MACS - good practice in attraction and assessment - 2013

Key learning outcomes

• You can easily adapt a standard appointments process to make it accessible to disabled applicants. This doesn’t equate at all to compromising on the merit of appointees.
• When you make the selection process accessible as a matter of course, it leads to the attraction of a wider range of people because they don’t feel excluded or as though they have to ask for adjustments to be made. 
• Sensitivity to the differing needs of applicants pays dividends. One fifth of the population of Scotland has a disability and it makes sense for panels to be as inclusive as possible in order to attract the optimum number of applicants.
• Changing approaches when you’ve previously been unsuccessful can pay dividends. 

Background

MACS was set up in May 2002 by the then Scottish Executive as a statutory advisor on disability issues in relation to transport and transport policy in Scotland.  MACS believes in a Scotland where anyone with a mobility problem due to some physical, mental or sensory impairment can go when and where everyone else can and have the information and opportunities to do so. MACS is statutorily obliged to have a convener who is a disabled person and the committee membership has to consist of at least 50% members with a disability.

This was an open competition to find five new board members. Although the round resembled custom and practice in many ways it also diverged in some important respects. Selection panels seeking to take positive action to attract and appoint applicants with a disability should be able to take some pointers from this case study.   

Attraction

MACS had historically had problems attracting people to these roles. Its previous experience contributed to the strategy on this occasion. 

The Committee arranged for messages about the vacancies to be forwarded to a range of disability groups with whom MACS had established connections over the past few years.  The same information was also distributed to individuals who had expressed an interest in the work of MACS as well as to representatives of the organisations who make up the Roads for All Forum and the Scottish Rail Accessibility Forum. Contact was also made with organisations such as Remploy; Royal Strathclyde Blindcraft Industries; Highland Blindcraft and Jobcentre plus with a view to them circulating the information to those in the community who may be interested in the roles. 

Transport Scotland also prepared a news release highlighting the appointment round. The advert also appeared on the Scottish Government (SG) Public Appointments website and was circulated to all of the SG external contacts contained within the Public Appointments contact list.  These included Capability Scotland, Inclusion Scotland, the Scottish Disability Equality Forum, the Scottish Disability Alliance, Age Scotland; Black and Minority Ethnic Elders Group; Centre for Education for Racial Equality in Scotland; Citizens Advice Scotland; Edinburgh and Lothian’s Racial Equality Council and the Equality Network.  They and others were asked to publicise the appointments on their websites or through their distribution and network routes.  The appointments were also forwarded to a number of organisations which support and promote women within the workplace including the 2 Percent Club; Women on Boards; and Scottish Changing the Chemistry who were asked to promote the appointments in a similar way. The Public Appointments Team (PAT) made arrangements for all publicity.

Anne MacLean, the Convener of MACS at the time, sent a very encouraging and welcoming covering letter to every potential applicant along with the pack. It included the following wording

“to comply with the legal terms governing the constitution of the Committee, three of the four new appointees must have a disability which means that we particularly welcome applications from people with disabilities.  However, you should not be put off applying if you do not have a disability as we would welcome the opportunity to consider those members of the community who feel they have a valuable contribution to make”. 

Assessment

The panel, supported by PAT, ensured that the arrangements for all aspects of the round were accessible. The panel recognised and wanted applicants to know that this approach doesn’t just apply to the appointment process. A proportion of the MACS board require reasonable adjustments to participate in board activities. The board secretariat and MACS board members themselves have been very proactive and positive about making such adjustments. Many are self-evident and simple to accomplish such as ensuring that the rooms used for meetings are wheelchair accessible.

Whilst the process used a standard application form followed by an interview, the criteria for selection were worded in a much simpler way than can sometimes be the case. In their application form, applicants were asked to demonstrate:

• ability to work effectively in a team;
• ability to present views at the Committee;
• ability to consider other opinions;
• ability to represent the views of MACS; and
• understanding of the accessibility issues that affect transport users.

Applicants were offered the application pack in other formats, such as braille and audio, as well as the opportunity to take up support in applying.  

The panel ensured that the venue for the interview and the arrangements for applicants were fully accessible. Applicants were also invited in their invitation to interview letter to let the panel know if they required any adjustments to be made for them to take part. The interviews were spread over three days. The panel allowed an hour and a half for each interview. This ensured that there was sufficient time to cover all of the criteria and the elements of the fit and proper person as well as time for the panel to agree and record its assessment of the applicants immediately following interview.   

Applicants were asked to make a five minute presentation at the beginning of the interview setting out their reasons for applying to be part of the Committee and in what way they would be able to contribute to the Committee. This was specifically by reference to the desirable criteria listed below:

• understanding of passenger perspective in relation to transport issues.
• understanding of urban and/or rural transport issues.
• understanding of equalities legislation as it equates to disability.
• understanding of the government/Parliament role in public transport.

Applicants were then asked questions to assess their understanding of these issues. The rest of the interview consisted of competency based questioning to assess the essential skills that were set out in the person specification. This included two desirable skills that were not tested at the application stage:

• ability to analyse and review issues
• ability to challenge constructively.

Results

The strategy generated 27 applications. 12 applicants were shortlisted for interview although two later withdrew. Of these, seven applicants were considered suitable for appointment. 

The press release announcing these appointments is no longer available for download from the Scottish Government’s website.