CONFIDENTIAL

 

Safety

for

Sam Sample

 

 

Produced by Selby & Mills in partnership with

Example Organisation

 

Report Date Monday 27th July 2009

Norm Group = General Population


This report has been prepared with every care and in good faith. However the interpretation arises from the sum of the candidate's choices and preferences in answering a series of self-report inventories, and should therefore be seen purely as indicative of certain trends in their attitudes at that time.

No liability can be accepted by the interpreter or by Selby & Mills Limited.


The results are presented as stens where a score of 1 is low and 10 is high.
They are colour-coded; the darker the colour the higher the score and the stronger the persons preference.


© Copyright 2004-2009 Selby & Mills Limited
Prospect House, Prospect Place, Beechen Cliff, Bath BA2 4QP United Kingdom
Phone +44 (0)1225 311399 Email info@selbymills.co.uk

All rights reserved.
No portion may be reproduced by any process whatsoever without prior written permission of the copyright holders.

SAFETY AND RULE CONFORMITY

The box below presents the candidate’s overall score in relation to safety and rule conformity.
‘Safety’ is a description of the extent to which the candidate is likely to work in a way which will be conducive to the observation of health and safety legislation. It also evaluates the likelihood that their attitude towards safety may endanger themselves and others.
‘Rule conformity’ refers to the likelihood that the candidate will observe and respect rules, regulations and policies in the organisation and observe them. At the extreme this may involve an unquestioning acceptance of, and adherence to, rules.

SAFETY INDEX  
2 
This person will value work which allows them some discretion in order to be able to review and revise priorities or choose their work approach. Their behaviour will, to some extent, be governed by corporate policy and practice. However, they will also respond and behave according to who they are with, the situation and sometimes their feelings about the priority. In this respect rule conformity is not likely to be one of their particular strengths in that they will wish to adapt what they do in order to deliver what they believe the result will be. This could cause lapses of observation with safety and security procedures. While their goal is likely to be continuous improvement and the production of the best results, they may still not fulfil all the organisation’s requirements with respect to the observation of laid down procedure. This could sometimes have safety or procedural consequences.
 

Safety Competencies

This section presents the candidate’s results in relation to the individual safety competencies. Each sten score is accompanied by text to indicate the likely behaviours which are associated with the result they have achieved. Remember that they are unlikely to score very highly on every competency; indeed some competencies may, to some extent, conflict with each other. The value to be derived from this section lies in identifying those competencies which are particularly crucial to the successful performance of a job, related to safety and conformity, and to identify the candidate’s likely behaviour in relation to these. The competency results should not be used in isolation but provide an input to the broader evaluation process, including the interview

SELF-DISCIPLINE  
3 
This person will follow agreed procedures and priorities much of the time, although they sometimes neglect some of the endplay or details if they do not see the topic as a priority.
RISK AVERSION  
6 
May occasionally pursue non-core job role requirements for a short time, if they think circumstances require it, following which they will return to core activity.
ATTITUDE TO AUTHORITY  
1 
Prefers job discretion to do what they believe are the priorities, even if they vary from agreed goals. May not always display tenacity.
VIGILANCE  
3 
Will maintain generally high standards, although they will not be consistent if the issue is perceived to be a lower priority. May be expedient with what they believe to be less important. Generally helpful and understanding to others, unless they disagree with their approach.
PERSONAL STANDARDS  
5 
Values, sets and observes high standards for self and others; is alert to conflicts of interest and generally seeks to avoid these in the short and long term. Is willing to accept second place although prefers not to.
RESPONSIVENESS  
2 
They tend to stick to their own work priorities and objectives, responding to the needs of the situation in order to further their effectiveness at work. They are able to resist others' requests for support if these conflict with their own priorities.
FIRM BUT FAIR  
2 
They generally do not promote similar standards among their colleagues which they may maintain for themselves. They may be accepting of weaknesses displayed by others some of the time and may not be seen as sufficiently firm if in a management role.
SECURITY  
4 
Organisational clarity is not a priority for them, although it can provide comfort. Changes to the organisational structure and activity probably do not unsettle them, so long as they are not prolonged.
STRUCTURE  
6 
Although they value clear structure, status and objectives, they are able to make sense of these for themselves and work through the establishment of clear relations with clear colleagues.
 

This is the end of your report.

© Copyright 2004-2009 Selby & Mills Limited