Superintendents' assessment process

Report: 8
Date: 15 March 2001
By: Commissioner

Summary

The report provides a summary of the last Superintendents' Assessment process, which took place in October and November 2000, together with details of the results.

A. Recommendation

That Authority members note the contents of this report.

B. Supporting information

1. The Superintendents' Promotion Assessment Centre was held between 30 October and 24 November 2000. All substantive chief inspectors from the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) and other forces were eligible to apply.

2. Potential candidates were provided with the opportunity to attend a briefing before the process commenced.

3. The application process consisted of the completion of a competency/skill based application form, which was then assessed by the officer's line manager. All examples of performance contained in applications were required to be verified by the line manager. He/she was also required to make a recommendation as to the suitability of the candidate for promotion and endorse the form to the effect that the attendance management selection criteria form was completed in compliance with policy and that there were no issues that would disbar the candidate from promotion at this stage.

4. All completed application forms were then passed to business group panels, comprising the Business Manager and another senior officer from the Business Group. They reviewed the evidence and scored it against corporate criteria developed by the P7 Higher Occupational Psychologist. The score determined the level of recommendation ranging from Not Recommended to Recommended or Highly Recommended.

5. All those in the categories Recommended or Highly Recommended went forward to the assessment centre.

6. The assessment process consisted of a behavioural interview based on the candidate's application form, a strategic interview, a presentation exercise, an immediate written response exercise and a further written exercise.

7. The following competencies/skills were assessed during the process:

• Leadership
• Decision Making
• Managing and Developing Staff
• Communication
• Strategic Planning
• Policing Diversity

8. Appendix 1 provides more details of the elements of the assessment process.

9. In determining the relevant areas to be tested job analysis interviews were undertaken to ensure the relevance of the information used and that the exercises were based on key contemporary practical issues facing the MPS. In-house focus groups and an external trial also validated the content of the exercises and assisted in the development of the behavioural indicators (assessors' marking sheets)

10. Each competency was assessed at least three times at the Assessment Centre in different ways.

11. Quality control was maintained by a team of six consultants and the Higher Occupational Psychologist. They rigorously reviewed the assessors' evidence to ensure that no candidate was disadvantaged, and that a corporate standard was maintained throughout the assessment centre. Additionally during the four weeks of assessments, the Higher Occupational Psychologist and consultants observed 20 per cent of the 'live' exercises.

12. The final panel met on 16 January 2001 and the results were published on 18 January. All unsuccessful candidates were offered one-to-one feedback interviews with a member of P7 quality control. The candidates were given three weeks to lodge an appeal from the date of the feedback interview.

13. A breakdown of the number of officers who applied and the number taking part in the assessment process broken down by gender and ethnicity is provided at Appendix 2.

14. To date one appeal has been received and it is anticipated there may still be one or two more to follow. The appeal is being evaluated by the Occupational Psychologist and a report provided to the Director of Personnel who makes the final decision as to whether the appeal should be allowed.

C. Financial implications

The cost of running the assessment process was approximately £123,000. This includes the cost of assessors, quality controllers and the support and IT staff to run the process. It excludes cost of the exercise design team's time, stationary and the opportunity costs for the applicants, their supervisors, SMT and review panels.

D. Background papers

None.

E. Contact details

The author of this report is Janice Tunnicliffe, Personnel Department.

For information contact:

MPA general: 020 7202 0202
Media enquiries: 020 7202 0217/18

Appendix 1: Assessment centre process for superintendents 2000

Presentation exercise

Candidates were given 30 minutes preparation for this exercise. They were then required to make a 15-minute verbal presentation in relation to a Critical Incident. At the end of the presentation, candidates were provided with an information update, and had up to 5 minutes to consider and make a verbal response to the update. The assessors then asked questions relating to the presentation for up to 5 minutes.

Candidates were assessed by two serving Superintendents or above, or possibly by one serving and one retired officer of similar rank.

The following competencies were assessed:

• Leadership
• Decision Making
• Communication

And the skill area of Policing Diversity

Strategic interview

In this exercise, the candidate was interviewed for 1 hour. The interview focused on strategic issues facing the Service and their implications for the role of Superintendent.

Candidates were assessed by two serving Superintendents or above, or possibly by one serving and one retired officer of similar rank.

The following competencies were assessed:

• Leadership
• Managing and Developing Staff
• Strategic Planning

And the skill area of Policing Diversity.

Behavioural interview

In this exercise, the candidate attended an interview that lasted for 30 minutes. This interview focused on the examples that the candidate had provided on his/her application form.

The following competencies were assessed:

• Leadership
• Decision Making
• Managing and Developing Staff
• Communication

The assessors were given copies of the candidates' relevant examples from their application form 30 minutes in advance and instructed to question on one example from each competency. The assessors were allowed to choose the example. Line managers comments were not available to assessors.

Candidates were assessed by two serving Superintendents or above, or possibly by one serving and one retired officer of similar rank.

Immediate written response exercise

Candidates are required to complete a 30-minute immediate written response exercise. This was based on a given scenario. There was no set word limit. Candidates decided for themselves at what time during the day they wished to complete the exercise. Candidates could complete this exercise on computer or in manuscript.

The following competencies were assessed:

• Decision Making
• Strategic Planning

And the skill area of Policing Diversity

Written exercise

This exercise required candidates to write a report that covered either performance and integrity issues, or staff management issues. Candidates selected which topic they were going to address before attending the assessment centre. The report, including any attachments, was not to exceed 1500 words and was completed during the day around their other exercise commitments. Candidates could complete this exercise on computer or in manuscript.

The written exercise tested the following competencies regardless of the paper chosen.

• Managing and Developing Staff
• Leadership
• Strategic Planning
• Communication

Appendix 2: Number of officers participating in the superintendents' assessment process

*Includes 5 external candidates, one each from Cheshire, City of London, Essex, Hertfordshire and Surrey Constabularies.
**Includes one external candidate from Essex.

Send an e-mail linking to this page

Feedback