Applicants can be stumped when tackling selection criteria about showing judgement, intelligence and commonsense. We readily recognise poor judgement. We see plenty of examples in the media of politicians, footballers and celebrities making choices that result in poor consequences. But when it comes to our own behaviour in the workplace, what can we say that will reflect well on us? First be clear about where these behaviours sit within competency frameworks. ‘Shows judgement, intelligence and commonsense’ falls under supporting and shaping strategic direction within the APS capability framework, known as The Integrated Leadership System. In general, the relevant behaviours are:
What is your general approach to a situation? Over the years you will have developed a broad approach to dealing with situations needing judgement. That approach will likely involve some of the following steps:
When is judgement needed? If something is black-and-white, little judgement is needed. If it is clear what needs to be done, because it’s been done before, or there is a clear procedure, then little judgement is needed. Judgement is needed in:
What are specific examples of showing judgement? As with other behaviour-based responses, you can use the SAR structure.
For example: I demonstrated judgement when handling a staff underperformance issue. A member of my team was regularly failing to meet deadlines, taking advantage of flex arrangements, and producing sub-standard written documents. As team manager, my role was to bring performance up to an acceptable standard in such a way that the staff member concerned was cooperative and other staff supported my actions. The staff member did not recognise nor accept that their performance needed changing, despite a month’s evidence. In addition, whenever the subject was raised, they became highly defensive and at times abusive. In handling this situation I listened to the views of the staff member, team members, and staff in other teams who had worked with the person; considered the workload and goals of the team and the impact continued underperformance would have on team morale and risks to delivery of results during a peak workload period; weighed several options for performance improvement, taking account of the staff member’s personal issues impacting on their work performance; consulted with HR to confirm policy and correct procedure. My assessment was to narrow the options to two, which I discussed with the staff member. By a firm and fair process that allowed for support as well as confirmation of workplace requirements, the staff member gradually came to realise the seriousness of their situation and the need to take remedial steps. After several meetings we arrived at an agreement that met their, my, the team’s and organisation’s objectives. Within one month there was an improvement and after three months the staff member’s performance returned to satisfactory. You may have demonstrated judgement:
As you tell the story identify what you needed to make judgements about, what you took into account in order to assess options, how you narrowed the field of options, how you arrived at a decision or agreed position, what the outcome was. adjective lacking good sense and judgment adjective mindless people do not think about what they are doing adjective someone who is impulsive tends to do things without thinking about what will happen as a result adjective used about something that you do without thinking that it might be wrong or stupid adjective someone who is impetuous does things quickly without thinking about what will happen as a result
Our character curriculum is centred on building four key character traits discussed in relation to human flourishing and success since the times of Classical Greek Philosophy: resilience, self-control, good judgement and fairness. Why do we focus on these traits? This series, called “The importance of”, explores the importance of each of these four traits. Good judgement includes considering the consequences of one’s decisions, thinking before acting and speaking and having the tools to make good decisions in a variety of situations. Good judgement and well-being Good judgement includes prioritising, meeting deadlines and carefully planning, which are tools that enable us to effectively cope in difficult and stressful situations. Making decisions which fail to consider the future can lead to high levels of stress when we have to rush deadlines and deal with pressing problems. Good judgement and achievement Making wise decisions is also key to unlocking our potential. These can guide the goals that we set for ourselves. Duckworth and Mischel found that exercises in self-regulatory skills only improved school performance when young people had thought through their decisions of why and how they wanted to achieve a certain goal (Tough, 2013). This requires considering the consequences of our decisions, prioritising, carefully planning and thinking before acting, as well as day-to-day application of good judgement to be motivated to complete school tasks (e.g. to know when to decline an invitation for a play-date due to schoolwork). Good judgement and moral behaviour Good judgement is related to the concept of phronesis, also called practical wisdom, good sense, or moral reasoning. The Jubilee Centre for Character and Virtues (2013) follows Aristotle in viewing this character trait as the “integrative” “master virtue”, meaning that it unifies all other positive character traits. This is related to work by Piaget (1965) and Kohlberg (1989) who suggested that the final stage of moral development consists of complex moral reasoning, which should be the primary aim of character building strategies (Kohlberg & Hersh, 1977). This stage includes the ability to differentiate between right and wrong in situations without clear guidelines, where different values may collide. It requires critical ethical thinking, and recent research has suggested that it also requires emotional processing and being able to put ourselves in others’ shoes (Decety, Michalska, & Kinzler, 2012; Cowell et al., 2017). References Cowell, J. M., Lee, K., Malcolm‐Smith, S., Selcuk, B., Zhou, X., & Decety, J. (2017). The development of generosity and moral cognition across five cultures. Developmental science, 20(4). Decety, J., Michalska, K.J., & Kinzler, K.D. (2012). The contribution of emotion and cognition to moral sensitivity: a neurodevelopmental study. Cerebral Cortex, 22, 209–220. Jubilee Centre for Character and Virtues (2013). A Framework for Character Education in Schools. Retrieved from https://uobschool.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/Framework-for-Character-Education-2017-Jubilee-Centre.pdf Kohlberg, L., & Hersh, R. H. (1977). Moral development: A review of the theory. Theory into Practice, 16(2), 53-59. doi:10.1080/00405847709542675 Piaget, J. (1965). The moral judgment of the child. New York, NY: The Free Press. Tough, P. (2013). How children succeed: Grit, Curiosity and the Hidden Power of Character. Random House. |