Page 107 - Graphic1

98 | SSB

Navin must have played football at some stage but he boasted to be the Captain of his
School football team. The interviewing officer quizzed him thoroughly to verify the facts
submitted and to ascertain his motivation for sports. Navin had hardly expected such
questions. He tried to put a brave front initially but was unable to sustain the penetrating
questions. Finally he broke down and confessed to the IO that he gave this information only
to impress the Board. The only truth was that he liked to play football. The candidate faced a
lot of embarrassment on the other achievements also which he had mentioned and finally
pleaded apology for wrong; perhaps exaggerated information. Navin’s case was discussed at
length in the President’s conference also. Navin was finally NOT RECOMMENDED.
Comment—Navin’s case is a burning example, how dependence on a quack’s advice can ruin your
chances in SSB. Secondly, there is a general tendency among the candidates to give inflated
information regarding their achievements. Had Navin been advised to be truthful he would not have
faced discomfiture of that degree. Truth would have saved him!
Case II. We will examine the responses of two candidates to a situation in the psychological test
(SRT):—
Situation—He had to go to a place some 20 Km away in a hot summer afternoon. Having waited
at the bus-stop for a long time when no bus came he …
Candidate 1. He took a tonga and managed to reach his destination.
Candidate 2. Hired a taxi and reached there on time.
Comment—Though the response of the second candidate (hiring a taxi) appears better in
comparison to the first candidate’s response, a psychologist would not take this only on the face value.
A professional would find both the responses of equal merit. Both the candidates have taken same
decision i.e. not to wait any further and to go for a substitute means of transport. Both the candidates
have shown equal degree of understanding, grasp and decision-making to explore an alternative
resource. Now, what will they explore depends on their socio-economic backgrounds. The second
candidate belonged to New Delhi where hiring a taxi is a common phenomenon. Hiring a taxi is in his
world of cognition. The first candidate chose to take a tonga because he hailed from a small suburb in
Aligarh in UP. The common means of transport in his environment is tonga. He would not imagine
hiring of taxi at the spur of the moment. The first candidate comes from a relatively deprived socio-
economic background. The second candidate comes from a better and richer background. But both of
them understand the situation in similar way and take similar decisions !
One cannot appreciate these finer aspects by ignoring the PIQ of candidates. In the mentioned case
the candidates would have been assessed on uneven keel. Correct and truthful information supplied in
the PIQ can save a candidate.
SPECIMEN
PERSONAL INFORMATION QUESTIONNAIRE (PIQ)
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………
SSB NO & PLACE NO BATCH NO. CHEST NO UPSC ROLL
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………
1. Name …………………………………
(as mentioned in the application form) …………………………………
2. Father’s name …………………………………
3. Place of maximum residence …………………………………
4. Present address …………………………………
(with approximate population of the place) …………………………………
5. Permanent address …………………………………
(with approximate population of the place) …………………………………
Whether district headquarters or not …………………………………