NATS psychological profiling
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: SE England
Posts: 33
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
NATS psychological profiling
NATS have got a psychology boffin from Cranfield Uni to devise a formula that compares applicants for the ATCO training scheme to a "profile" of successfully validated trainees.
Applicants are scored from the aptitude tests, personality questionnaires, both the HR and tech interviews and the computer tests, i.e. the whole process. This data is then fed into the computer and compared to the "successful profile" and the applicants outcome is thus decided.
This sounds far fetched but I have seen it in writing.
It is therefore possible to pass all stages of the selection process but still not meet this magic formula and so be unsuccessful! They wouldn't be performing this jiggery-pokery otherwise.
Why go to all the bother of having the selection process if you don't take notice of the results?! Are the interviewers and interviewees wasting their time? Surely this says that NATS believe the process isn't reliable enough, (that's a seperate issue) so why not address this rather than introducing the secret fudge-factor?
Anyone who puts in the required effort and meets the standards set by NATS at each stage of the application process fully deserves their place on a training course. They should not then be submitted to a lottery that they can have no influence over.
It seems extremely unfair to put people through what is a hard process when in fact they cannot ultimately be fully prepared as there is a secret final stage that is out of their hands.
Applicants are scored from the aptitude tests, personality questionnaires, both the HR and tech interviews and the computer tests, i.e. the whole process. This data is then fed into the computer and compared to the "successful profile" and the applicants outcome is thus decided.
This sounds far fetched but I have seen it in writing.
It is therefore possible to pass all stages of the selection process but still not meet this magic formula and so be unsuccessful! They wouldn't be performing this jiggery-pokery otherwise.
Why go to all the bother of having the selection process if you don't take notice of the results?! Are the interviewers and interviewees wasting their time? Surely this says that NATS believe the process isn't reliable enough, (that's a seperate issue) so why not address this rather than introducing the secret fudge-factor?
Anyone who puts in the required effort and meets the standards set by NATS at each stage of the application process fully deserves their place on a training course. They should not then be submitted to a lottery that they can have no influence over.
It seems extremely unfair to put people through what is a hard process when in fact they cannot ultimately be fully prepared as there is a secret final stage that is out of their hands.
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Southampton
Posts: 300
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"Anyone who puts in the required effort and meets the standards set by NATS at each stage of the application process fully deserves their place on a training course."
Why?
The selection process is not there as an end in itself, it is an attempt to identify candidates who will pass the college course and go on to validate. NATS invests alot of time and money in its ATCO trainees and has a responsibility to take whatever steps it sees fit not to waste either. The selection process has to predict which candidates stand the best chance of success with very limited information. NATS does not owe anybody a chance no matter how hard they try or how badly they want to do the job.
"Surely this says that NATS believe the process isn't reliable enough, (that's a seperate issue)"
NATS are well aware that the process isn't reliable and it IS the issue, until the pass rates near 100% selection will need to be constantly reviewed.
"It seems extremely unfair to put people through what is a hard process when in fact they cannot ultimately be fully prepared as there is a secret final stage that is out of their hands."
You can never be fully prepared for a job that requires as much training as ours. The final decision will always be out of the candidates hands, no matter what the job and as for being a secret - you know about it don't you?
All that said, I do not think that comparing psychological profiles will help very much and I would be surprised if its results were allowed to over rule the selection committees decision.
Although this is far from a new idea it bears repeating. The best form of selection is to send all candidates to operational units and have them work as assistants for a year or so and only proceed to the college on the recommendation of that unit.
Why?
The selection process is not there as an end in itself, it is an attempt to identify candidates who will pass the college course and go on to validate. NATS invests alot of time and money in its ATCO trainees and has a responsibility to take whatever steps it sees fit not to waste either. The selection process has to predict which candidates stand the best chance of success with very limited information. NATS does not owe anybody a chance no matter how hard they try or how badly they want to do the job.
"Surely this says that NATS believe the process isn't reliable enough, (that's a seperate issue)"
NATS are well aware that the process isn't reliable and it IS the issue, until the pass rates near 100% selection will need to be constantly reviewed.
"It seems extremely unfair to put people through what is a hard process when in fact they cannot ultimately be fully prepared as there is a secret final stage that is out of their hands."
You can never be fully prepared for a job that requires as much training as ours. The final decision will always be out of the candidates hands, no matter what the job and as for being a secret - you know about it don't you?
All that said, I do not think that comparing psychological profiles will help very much and I would be surprised if its results were allowed to over rule the selection committees decision.
