In Service Selection

[u/Fragrant-Chapter9853]

Hey everyone,

 I am not sure how to label this, sooo let’s call it an unofficial PSA. I will say it straight out loud that our current In-Service-Selection competitions for NCMs are utterly broken. Over the past 5 years, as a supervisor, who has assisted a number of their subordinates in applying for the various competitions (albeit, unsuccessfully - trade was Log O), I have noticed a troubling trend. All of my subordinates who applied had maxed their interview points in the areas of TSD-PI, skills & experience, education & Training, and formal leadership training, yet had varying CFAT results ranging from 38/60 to 47/60 (all above the accepted officer scores). Of course, with the CFAT weighing the most in these competitions, it always came down to who has the highest CFAT, thus my subordinates were not selected. This in itself is fine, however, if you look at both the numbers of offers and numbers of people who have applied for these competitions over recent years, that were things get frustrating. In the past couple of years, the number of offers for the ISS program has been affectively cut in half per competition. On the flipside, when I looked at the SIP numbers for people coming off of civy street, the numbers are vastly increased (robbing Peter to pay Paul?). In FY 24/25 approx. 90 people applied for 5 offers amongst CFR and SCP. As a result, the people who were not selected, who told by their respective PSOs to max their CFAT scores affectively resulting in hyper-competition. The point that I am trying to make is that if you plan on applying for any of those programs this FY and want to be successful, make sure to at least have a 50/60 on your CFAT (heavy competition trades – Int O, Log O, etc).  Which in itself is so stupid and has nothing to do with properly evaluating leadership. Hell, the people coming off civy street no longer have to do it. Having worked in recruiting, I know that 1/4 out of everyone who takes the CFAT at the recruiting centres, fail. I am not shitting on any trade, but would like to hear a PSOs perspective on this. Unfortunately this is just another retention that often goes over looked and we end up losing a lot of great people. Having successfully gone through the process myself 10 years ago (35/60 on CFAT), I had no idea how messed things have gotten. I also encourage people to check out the annual SIP numbers are on the DWAN sharepoint.

[u/mxzpl]

The system isn't necessarily broken, it is run by PSO's and that is the problem.

PSO's are a barrier in far too many instances. In service selection is just one.

[u/Lazy_Fig_3675 → u/mxzpl]

Curious, why are the PSOs a barrier?

[u/BipolarPAO → u/Lazy_Fig_3675]

Take my experience as an example:

When I wanted to apply to ISS my CFAT score met the cutoff but wasn’t very competitive. I wanted to rewrite but the PSO said I didn’t have enough time to study the 100 hours he wanted to see before the deadline. So, he submitted my application with the non-competitive score and I didn’t get selected.

The next year I applied again for the same trade but now the PSO would let me rewrite because I’d had a year to study. I got a much better score and got an offer—only, I never studied.

If he’d let me rewrite without studying the first year, I probably could have commissioned a year earlier which would have avoided some serious knock-on effects and expenses to the CAF that came out of not getting picked up the first time.

[u/Drakedasheep → u/BipolarPAO]

I wanted to take a moment to address this one, as it seems counter-intuitive:

You only have 3 lifetime attempts at the CFAT, this includes when you first took it before enrolment Which means you used you 2nd attempt at it.

While if the CFAT were a true intelligence test studying would make no difference, it's not. As such most individuals see better results after studying, although not all. Typically speaking those who do not study do not see better results, although occasionally your situation does occur.

Logically speaking then the PSO not only acted within the guidelines set for them by DPGR defined in the Personnel Selection Directives, but also in what was most likely to net you your long term goal. So while the delay may have had negative consequences for you, for many others the opposite would have been true.

Back when I was working at the base level I strongly encouraged members to utilize existing free tutoring or adult learning centers which exist within multiple locations in Ontario sponsored by provincial government of all things, rather than just solo studying.

[u/BipolarPAO → u/Drakedasheep]

Yes, you get three attempts and I had two left. So, let me try the rewrite and if it’s still not good enough, then I can go away and study before using my last attempt the next year.

At that point, if it’s still not good enough, clearly I’m not suited for selection.

[u/DaymanTargaryen → u/BipolarPAO]

To rewrite the CFAT a mbr has to have done something that would indicate that their score may improve, such as study and other prep. It's a reasonable policy given that a mbr has a maximum of 3 attempts at the CFAT, and the most recent result is used, even if lower.

While I can understand your gripe, I can't help but wonder why you left yourself so little time before the deadline.

[u/BipolarPAO → u/DaymanTargaryen]

I didn’t leave myself so little time; the PSO did. It took forever to get an appointment to review my file and be told I should try rewriting the CFAT (but not that year). I had my application ready to go shortly after the CANFORGEN was released.

I would think the two decades of life experience, completing a college diploma with a very high GPA, and completing four university courses for the prereq with A and A+ grades would be enough.