Expression of interest

Grumpy_chap

holidaypain said:

The only thing that sadly has become clear that there is no hope that the current fixed term will be extended again.

Maybe there are 4 opportunities.
I'd certainly see simply being invited to apply as a positive.

Emmia said:

Actually as a civil servant the recommendation is STAR (Situation, Task, Action Response)

In my sector, it is Situation, Target, Action, Result 

Savvy_Sue

Brie said:

So you send the email and say "I'm really interested in this because it would allow me to progress my interest in <topic> which would enhance the work done in this sector."  Or something.  Show them you aren't just interested but you'd really like it and they would get a positive something from you.

Personally I think I'd say a little more, yes the 'cringe' factor creeps in, but a couple of paragraphs outlining how your previous experience (especially any gained outside the organisation) seems really relevant to the role and how keen you are to make a continuing contribution. If you're currently on FTC and no expectation of renewal, it's good to show you're keen to stay, rather than ready to move on to pastures new (yes, you may feel there's very little for you to move on TO, but now's not the time to say so.)

MeteredOut

OP, if you feed your experience into ChatGPT, tell it to use the STAR criteria, and give it any other information you have about the role, it can help you write an expression of interest statement.

Just don't use the output as is - change it so it is you that is writing it.

elsien

And doublecheck what it says because you ChatGPT does make things up or misinterpret. 

Emmia

elsien said:

And doublecheck what it says because you ChatGPT does make things up or misinterpret. 

As someone who has recently sifted applications, I've been low scoring any i suspect were written by ChatGPT.  Some were frankly so obvious that a 0 was really too generous as a score. I can only imagine that the applicant thought ChatGPT would be used to sift.

OP, if you do use it, use the output as "inspiration" for your own words. Don't do a copy+paste.

MeteredOut

Emmia said:

elsien said:

And doublecheck what it says because you ChatGPT does make things up or misinterpret. 

As someone who has recently sifted applications, I've been low scoring any i suspect were written by ChatGPT.  Some were frankly so obvious that a 0 was really too generous as a score. I can only imagine that the applicant thought ChatGPT would be used to sift.

OP, if you do use it, use the output as "inspiration" for your own words. Don't do a copy+paste.

Exactly, which is why i said to not use the output. But, for scenarios like this, it is great as a sounding board, to give ideas of what to include. 

Bit worried that you're low-scoring applications based on a suspicion though. Surely you'd use one of the many free checkers as well?

Emmia

MeteredOut said:

Emmia said:

elsien said:

And doublecheck what it says because you ChatGPT does make things up or misinterpret. 

As someone who has recently sifted applications, I've been low scoring any i suspect were written by ChatGPT.  Some were frankly so obvious that a 0 was really too generous as a score. I can only imagine that the applicant thought ChatGPT would be used to sift.

OP, if you do use it, use the output as "inspiration" for your own words. Don't do a copy+paste.

Exactly, which is why i said to not use the output. But, for scenarios like this, it is great as a sounding board, to give ideas of what to include. 

Bit worried that you're low-scoring applications based on a suspicion though. Surely you'd use one of the many free checkers as well?

We don't use "checkers" applications are reviewed independently by more than one person though - usually I find we have concerns about the same applications. 

The types of error are personal statements /examples that reference employment/work that do not appear on the CV or seem very unlikely from the CV. For example a low level admin role applicant apparently controlled significant budgets despite the fact their stated career history indicated retail work (checkout assistant) and bar work - it didn't add up... 

Plus there's the tone thing you see on here with posts. 

One person left in "would you like me to refine this to make it sound more professional"... I really don't need to run a check on that.

TELLIT01

The reality is that personal bias will almost always be a factor in decision making, but the level can vary.  If the person the applicant will report to already has a good relationship it's going to be factored in, although shouldn't be the only factor - far from it.

holidaypain

Maybe there are 4 opportunities.
I'd certainly see simply being invited to apply as a positive.

Like it    yes I think I'm just going to think there are positions for all of us. 

Thank you again everyone.

EnPointe

Emmia said:

monkey-fingers said:

SiliconChip said:

As it's public sector I would be very surprised if they don't publish the criteria for job applications, very likely some form of SMART, so I would use those as a guide to writing your expression of interest and also to answer questions in the interview if offered.

Came in to say this. Public Sector love SMART and you'll get a score for each one.

Actually as a civil servant the recommendation is STAR (Situation, Task, Action Response) or SOAR (Situation Opportunity Action Response), not SMART  - this is used for objectives when in the job.

not seen SOAR  before that is a good one 

but,  interviews STAR   or SOAR 

SMART for goal Setting 

SBAR  for communicating  issues / problems / handing over a  task