Friday, December 17, 2010

2011 PMF Semi-Finalists and In-Person Assessment: Open Thread

[Cross-posted to GovLoop here]

No, the semi-finalist list is not out (to my knowledge). Once it does come out, I'm sure most of you will know before I do. (Nor, as an aside, has the PMF site finally cleared what I assume is legal review for publishing). This post can serve as an open thread for anyone who wants to share the good or bad news, once it arrives.

In the mean time, however, we can discuss the in-person assessment a bit. A commenter in a previous thread pointed me to a document proposed to (but not, apparently, published by) the Chief Human Capital Officers (CHCO) Council regarding the administration of the in-person assessment (warning: PDF). Based on other information I have seen, the document appears to cover the breakdown of the in-person assessments, anticipating the number of semi-finalists that are expected at each of the assessment centers. Of particular note is the anticipated number of semi-finalists: 1500. Of the over 9100 applicants and 7400 ultimately nominated, the PMF Program Office intends to invite around 1500 semi-finalists to the in-person assessments. For those interested in graphing this, that's: 82% of applicants become nominees; and 20% of nominees (or 16% of applicants) will be chosen as semi-finalists. Further, the PMF Program Office indicates that about 750-800 semi-finalists will advance to finalist status (as a percentage of applicants, that's 8.2-8.7%; as a percentage of nominees, that's 10-10.7%; and as a percentage of semi-finalists, that's 50-53%). Historically, agencies have been able to absorb maybe half of the finalists, depending on demand. It's a useful approximation here, but given the state of the economy and the political climate toward federal employees right now, it's anyone's guess as to how this will play out in 2011. If we take the historical rate, then, an applicant has about a 1-in-25 shot at landing a position; a nominee improves to 1-in-20; and a semi-finalist improves to 1-in-4. Put another way, the program selects only about 4-5% of its applicants, which is pretty competitive (but you knew this, right?)

Now back to the in-person assessment. The locations (which were apparently polled preferentially) are:
  • Washington, DC
  • Chicago, IL
  • San Francisco, CA
  • Atlanta, GA

(According to the document) The assessment is a one-day, day-long assessment before a three member panel (comprised of an OPM official, an official from another agency, and a current or former PMF), and it will require semi-finalists to prepare and deliver an individual presentation, participate in a group exercise, and deliver a proctored writing assessment. The assessments will be spread out over approximately three weeks, so you will have a time window in which to schedule the assessment.

What do you think of this format? The assessment locations? When/where would you plan (or are you planning) to take the in-person assessment? And finally, is this process something in which you would expect to participate next year (or thereafter), should you become a finalist and find an appointment?

64 comments:

  1. As the person who found the document I was highly relieved to not be asked to complete a formal interview on the same day I will have other kinds of exercises to do. It just seemed like it would be more nerve racking that way. Also because we will be interviewed in groups of 10 I'm wondering if the plan will be to nominate 5 from each group because if so there is a strong element of luck as well depending on who you are competing against. This is true anyway but you know your chances if you see how you do against the other people in the room (at least on some exercises). I also am wondering if those being interviewed in Washington DC will have a tougher time since there is a MUCH larger pool of applicants to select from. Especially if as in some previous years 20% of those nominated end up not showing it seems those in smaller pools will benefit the most. I could be wrong though.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I agree with Anonymous #1 on the not having a formal interview part. If selected, I'll take the assessment in DC. I'm getting nervous about the selection, though 1/20 doesn't seem so bad once you put it that way.

    ReplyDelete
  3. The website is up now and it's full of useful info!

    ReplyDelete
  4. Not that I was expecting it or anything.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Semi-finalist announcements are out

    ReplyDelete
  6. @Anonymous 2:23 Did you get an email? Are they posted to the web site? I didn't see them there.

    ReplyDelete
  7. @Anonymous 2:28, notification via email

    ReplyDelete
  8. I hope it was good news for you! I still haven't received anything.

    ReplyDelete
  9. I haven't heard anything yet either. I heard that in previous years notifications were sent out alphabetically - I'm at the end of the alphabet so I'm sure it will be an agonizing day or two for me. :(

    ReplyDelete
  10. I just got mine! It was sent a half hour ago and my last name starts with "C."

    ReplyDelete
  11. My last name starts with a C too, I havent gotten it yet...maybe they aren't doing it alphabetically this year?

    ReplyDelete
  12. Maybe they are starting with the people who are semi-finalists. I'm an "A" and haven't heard yet.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Or maybe they are doing it by school or location?

