Be gentle with me please, I am a first time poster but regular reader of the topics.
I am after a bit of advice. I am currently (and have been for the last two & a half years at least, but that is another story) trying to get a board date for SNCO. After to-ing and fro-info from Wing & attending their pre uniform staff course (twice!) I have got the WWO coming to meet with me at the squadron in two weeks time so he can assess my suitability for a board.
I know my ATC and RAF stuff from teaching First Class, but my downfall is talking about myself. So I can prepare, what sort of things am I likely to be asked on my board?
I got asked why I had chosen to become an SNCO instead of going for a comission. I was also asked what I thought my role would be as an SNCO. They may ask you what you think you can offer in uniform that you cannot currently do as a CI (something they asked my Dad on his board).
I never understand why they ask questions like this?
It’s a long time ago but I can’t remember being asked why I wanted to go the route I was interested in when I had interviews at the CIO and OASC, a real job. But I was asked in the ATC, a hobby, when I went for WO and then when I commissioned.
I’ve never been in an interview at work and asked why they have applied for this job over another.
What difference does it make that someones wants to be a CI, SNCO or Officer, surely it’s a personal thing and sod all to do with the ATC’s heirarchy. Unfortunately though because of this sort of questioning you have to coach people to prepare for this nonsense.
Thank you very much for your replies guys, they’re really helpful.
I never understand why they ask questions like this?
It’s a long time ago but I can’t remember being asked why I wanted to go the route I was interested in when I had interviews at the CIO and OASC, a real job. But I was asked in the ATC, a hobby, when I went for WO and then when I commissioned.
I’ve never been in an interview at work and asked why they have applied for this job over another.
What difference does it make that someones wants to be a CI, SNCO or Officer, surely it’s a personal thing and sod all to do with the ATC’s heirarchy. Unfortunately though because of this sort of questioning you have to coach people to prepare for this nonsense.[/quote]
Glass Half Empty, I totally agree with this. I have never understood the point of asking someone why this role over that role. Because they want to do that one, obviously, otherwise they wouldn’t be sitting in front of you. I have been asked ‘why do you want to do this role?’ twice in my job, and was tempted to answer on both occasions ‘why not?’ or give them a silly answer.
I can understand the question if only to have the candidate indicate their understanding of the difference between SNCO and Commission and their chosen path
if a candidate is seen as a future CO I can well understand asking the question why go SNCO…the candidate can justify their reasons, just by being at a SNCO board isn’t enough.
and likewise someone who is looking to be a CO but may not be suited to it, or has exceptional service in the Forces as a SNCO or even WO may well be questioned why they are looking for commission when they are better placed even experienced or skilled in a SNCO role
of course all this is dependant that there is still a belief the difference between the role of Commission and NCO still hold true
Maybe to indicate the perceived differences in the role, but to carry out some form of Air Cadets eugenics, no. The main thing is that if you are to commission then you should expect to command a squadron, potentially within 5 years of appt and if you don’t like the idea of this or like being commissioned you can’t resign and become an SNCO.
Who are we to say yes or no, we can only advise, it is still down to the individual what they want to do and this should be respected, regardless of what anyone might think.
The only thing I would do is strongly dissuade from any cadet going directly into uniform adult service, because you are a long time dead.
I tend to regard people like they are your children, you can only advise, but ultimately you have to let them take their own path. You may not like their choice, but you should support them.
In fairness, in almost every job interview I’ve ever had (and I’ve had a few), I’ve been asked ‘why do you want to do this job?’ and ‘where do you see this job taking you?’
They don’t like the answers ‘I need a job because I have no money’ and ‘to a new house’.
I’ve not heard of such a thing and it sounds like a somewhat strange way of doing things. I’d be keen to see a justification for requiring 3 interviews.
On my board they were quite keen on you knowing a few ACP numbers and what they are for. Especially the child protection ones. Who the WSO are and their roles. Apart from that as already mentioned.
You will almost certainly be asked about a child protection issue and how you would deal with it.
They might ask what specific skills you have, talk about yourself for a bit. Where you see yourself in a couple of years, why be an NCO not a CI, what your role is on the unit now, how you see it changing if you go into uniform.
Those are the sorts of things I would expect to be asked, but not being an NCO I can’t comment on it I’m afraid!
But that’s a job not a spare time activity, AKA a hobby. We should be welcoming the fact that people after the initial process feel that they wish to contribute something, beyond that. All this why do you want to do it and where do you see yourself guff is completely inappropriate.
They should have been a CI for a few years and ‘done the rounds’ (camps and other activities) so that they are able to see where they feel they are best suited, and in the current ATC done some form of course that is explaining the differences of the roles and the expectations of the roles (largely imposed by the organisation and those within it), to further assist their decision making.
Asking banal questions is not what is required, IMHO.
is it (boards and interviews) however further indication we have are not the Scouts, but a more serious organisation?
by that i mean, yes we are all volunteers but we still want to right people doing the right job and doing it well
i’m not saying the Scouts/other youth volunteer organisations dont consider whole they have as leaders, and have bad adult leaders
only it is far easier to walk into other organisations without expecting the same level of questioning.
there is also the aspect of the “RAF uniform” to consider, we (uniformed CFAVs) represent the RAF by proxy, often the public face and so candicates should not just be considered for the role they put themselves forward for, but consideration of how they would represent/how the RAF would be represented by their appoointment.
of course some would argue the notion of interview boards is a hark back to RAF life and the ATC is trying to be “more like the big boys” when it isnt required particualrly given the hoops required to be a Staff member, puts people off which is counterproductive for an organisation not known for being “overstaffed”
As I see it, a formal interview or board helps to set the tone of the future of an individual in the organisation. Even if it is all just theatre it has value.
Suitability to go into uniform also covers commitment and personal desire, as this is something that will only take place if people are willing to devote their spare time, for little more than altruistic reasons, like all youth volunteers. Do you want really want people hoodwinked by corporate BS, by those staff who talk up the roles (I include here those senior cadets who are sold a story) or approved because they are mates with someone or funny handshake mob?
To some extent the sqn cdr, assuming of course they are experienced enough, is pivotal, as they see the individual on a regular basis.
I have several chats with staff who are looking at a uniform role and I do all I can to dissuade them by telling them how badly the heirarchy treats you and the expectations applied. If they are still determined after I’ve done all I can to put them off, then they are IMO more than suitable. I don’t just rubber stamp their enquiry.
Then there is self-selection.
I’ve got 2 CIs who did a pre-uniform course and after said they didn’t want to take it any further as they felt it would take the fun out of being staff in the Corps. Ironically I’ve got one SNCO who has found the organisation to be increasingly far too anal and is looking to resign after nearly 10 years and carry on as a CI.
As I said, assuming, they would have been CIs for some time they would have seen all that goes on and feel they want to be a bigger part of the organisation. This counts for more than someone just doing the boards.
I do feel that the pre uniform courses should have far greater importance in the process and act a bit like the tests done at the CIO which ascertain the trade group(s) you can apply for. But as I said above the courses should be as blunt as possible, to allow people the freedom to see if it’s what they want.
I have to say that the question “what do you think that you can do as an officer that you can’t do as a CI” always annoyed me, because the answer is of course nothing (as a new junior officer, anyway).
I want to be an officer because I’m already doing the job as a CI and I deserve it!
I think applicants should ask the interviewer - what can I do as an SNCO/Officer, that I can’t do as a CI?
And see what they have to say, afterall the interviewers have all been CIs and know the answer, well other than anyone asking it at from OASC I imagine.