Abstract: Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) results have become synonymous with quality benchmarking, determining standards and comparing performance among 15-year-old students in countries around the globe. Concern, however, exists with the utility and consequential validity of the newest measure to the suite of the OECD’s PISA tests: its global competence measure. This study continues our examination of the global competence measure by deconstructing how the OECD frames it within the first global competence rankings, which are based on PISA 2018 data. Our study uses Derrida’s technique of deconstructing texts to critique the five specific claims that the OECD used to underpin the importance of its measures in PISA- policy orientation, innovative concept of literacy, relevance to lifelong learning, regularity, and breadth of coverage. Our analysis exposes the measure’s silences, unquestioned assumptions and inconsistencies. The aporia evident in the text is of concern for educational policy makers around the globe as it perpetuates global messaging that reinforces dominant discourses and continues to ignore contextual differences. We call for continued critique of the global competence measure and recommend that hyperbole be replaced by contextualisation of any differences it might detect.