    ReplyDelete
  14. Mine last name begins with "G" Been watching my email like a hawk. Best of luck to everyone who moves on

    ReplyDelete
  15. I guess we will all know soon enough. Good luck to you all!

    ReplyDelete
  16. Could totally be by location. I'm the same person @ 3:03pm. I go to UC Berkeley, so us California people might be hearing first. IDK

    ReplyDelete
  17. has anyone from DC heard?

    ReplyDelete
  18. My friend in DC heard. He was accepted. I haven't heard anything yet (also in DC).

    ReplyDelete
  19. Could also be releasing by where the in-person exam will be scheduled. So far, posters have confirmed CA and DC. Can anyone confirm IL or GA?

    ReplyDelete
  20. Atlanta is a no-go for me haven't heard yet!

    ReplyDelete
  21. Any news from WA? I knew I shouldn't have looked at the blog while at work. I had already forgotten about this all morning.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Yeah also waiting to hear from Atlanta....

    ReplyDelete
  23. Has everyone that heard been accepted? Or have there been rejections sent out as well?

    ReplyDelete
  24. Has anyone heard back who hasn't gotten through to the next round?

    ReplyDelete
  25. I have a friend, American University, DC, Last Name "A" that heard tonight and did not make it. I'm a "P" so I'm thinking I won't hear until the end of the week....what a great Xmas gift that would be!

    ReplyDelete
  26. I don't think it's at all alphabetical. My friend is a C and heard back. I'm a B and haven't heard back...

    ReplyDelete
  27. Does anyone know why OPM sends these emails in waves? Why not send out a mass email with a list of who did and didn't make it, just so everyone knows all at once? I'm an "S" so I'm sure it will be days before I hear anything. I'm not going to have any fingernails left.

    ReplyDelete
  28. @Amanda I'm also a "P" name but I hope I'll hear sooner since once they get to about E it should go faster until you get to about M. Just thinking about common last names. J of course is an exception to that. (Jackson, Johnson etc.)

    ReplyDelete
  29. @5:04 I feel your pain.

    ReplyDelete
  30. "D" here in Portland OR and checking my email like a hawk? has anyone checked application manager? I can't, I'm still at work and its blocked hahhahaha

    ReplyDelete
  31. I checked application manager (B last name from above) and got nothing...

    ReplyDelete
  32. I think the comments on this board have already proven that it's not alphabetical. It's futile to understand the government's hiring methods.

    ReplyDelete
  33. Congrats to everyone who made it to the next level!
    Does anyone know if the scores for the in-person assessment are compared with all semi-finalists or just for the people at the same interview site? I assume this is so for the group exercise, but what of the writing and individual presentations?

    ReplyDelete
  34. @5:14 Yet you have recognized the need to become part of the Borg. Resistance is truly futile. LOL

    ReplyDelete
  35. I'm in FL and selected. The notification letter was sent at 8:59 PM EST. I should be heading to Atlanta!

    ReplyDelete
  36. Well, I'm an "S" and just got notification that I was NOT selected. I had chosen DC as my interview site. If that helps anyone. :(

    ReplyDelete
  37. Shocked to hear tonight with the assumption of alphabetical notification. This last name "P" didn't make it. Good luck to all that did!

    ReplyDelete
  38. I'm @ 6:04 PM and my last name begins with an 'A', so I agree with other posters that notifications are not being released alphabetically.

    ReplyDelete
  39. They could be doing it in random batches too. Almost anything is possible.

    ReplyDelete
  40. Selected. Sent around 9 p.m. Name starts with N.

    ReplyDelete
  41. Anyone from Oregon, or who selected San Francisco got notification?

    ReplyDelete
  42. I offer a genuine congratulations and offer of good luck to those chosen to move on to the next round. I'm just sad that instead of looking at an individual's *actual* accomplishments, OPM is using a glorified personality test to eliminate 80% of the nominees. I'm a published author at the top of my class at a top tier school with a proven record of leadership and initiative and am fluent in three languages and was not chosen to move forward to the semi-finals. I answered the assessment questions honestly and thought I wrote a nice paragraph in the written portion of the test. I don't want to be a sore loser, I'm just having a hard time seeing the sense in this. *sigh*

    So begins the job search the old fashioned way I suppose.

    ReplyDelete
  43. I agree. It probably isn't the best way to do it. A lot of very qualified candidates get weeded out while average ones go through. It sucks. I have heard from friends who graduated last year that this was a general trend they saw, even w/in their own school (American) where a lot of average applicants went through while several well qualified ones did not. It has nothing to do with you as an applicant.

