do rather tend to start with the answer and run the process to colour the required paperwork to get to it.   Now that's more a 123 problem than a 6,7 appointment problem.  But you need to lift the lid on the mechanism.

I am sure the challenges you face with interview around the day job are real for you.  As an analytic and introvert personality type but not diagnosed with anything specific.  I am not particularly interview gifted either at concisely blowing my own trumpet as loud as possible tailored to audience and their checklist.  While reacting in the panel session.  I need to prepare quite a lot. Talking points in short term memory for anticipated Qs - and general question areas I plan to redirect to a humble brag example (criteria focused talking points) - utterly shamelessly like a politician in the media. All pruned viciously for brevity. Interviews are a special hell for most. of us.  

A few people are quick verbally and charismatic and shameless.  And yes - it has little to do with ability to do *most* jobs day to day.  Verbal skills under pressure do matter and matter more for management roles heavier on communication but do get overweighted by this process. And so what.

Finally - the more constraints you apply to where the opportunities need to be - the smaller the opportunity pool becomes.  I would not relocate to India/China.  Their relevant needs were there not here.  My constraints were here not there.  My choice to prioritise family over career. That decision you have control over.  And it sounds like you know your priorities.  But they don't owe you an ideal next level job - and only in the location you want. Nobody does.  It may work out. It may not

So Meta.  Checklist. Criteria used by assessors.  Game focus.  Step back.  Treat the process less literally and less seriously - with more of the contempt it *richly* deserves - just don't let that contempt show.  

Try to relax into it - and project confidence. Even though it's hard.  If you find yourself in a "useful SME trap". Then a move to a post which provides a reset with a carefully chosen boss - may be a way to break the cage.

Good luck