Although this is far from a new idea it bears repeating. The best form of selection is to send all candidates to operational units and have them work as assistants for a year or so and only proceed to the college on the recommendation of that unit.
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Hurn....still
Posts: 66
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It is therefore possible to pass all stages of the selection process but still not meet this magic formula and so be unsuccessful! They wouldn't be performing this jiggery-pokery otherwise.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: southampton,hampshire,england
Posts: 869
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Van Der Hum
Agree totally with Arkady, you see nobody really knows what makes a controller tick. Selection purely on the basis of academic achievement has been found to be wanting, and Arkady's final para would serve both employer and potential employee alike.
Another solution would be to take this leviathon of complexity that is the UK ATC system and simplify it so that it can be performed by Joe Average and Norma Normal instead of having to become a four-dimensional chess player cum brain-warped psycho every time you plug the £10 headset into the billion dollar pile of computerised fish tanks.
Another solution would be to take this leviathon of complexity that is the UK ATC system and simplify it so that it can be performed by Joe Average and Norma Normal instead of having to become a four-dimensional chess player cum brain-warped psycho every time you plug the £10 headset into the billion dollar pile of computerised fish tanks.
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: By here now in a minute
Posts: 122
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Anyone who puts in the required effort and meets the standards set by NATS at each stage of the application process fully deserves their place on a training course.
NATS does not owe anybody a chance no matter how hard they try or how badly they want to do the job.
You can never be fully prepared for a job that requires as much training as ours.
The best form of selection is to send all candidates to operational units and have them work as assistants for a year or so and only proceed to the college on the recommendation of that unit.
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: LHR/EGLL
Age: 45
Posts: 4,394
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't have a problem with this. Why shouldn't candidates go through psychological profiling?
That same could be said of any job interview.
If that was the case there would be a ten year waiting list to start at the college. The psych profiling is used to determine which of those candidates who passed everything else would be most likely to succeed in a high pressure, team working environment, according to criteria stipulated by the employer.
It seems extremely unfair to put people through what is a hard process when in fact they cannot ultimately be fully prepared as there is a secret final stage that is out of their hands.
Anyone who puts in the required effort and meets the standards set by NATS at each stage of the application process fully deserves their place on a training course.
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Berkshire, UK
Age: 79
Posts: 8,268
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm not sure that any testing would be foolproof, or that any system which did prove foolproof would be acceptable to "authority". ATC people are among the looniest people I've ever met; my wife tells everyone "they're all raving mad". So what sort of system would or could quantify that strange personality trait?
IMHO educational qualifications mean very little after initial selection. I managed to scrape 2 GCE "O" level passes, neither in a science subject, but I worked alongside people with 6 A levels, two degrees, etc. I'd be the first to admit that my general intelligence is way, way below that of some of my ex-colleagues but, like them, I had the peculiar ability to do the job. I have seen many extremely well-educated guys fail - they simply could not hack the practical job, which requires a certain flair. Not only that, but controllers are often suited to one particular job and cannot do someone elses.. I could do the Heathrow Tower and Approach Radar jobs but was certain that I could never have managed Thames or Essex Radar - those people are of another world! I used to sit beside the TMA controllers and watch with awe - how on earth could they do it? Equally they'd come and watch the approach controllers, totally baffled as to how we sequenced traffic with such tight spacing. Very experienced instructors from The College have often failed to re-validate when posted back to an operational station.... And senior and experienced controllers might find College work impossible (me for a start).
From the many trainees I encountered during my career I have no doubt that those with a keen interest in aviation matters - yes, including spotters - go on to make good controllers. Their chance of success is enhanced if they are posted to a station of their choice. It's very depressing for a training officer meeting a trainee for the first time when he asks: "Did you want to come here?" to be told "not bl**dy likely". That signals bad problems. On the other hand, the trainee who views his posting as a dreamn come true (I did) and is eager to do the job to the best of his professional ability stands a very good chance of success.
Good luck to all who are going through the application process. Those who make it right through to validation are in for a truly fantastic career - probably the best job on earth.
IMHO educational qualifications mean very little after initial selection. I managed to scrape 2 GCE "O" level passes, neither in a science subject, but I worked alongside people with 6 A levels, two degrees, etc. I'd be the first to admit that my general intelligence is way, way below that of some of my ex-colleagues but, like them, I had the peculiar ability to do the job. I have seen many extremely well-educated guys fail - they simply could not hack the practical job, which requires a certain flair. Not only that, but controllers are often suited to one particular job and cannot do someone elses.. I could do the Heathrow Tower and Approach Radar jobs but was certain that I could never have managed Thames or Essex Radar - those people are of another world! I used to sit beside the TMA controllers and watch with awe - how on earth could they do it? Equally they'd come and watch the approach controllers, totally baffled as to how we sequenced traffic with such tight spacing. Very experienced instructors from The College have often failed to re-validate when posted back to an operational station.... And senior and experienced controllers might find College work impossible (me for a start).