    ReplyDelete
  44. In Chicago, last name "R", got my notification of acceptance at 8:40PM CST.

    ReplyDelete
  45. Not selected. I choosed San Francisco for the in person assessment. Good luck to those who got selected.

    ReplyDelete
  46. Selected! Last name E, got the email at 9:19 EST, assessment location is Chicago.

    ReplyDelete
  47. In New England, just got acceptance at 9:46 PM EST.

    ReplyDelete
  48. Just got selected. San Francisco was my choice for assessment locations.

    ReplyDelete
  49. @ 6:33. I also agree with you. Without wanting to sound like a sore loser, this selection process is a ridiculous method to cut 80% of applicants. In the past, all nominees had the opportunity to exhibit their skills, and budget cuts have made it so that well qualified people aren't accepted. I also am at the top of my class, speak 3 languages, and have exhibited great leadership skills. Congrats to those who moved on, but shame on OPM for not realizing that a test with no correct answers and a 10 minute writing sample just are not sufficient.

    ReplyDelete
  50. Just find out. 10:24pm ATL. Going on to the next round! Congrats and good luck to ya'll!

    ReplyDelete
  51. In New Orleans, just got acceptance at 8:22 p.m.

    ReplyDelete
  52. I want to place a lot of blame on the schools. Grad programs are supposed to have a competitive assessment process to weed out seemingly average candidates. At my school (American) there isn't even a minimum GPA...I know some people that have not shown the academic achievement to warrant nomination. I think this test would yield better results if schools did what they are supposed to do instead of nominate everyone to improve their odds at getting a nice quote for their admissions brochures. Oh well. To those that made it, good luck with the new interview process. For the rest of us, good luck with the job hunt and USAjobs.

    ReplyDelete
  53. I think the initial assessment was pretty random, especially the situational analysis. However, with over 9000 applicants, I'm sure OPM are aware that a lot of quality candidates would be lost from the first round but know that with 1500 going through to be whittled down to about half that, they will ultimately still end up with very high quality candidates.

    ReplyDelete
  54. Last name starts with H selecting Atlanta, I received my acceptance at 9:04pm ET.

    ReplyDelete
  55. I don't agree with most of the comments about the assessment. In all fairness, I did get through to the semi-finalist round. I also would consider myself a great applicant, who likely would have gotten through with my resume and education from Stanford and UC Berkeley.

    Regardless of my credentials, it was clear to me that there were logical answers on the test, particularly the first section of the test. I approached it by thinking like a person who is applying to a fast-track to management program. Then I consistently chose answers that expressed a desire to be a leader, to learn new things, to take personal responsibility, and to be uncomfortable for the sake of the team or my own growth. That made the first part pretty easy. My only question afterward was: is it possible to be too forward/go-getter?

    I think the real "unfair" portion was the second section, particularly because of the questions about high school that could reflect negatively on someone. Fortunately, I was mostly a square in high school, just like everyone else that got into Stanford. I think that definitely gave me a boost if any points were given for having straight A's, ect. Also, personality tests ask the same or very similar questions in many different ways, over and over. However, as a Psychology major in college I learned how to construct these types of surveys, so I am familiar with them.

    As for the essay, I was pretty impressed with the idea of putting people, who say they are good enough to work under pressure, in a high pressure situation. I mean...what could have been a more easy question to answer than the one they asked? The problem is that when we get into high pressure situations, we forget to breathe, which means we have a limited capacity to think. In reality, there is no reason why any of us should not have been able to craft a great essay about ourselves in ten minutes. Especially considering I know I put a lot of time into changing my resume for USA jobs, so I had relatively recently been thinking about myself in PMF terms.

    Those are just my thoughts. I was most nervous because I generally do less well on tests than I do in interviews, and I would much rather have an interview than a test. I'm interested to hear what others think.

    ReplyDelete
  56. I remember right-clicking in the box during the written assessment...it was this strange kind of force of habit thing that happens whenever I see a red, underlined word that is misspelled in Firefox..I think I probably got flagged for it, as it stated in the instructions that any attempts at a copy/paste would be recorded. I think simply right-clicking in the box actually triggers this event. I remember the screen sort of flashing when I did it...I wonder if other people got eliminated based on this...

