Group Boredom and Reactions Practice

[KT530]

Many thanks

 

[anthony263]

I am certainly glad I practised the computerised version of the Group Boredom test, quiete surprised there were a few at the test centre today who didnt even know you could find versions of this test online

 

[Dave1987]

I am certainly glad I practised the computerised version of the Group Boredom test, quiete surprised there were a few at the test centre today who didnt even know you could find versions of this test online

Because you are not supposed to practise intensely on the proper test. Why do you think you are given a simplified version to practice on and not the proper thing? I actually think all this practice material available has detrimental affect, because the people who practice intensely on the real think are at a clear advantage to those who use the practice material supplied by the TOC. This ov course raises the level to which people are achieving. This means people who have practiced using the TOC supplied material might get a lower pass and be told their mark isn't high enough. Yet they are probably more suited to the role than the people who practiced intensely on the proper test. Is it any surprise they are changing the tests????

 

[NI 271]

Because you are not supposed to practise intensely on the proper test. Why do you think you are given a simplified version to practice on and not the proper thing? I actually think all this practice material available has detrimental affect, because the people who practice intensely on the real think are at a clear advantage to those who use the practice material supplied by the TOC. This ov course raises the level to which people are achieving. This means people who have practiced using the TOC supplied material might get a lower pass and be told their mark isn't high enough. Yet they are probably more suited to the role than the people who practiced intensely on the proper test. Is it any surprise they are changing the tests????

What are you basing that bit (in bold) on, exactly? The rest I can accept, but that bit is pure conjecture, and something you cannot possibly know. If someone is unsuitable for the role of trainee driver, the two interviews should discover this.

 

[Dave1987]

What are you basing that bit (in bold) on, exactly? The rest I can accept, but that bit is pure conjecture, and something you cannot possibly know. If someone is unsuitable for the role of trainee driver, the two interviews should discover this.

Well if you feel the need to practice intensely you are clearly not confident in your ability to get a good score without that practice and by that virtue maybe you are not totally suited to the role. That is my reasoning. If the TOC wanted you to practice the real thing they would provide the resources for it or tell you where to get it.

 

[NI 271]

Well if you feel the need to practice intensely you are clearly not confident in your ability to get a good score without that practice and by that virtue maybe you are not totally suited to the role. That is my reasoning. If the TOC wanted you to practice the real thing they would provide the resources for it or tell you where to get it.

I was perfectly confident in my ability, however I wanted to be better still. It's why I rehearsed my answers for a manager interview, also. With so many applicants for each position, and knowing that many of them will be doing likewise, it would be very remiss of any candidate to think they would just walk into a job without going the extra mile. My experiences would leave most other candidates way behind (similar shifts, weekends/bank hols, emergencies, communicating, customer service, going the extra mile at work...the things they look for could have been tailor-made for me), but there's no way I'd ever be arrogant enough to assume they'd be enough, when you get down to the final few you're up against outstanding candidates, the only way to succeed is to be the best of the best. In the present climate, being suitable isn't enough on it's own.

And at the moment, that means in every facet of the application process. Maybe the new assessment will mean it isn't as necessary, but for now, it is.

Ironically, my first few attempts at the Group Bourdon test would, reading through various threads on here, have been plenty good enough to pass. I don't think wanting to be the very best I can be at something is a trait any recruiter would view in a negative light. That attitude saw me headhunted last month to a role above my previous level, if I was (as some of my colleagues are) happy to get by doing 'just enough', I'd still be doing that old job. Thankfully for me, people above took note of my attitude and must have liked what they saw. That's the edge you need over rival candidates.

I'd suggest good scores in the dots/reactions tests are only a small part of the process. There will be many high-scorers in those who find themselves binned at interview stage because they ARE unsuitable. This still doesn't prove your theory that those who don't do the necessary research are "more suitable" as you aver.