From the many trainees I encountered during my career I have no doubt that those with a keen interest in aviation matters - yes, including spotters - go on to make good controllers. Their chance of success is enhanced if they are posted to a station of their choice. It's very depressing for a training officer meeting a trainee for the first time when he asks: "Did you want to come here?" to be told "not bl**dy likely". That signals bad problems. On the other hand, the trainee who views his posting as a dreamn come true (I did) and is eager to do the job to the best of his professional ability stands a very good chance of success.
Good luck to all who are going through the application process. Those who make it right through to validation are in for a truly fantastic career - probably the best job on earth.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: 43° 40' 47" , -80° 25' 28"
Posts: 70
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Obviously rumour, but when I did that course at Cranfield it was rumoured that a similar study had been done, showing the selection tests employed by NATS to have absolutely no relation to eventual validation at a NATS unit. The report was supposedly suppressed by a litigious third party company who supplied and administered the test. Sprinkle allegedly through the preceding sentences at your own discretion please.
This was a while ago though, and I know most things have changed since then.
As everyone else says, it's difficult to derive an infallible 'formula' for the psychological profile. Common sense will prevail I'm sure
and the information will just be another piece of data the selection board can consider in their decision making.
This was a while ago though, and I know most things have changed since then.
As everyone else says, it's difficult to derive an infallible 'formula' for the psychological profile. Common sense will prevail I'm sure
and the information will just be another piece of data the selection board can consider in their decision making.
PPRuNe Handmaiden
Psychological profiling?
Gees, just get the prospective candidate to join operational ATCO's on a Watch team bonding session at the local curry house/drinking establishment.
It would save NATS a fortune in testing and the cost to the candidate is to his/her wallet and possibly a smidge of a hangover.
(Please note, this is not to be taken too seriously)
Gees, just get the prospective candidate to join operational ATCO's on a Watch team bonding session at the local curry house/drinking establishment.
It would save NATS a fortune in testing and the cost to the candidate is to his/her wallet and possibly a smidge of a hangover.
(Please note, this is not to be taken too seriously)
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Euroland
Posts: 2,814
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
NATS ATCO recruitment.......only short psychopaths need apply!
It is impossible to achieve a 100% pass rate on a time/finance limited course no matter how good the recruitment process.........either people or time or financial limits will be exceeded.....or in the case of NATS...all 3!
IMHO, the problem NATS has is not in the recruitment it is in the training or more importantly the progression/rejection of students as the course progresses. NATS was unable to sort out the problem of failing people who then proceded to become good controllers with other companies. Their answer was not to prevent such leakage it was to redesign the training into more specialised areas so that failing students from the process resulting in the majority of failures does not provide ready made controllers for the competition.
In order for any computer analysis as described to be valid it would have to include all the people who were failed by NATS and went on to become good controllers elsewhere. It would have to also include the data showing the fact that many ATCOs from the ATC School subsequently fail to validate on return to their operational unit..............probably the only place in the world where the old "those that can do, those that can't teach statement is true.
With all the moaning from well educated, motivated and enthusiastic candidates one has to wonder if NATS recruitment and training has taken a big chunk out of the Ryanair manual for people management!
Regards,
DFC
It is impossible to achieve a 100% pass rate on a time/finance limited course no matter how good the recruitment process.........either people or time or financial limits will be exceeded.....or in the case of NATS...all 3!
IMHO, the problem NATS has is not in the recruitment it is in the training or more importantly the progression/rejection of students as the course progresses. NATS was unable to sort out the problem of failing people who then proceded to become good controllers with other companies. Their answer was not to prevent such leakage it was to redesign the training into more specialised areas so that failing students from the process resulting in the majority of failures does not provide ready made controllers for the competition.
In order for any computer analysis as described to be valid it would have to include all the people who were failed by NATS and went on to become good controllers elsewhere. It would have to also include the data showing the fact that many ATCOs from the ATC School subsequently fail to validate on return to their operational unit..............probably the only place in the world where the old "those that can do, those that can't teach statement is true.
With all the moaning from well educated, motivated and enthusiastic candidates one has to wonder if NATS recruitment and training has taken a big chunk out of the Ryanair manual for people management!
Regards,
DFC