    ReplyDelete
  57. hey for those who've been selected as semi-finalists, are we suppose to choose our interview sites already? are we supposed to formally do this??? or is it more like you are talking about where you would like to have your interview site? or did we already establish where we would interview??? sorry...it seems like forever ago that I applied.

    ReplyDelete
  58. I was accepted last night at about 9:30pm as an E in CA. Congrats to those that made it and good luck to those who did not.

    I just wanted to say I also agree that the schools need to make a better effort at weeding out nominees. I think by looking at the numbers there is no way schools have a competitive process.

    BUT, that is a hard thing to tell schools to do. They would basically be telling their own students we do not have faith in you and are not going to help.

    I don't know, I think the process is as fair as possible. The OPM has identified the traits important to them, and they must have at least some psychologists telling them how to find those traits. Grades are not always the best indicators (but usually are in a quantitative world).

    ReplyDelete
  59. I also disagree with the unfairness posts... Having worked in local and state government, I know that it's not ONLY about intelligence and passing standardized tests... It's about interpersonal skills and how well someone is at being flexible donning many hats (like being lead, team assistant, etc.). You need to be someone that is a servant leader, not just a leader. And while you may think "average" folk passed through-again, these may be people that are just better at working with others and as assistants. Not everyone who goes through is meant to be placed in a managerial position. I personally think its great that OPM decided to look at people based on their personality-and I know that is what the in-person assessment used to be primarily about. Now it looks like the test is meant to choose those who already have the personality types meant to thrive in government and the in-person will be more on skills-based testing etc.

    ReplyDelete
  60. Anonymous @ 7:00 AM: The sheer volume of applicants and nominees doesn't necessarily warrant the conclusion that schools aren't conducting competitive processes. In practice, the competitiveness varies from school to school. I would argue that the numbers may be reflective of both greater participation at schools with a history with the program AND more schools participating this year than have ever participated. I only have data from three application cycles to date (and I'm missing the 2009 nominees list), but I think it would be interesting to do a year on year comparison of the number of unique schools participating. And by unique, I mean that all those Harvard - X and Harvard - Y schools should be combined into one.

    Also, it is true that OPM employs IO Psychologists to assist with assessments.

    Finally, I would argue that grades these days are meaningless in light of rampant grade inflation.

    ReplyDelete
  61. I think everyone is overlooking the real culprit of why it is so difficult to become a finalist these days: The Great Recession. FY 2007 and 2008 each had about 3600-3700 total applicants while this year's total was around 9100. That's a 250% increase! But while the applicant numbers have skyrocketed, the number of finalists has not increased accordingly. Therefore, you might have had a 20% chance of becoming a finalist in 2008, but this year it's only 8-9%.

    Check out the stats on page 11. https://www.pmf.opm.gov/Documents/AcademicOutreach.pdf

    ReplyDelete
  62. I think that document needs to live on Google Docs before it disappears from the PMF site. It has been one of the most helpful documents I've seen produced by the program office.

    The applicant numbers have risen sharply with these last three application cycles, and we can bet the economy has something to do with it. The government as a whole has only ever been able to absorb at most about 500 or so fellows in a year (measured from March XXXX to March XXXX + 1 or April XXXX to March XXXX + 1, usually). One of the stated goals of the program is to be able to ramp that up significantly (I think I read this in one of the power pack PMF rotation notices, but it could have been some random overheard conversation somewhere, so take it for what it's worth). If I recall, they wanted to increase it to something like 3,000 placed finalists in an application year. Anyone see that happening?

    ReplyDelete
  63. I think the main problem with this type of assessment is that it was done at the wrong stage of the process. Afterall, some agencies may actually *want* to hire an outgoing ego-maniac to handle public relations, while others may *want* book worms with the patience to sort through mountains of paperwork without going stir-crazy. The State Department isn't going to care if you got a B in a science class if you speak three languages, and the NIH probably won't care if you flunked history in college if you have a PhD in Cancer Biology. So I guess what I'm saying is that depending on the agency, there may have been different "right answers" on this very same exam. That's why I think something less subjective, like something that tested your logical reasoning or reading comprehension skills, would have been a better weed-out tool at this stage.

    I think the only section with merit was the written section, except that I'm now reading comments on another post on PMFellow's blog here that indicates that some people cheated their way through that by just retyping essays they'd already written, so there goes the value of that section too.

    I wouldn't be surprised if this exam changed drastically next year. Hoorah for being a guinea pig!

    ReplyDelete
  64. Official list was just posted (pmf.gov). Congrats to all the semi-finalists!

    ReplyDelete