 

[TDK]

I was perfectly confident in my ability, however I wanted to be better still. It's why I rehearsed my answers for a manager interview, also. With so many applicants for each position, and knowing that many of them will be doing likewise, it would be very remiss of any candidate to think they would just walk into a job without going the extra mile. My experiences would leave most other candidates way behind (similar shifts, weekends/bank hols, emergencies, communicating, customer service, going the extra mile at work...the things they look for could have been tailor-made for me), but there's no way I'd ever be arrogant enough to assume they'd be enough, when you get down to the final few you're up against outstanding candidates, the only way to succeed is to be the best of the best. In the present climate, being suitable isn't enough on it's own.

And at the moment, that means in every facet of the application process. Maybe the new assessment will mean it isn't as necessary, but for now, it is.

Ironically, my first few attempts at the Group Bourdon test would, reading through various threads on here, have been plenty good enough to pass. I don't think wanting to be the very best I can be at something is a trait any recruiter would view in a negative light. That attitude saw me headhunted last month to a role above my previous level, if I was (as some of my colleagues are) happy to get by doing 'just enough', I'd still be doing that old job. Thankfully for me, people above took note of my attitude and must have liked what they saw. That's the edge you need over rival candidates.

I'd suggest good scores in the dots/reactions tests are only a small part of the process. There will be many high-scorers in those who find themselves binned at interview stage because they ARE unsuitable. This still doesn't prove your theory that those who don't do the necessary research are "more suitable" as you aver.

And this is the reason you read on this forum of so many people being dissapointed that they failed the interviews and so many with passes put on hold. You are fortunate to have the base qualities required and whether or not you practiced you would most likely have passed but how many people who do not practice do not get to the interviews because although they have passed all the tests others have a higher grade who in reality should have not got this grade by practicing. I see your point but this practice material is unfortunately adding the risk of good candidates not getting to interview if their morals are "practice is cheating" the system.

I agree that if you want a job you do your best to get the job and if that means researching and getting practice material so be it but there are many people out there (and I know many) who have a pass in their back pocket but did not get to interview as their grades were less than others. One company had over 1600 applicants for drivers jobs and hd to actually re-recruit as the quality of the candidates at interview were not to the standard.

 

[NI 271]

And this is the reason you read on this forum of so many people being dissapointed that they failed the interviews and so many with passes put on hold. You are fortunate to have the base qualities required and whether or not you practiced you would most likely have passed but how many people who do not practice do not get to the interviews because although they have passed all the tests others have a higher grade who in reality should have not got this grade by practicing. I see your point but this practice material is unfortunately adding the risk of good candidates not getting to interview if their morals are "practice is cheating" the system.

I agree that if you want a job you do your best to get the job and if that means researching and getting practice material so be it but there are many people out there (and I know many) who have a pass in their back pocket but did not get to interview as their grades were less than others. One company had over 1600 applicants for drivers jobs and hd to actually re-recruit as the quality of the candidates at interview were not to the standard.

I fully appreciate that, all I objected to was the view that those who didn't get through were less suitable, it doesn't automatically follow that all those who do use the available resources are less suitable than anyone else, I wasn't suggesting many unsuitable candidates would get past assessment. It's why I find Northern's model, ie driver manager interview first, better, although equally I understand why other TOCs do things the other way around.

If the current arrangement was satisfactory, it wouldn't be getting changed...

 

[Red18]

I am certainly glad I practised the computerised version of the Group Boredom test, quiete surprised there were a few at the test centre today who didnt even know you could find versions of this test online

Did you do the test on computer or on paper though?

 

[anthony263]

Did you do the test on computer or on paper though?

The GBT was done on paper at the asessment centre. I had also practiced using the materials sent to me by FGW.

I do feel comfident in my skills but it never hurts to pratice

 

[KT530]

Re the actual reactions test keyboard they use in the assessments - does anyone know how this is mounted, i.e. horizontally on a flat surface, upright vertical, or at an angle?

 

[FlamTap]

Re the actual reactions test keyboard they use in the assessments - does anyone know how this is mounted, i.e. horizontally on a flat surface, upright vertical, or at an angle?

Here's a video of the real thing in action:

[youtube]5EulZ1-VlCo&start=82[/youtube]

 

[KT530]

Here's a video of the real thing in action:

[youtube]5EulZ1-VlCo&start=82[/youtube]

Thanks very much FlamTap