Failed MMI, a couple of questions...

[wildarmtins]

Just some brief history - Took assessments back in August 2016, passed all practical assessments and first 5 parts of MMI, failed 6th part.

My questions are -
1) Is the MMI an essential part of the assessment or are there companies out there that will consider you to have passed the assessment without the MMI?

and

2) If I retake the assessment as I'm now eligable again, will I literally just have to answer the 6th part of the MMI or will I need to redo all 6 parts? As I've passed the rest of the tests, I know I wont need to redo those.

Thanks guys

 

[Sirgerbil]

Just some brief history - Took assessments back in August 2016, passed all practical assessments and first 5 parts of MMI, failed 6th part.

My questions are -
1) Is the MMI an essential part of the assessment or are there companies out there that will consider you to have passed the assessment without the MMI?

and

2) If I retake the assessment as I'm now eligable again, will I literally just have to answer the 6th part of the MMI or will I need to redo all 6 parts? As I've passed the rest of the tests, I know I wont need to redo those.

Thanks guys

1) Yes its an essential part, this will count as one of your fails.

2) I believe you will have to resit the whole MMI.

 

[wildarmtins]

1) Yes its an essential part, this will count as one of your fails.

2) I believe you will have to resit the whole MMI.

Booooo :-P Thanks for your help

 

[choochoochoo]

1) Yes its an essential part, this will count as one of your fails.

2) I believe you will have to resit the whole MMI.

I'll never understand why MMI is counted towards your fail count.

Like the DMI it's subjective and open to interpretation. Even though the psychologists/assessors would like to believe they are impartial and objective, they are humans.

The rest of the tests are either right/wrong or marked/measured by a machine that tells you whether you meet a set standard.

 

[tracerboy]

Can I ask what part you think you failed on, was it not giving enough depth or information etc. Thanks

 

[mmbeak78]

1) Yes its an essential part, this will count as one of your fails.

2) I believe you will have to resit the whole MMI.

This being the case, why on earth do GTR undertake the DMI before the MMI? Seems odd that Line Managers should be expected to interview candidates that could fail the MMI thereafter and no longer be able to apply for any future vacancies thanks to the ridiculous 'two strikes' policy?!

 

[ComUtoR]

no longer be able to apply for any future vacancies thanks to the ridiculous 'two strikes' policy?!

Why is it 'ridiculous' ? Its a sensible rule to have two strikes. It has been discussed at length on this forum. Well worth searching for it.

As for the DMI first. I'd agree. It feels a waste of time to do the DMI before the MMI. I have wondered why this is the case but cannot see no rhyme or reason for it either.

You have to pass both so maybe the point is that failing the DMI can mean that your application could be stopped for GTR but still gives you an opportunity to continue with another TOC. Maybe the MMI being on a different day means that the cost can be reduced by not progressing a candidate further at DMI stage and having none, or reduced MMI costs.

 

[Bromley boy]

This being the case, why on earth do GTR undertake the DMI before the MMI? Seems odd that Line Managers should be expected to interview candidates that could fail the MMI thereafter and no longer be able to apply for any future vacancies thanks to the ridiculous 'two strikes' policy?!

If you pass the initial tests but then fail the DMI, do you then lose one of your lives due to the fact you've not attempted the MMI?

That is harsh in my view, if so.

The process at my place was all the "official" tests on one assessment day with lunch between the written tests and the MMI. If you weren't successful on the writtens you were sent home at lunchtime, but if you passed the official tests to the national standard and failed DMI your lives were still intact.

 

[Pepperami]

The two strike rule has been in place for a long time, and its purpose is to potentially sift out anyone not suitable for the role

I think the reasoning is, if you cannot get through after two attempts, then its game over, because if you continue.... like a car test, odds are, unless you are really really bad... sooner or later your going to pass it

That's not a very good example, but the test is designed not to trip you up, or mislead you, it has a very strict criteria, and two attempts at it is considered an appropriate amount... some pass first time, some take the two goes, and some don't get there at all, that is unfortunately the way it is

 

[mmbeak78]

Why is it 'ridiculous' ? Its a sensible rule to have two strikes. It has been discussed at length on this forum. Well worth searching for it.

As for the DMI first. I'd agree. It feels a waste of time to do the DMI before the MMI. I have wondered why this is the case but cannot see no rhyme or reason for it either.

You have to pass both so maybe the point is that failing the DMI can mean that your application could be stopped for GTR but still gives you an opportunity to continue with another TOC. Maybe the MMI being on a different day means that the cost can be reduced by not progressing a candidate further at DMI stage and having none, or reduced MMI costs.

My dislike of the two-strike is the almost covert nature in which it is applied. At no point during my application have I been informed of this rule within the rail industry and having spoken to other candidates applying for positions with other train operators, nor have they.
If it weren't for fantastic forums such as this, I would most likely still be in the dark about it even now! Given the importance of this rule and how hard it can be to get into a Train Driver role, I really feel that it should be made explicit by all Train Operators as part of their application process.

 

[ComUtoR]

My dislike of the two-strike is the almost covert nature in which it is applied. At no point during my application have I been informed of this rule within the rail industry and having spoken to other candidates applying for positions with other train operators, nor have they.

