Application in practice of recruitment procedures for the senior civil service
Analysis of the five most recent examples of recruitment files of senior civil servants (all documents related to the recruitment process, from announcement to appointment) in the latest full calendar year, as well as supporting materials for selection committee members.
One file is selected from five central government bodies, which include two ministries (the same in all assessed countries) and three central government bodies with the highest number of civil servants reporting to the government, CoM or the prime minister. If files are not available for the latest full calendar year in any of the five institutions, (because there was no recruitment for senior positions), data from the year prior to that is requested.
Job announcements must contain requirements based on legislation and job descriptions if these exist; the general requirements must be in line with the requirements set by the legislation, and the specific requirements in line with the job description.
Selection techniques are considered appropriate to senior positions if in all cases they were oriented to testing practices and solving problems, and not only to testing pure knowledge and other formal criteria.
As a rule the highest-ranked candidate must be appointed but, for senior civil servants, the second or third highest-ranked candidate may be appointed with written justification, but only when there are more than three eligible candidates for a vacancy.
Evidence that uniform and professional recruitment practices were proactively supported would be that training courses, workshops and/or networking events have been organised for the members of selection committees and recruiters in civil service organisations, and supporting materials made available.
Quantitative data:
• The number of senior civil service positions which are staffed by competitions divided by the total number of staffed senior civil service positions, expressed as a percentage. Data relates to the government administration only;
• Statistical data on number of appeals and results of appeals for recruitment decisions for the latest full calendar year. Data relates to government administration only.
Points are allocated for each of the following 12 criteria (total of 9 points).
Application in practice of recruitment procedures for the senior civil service - 1.
Criteria fulfilled: 8/11
Yes
No
No data available / not assessed
| Requirements in job announcements are well aligned with legislation and job descriptions (0.5 points, if the requirements are well-aligned in all cases analysed) | |
| Requirements contained in job descriptions or job announcements are aligned with responsibilities expected in the position (0.5 points if the requirements are aligned in at least four of the five cases analysed) | |
| The deadline to submit applications is defined as at least ten working days from the date of announcement (0.5 points if this is the case in all cases analysed) | |
| All announcements for vacancies to senior civil service positions are accessible on the single web portal (1 point) | |
| The single web portal where all senior civil service vacancies are published offers the possibility of sorting vacancies and subscribing to new announcements (0.5 points) | |
| At least 80% of senior civil service positions are staffed by internal or external competition (1 point, unless any positions were staffed permanently without competition) | |
| No members of selection committees are political appointees (1 point if this is true for all cases analysed) | |
| Selection included both written and oral examinations (in the form of structured interviews) (1 point if this is the case in all cases analysed) | |
| Selection techniques were appropriate to senior positions (1 point) | |
| There is statistical data available (0.5 points) | |
| There is evidence that uniform and professional recruitment practices were proactively supported (0.5 points) |
Application in practice of recruitment procedures for the senior civil service - 2.
Yes
No
No data available / not assessed
| The highest-ranked candidate was appointed in all five cases (1 point) | |
| One of the three highest-ranked candidates was appointed in all five cases, but written justification was not provided for one or more (0.5 points) | |
| None of the above (0 points) |