Talk through how you would diagnose a fault that is reported, your given the description on the report, a description of what the equipment does with some drawings to assist. Also their is the 5-Why and Fishbone methodology of which you are asked to write it down. Ok in principle, but in practice hard to diagnose equipment without actually looking at it or never even seeing it. Would favour people from certain backgrounds over others even though both are capable. In another room you are asked behavioural questions ie Tell me about a time when…….? Again 2 people. Generally based on the usual Corporate Values. Would suit a pre-rehearsed (made-up) story in order to tick that corporate box. Next room you are asked to identify parts on a small piece of equipment. Also asked to look at an electrical drawing and identify parts. In my view this one is slightly flawed in its approach, much like the fault diagnosis. You never see the equipment as a whole (it’s on the other side of a wall), just a small part, so you have no idea what the equipment does, you only see a tiny area. An example, part of a black box with an electrical supply but no visual to see anything else about what it does. You are scored, just like the other panel questions. The process appears to be very paper and theory based, very corporate.