I found out on the day and that was purely because another candidate was on her second attempt. I believed I only had a single chance and treated it like any other job application. I don't think the TOC's are being covert but I do wonder how open the whole process actually is.

I really feel that it should be made explicit by all Train Operators as part of their application process.

I had never heard of the OPC and mine was done internally with the TOC's own staff.

I think the TOC's treat their applications purely from a single attempt process. Recruitment is higher than I have ever seen and forums like this show that people are failing, taking their results to other TOC's and often don't care about who they work for and have multiple applications in at various TOCs'. TOC's are notoriously slow at everything. I would agree they are a little behind in their recruitment methods.

I do however, support the 2 strikes rule.

Are all TOC's linked to the OPC ? I didn't see mine on their website.

 

[Bromley boy]

The two strike rule has been in place for a long time, and its purpose is to potentially sift out anyone not suitable for the role

I think the reasoning is, if you cannot get through after two attempts, then its game over, because if you continue.... like a car test, odds are, unless you are really really bad... sooner or later your going to pass it

That's not a very good example, but the test is designed not to trip you up, or mislead you, it has a very strict criteria, and two attempts at it is considered an appropriate amount... some pass first time, some take the two goes, and some don't get there at all, that is unfortunately the way it is

I don't have a problem with the rule. It is a level playing field and everyone (should) be aware of it when applying. The onus is on candidates to research the process before applying (sorry if that sounds harsh).

What I'm wondering is what happens where TOCs have the MMI after the DMI (MMI is part of the official process, DMI isn't). What if a candidate passes the written tests, fails the DMI and is then not allowed to progress to the MMI? If this counts as an attempt that strikes me as very unfair as someone who may be capable of passing the MMI isn't given a chance to take it and therefore loses a life.

Does anyone know if that is the case?

 

[dazzayid]

I don't think it does count as a strike. I passed all the assessments 3 years ago, failed the DMI 6 months later. I have just passed DMI last week now have my MMI next week.

 

[Raul_Duke]

My dislike of the two-strike is the almost covert nature in which it is applied. At no point during my application have I been informed of this rule within the rail industry and having spoken to other candidates applying for positions with other train operators, nor have they.
If it weren't for fantastic forums such as this, I would most likely still be in the dark about it even now! Given the importance of this rule and how hard it can be to get into a Train Driver role, I really feel that it should be made explicit by all Train Operators as part of their application process.

Why should they?

For everyone who doesn't do the research there'll be another 5 more motivated / "switched on," people who will.

TOC's won't change because they don't need to. If they weren't getting x-thousand applicants per position then they might reconsider.

 

[Red18]

My dislike of the two-strike is the almost covert nature in which it is applied.

Yes, but to be fair how many companies would divulge their particular recruitment policies as openly as TOC's do?
And how many would allow a person a second chance having already been rejected for whatever reason?
With many job applications you turn up for an interview with no idea what to expect; tricky questions, role play, written tests, maths tests. You also have no idea how many people will be on the interview panel or what particular personal traits they may be looking for etc..
When you apply for a Train Driving job with a TOC they send you pretty much everything you need to know about each step of the application process. I think that is pretty open and pretty fair.

People also need to remember that even though you may pass all the mandatory tests you can still fail, as in any interview with any company, because they just don't like you.
And I believe that's why some TOC's do the DMI first. Saves time and money.

 

[king_walnut]

I think the MMI being part of the two strikes is an unfortunate rule.

If someone is capable of passing the psychometric tests, why should they be ruled out permanently based on a lack of examples that would cause them to fail the MMI questions? Someone who's failed 2 MMI's might well go on to gain a ridiculous amount of relevant experience over the following few years, and therefore be more than suitable for the drivers role.

I know it won't ever change, but it is surprising that a lack of suitable scenarios to think of would contribute to you being ruled out forever.

 

[Red18]

I know it won't ever change, but it is surprising that a lack of suitable scenarios to think of would contribute to you being ruled out forever.

I think the MMI can be as much about how you present yourself when under pressure as opposed to just giving good scenarios of what you did in previous jobs.
We can all say how great we would be in certain situations and I'm sure most people would 'fluff' this information up a little anyway. Let's be honest nobody is going to admit to being a flapper under pressure are they? What the MMI does is to allow the interviewer to read between the lines a little, maybe filter out those who have embellished a little too much, and to see how you handle being put under pressure.
Hence the "So, how did that make you feel?" being repeated over and over.

 

[king_walnut]

Hence the "So, how did that make you feel?" being repeated over and over.

What's the best way to even answer that? For my emergency situation example I'm probably going to use a time when I had to get the power off because a junkie ran away from me down the track. It didn't really make me feel anything, I just did what I had to do .. all in a day's work. But I feel that it's not the right thing to say.

 

[Red18]

Lol, I know. It's hard isn't it?
In that example I would just try and be honest then...

"At the time I didn't really feel anything. My training kicked in and I dealt with the situation quickly and calmly. Afterwards, when I had chance to reflect on what had happened, I was a little shocked and upset but happy that I handled the situation the way I did"

 

[king_walnut]

And then assuming they keep asking me how it made me feel, just re-iterate the point and don't change the answer?

 

[Red18]

Tell the truth. Don't change the answer if that would be a lie.
Failing that a karate chop to the throat and politely thank them for their time.


(That was a joke by the way. Don't do that. They don't like it)