Challenges to narrow thinking about selection

Members of selection panels can take a narrow, rigid approach to conducting a selection process.

Terry Lisson, of the Commissioner for Public Employment in the Northern Territory, has put some ideas about reforming selection processes. You'll find the Powerpoint presentation at http://www.ocpe.nt.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0011/42878/Recruitment_Myths_presentation_handouts_PDF_copy_9_Sept_08.pdf 

and Good Practice Guidelines at http://www.ocpe.nt.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0018/45162/Good_Practice_Guidelines_to_Selection_Processes.pdf.

Some of the points made will shock some public servants. Here are some of the practices Terry questions:

• Merit-based assessment must be based on 'application, interview and reference'. No - merit-based assessment is based on capacity to perform the job, taking into account a person's skills, qualifications, experience, knowledge, potential for future development.
• Merit-based selection is not an application-writing contest. Nor is it interview performance that wins the job. Merit is demonstrated through work history not process performance.
• Why make internal applicants who have worked with an agency for several years write lengthy applications? Why interview internal applicants? Why not ask for an Expression of Interest and talk to referees? This then raises the issue of using varying assessment methods for different applicants. Some might worry that this would be unfair or reflect panel biases. Lisson's response is that: "Any employee should be able to rely on the fact that their day-to-day performance on the job will count toward them achieving a promotion." This then means the referees become very important in the process. The crux of the issue is that treating applicants fairly does not equate to treating them the same.
• On referees Lisson makes the point that a referee is "not just someone nominated by an applicant to say good things about them." "Referees must be the persons best placed to give current, relevant feedback on an applicant's merit" and could be the present supervisor and managers, clients, colleagues, staff managed by the applicant.
• Where a manager supervises several applicants Lisson suggests that asking for comparative information would be reasonable, in order to help a panel reach a decision.
• Lisson makes comments about the quality of individual selection reports. The best report "should be one that answers all the questions the unsuccessful applicant might have." This approach might encourage a narrative style of writing which focuses on merit rather than on the process.

For some people, these suggestions would be regarded as heresy. Yet, until someone raises these issues and reforms selection processes so that they are different, members of selection panels may continue to take a rigid, highly 'rules'-based approach to selecting staff, an approach which does not necessarily result in quality decisions.

Other useful articles:

• 30 myths selection panels live by
• Using a common standard to judge applicants

Dr Ann Villiers, learning guide, professional speaker and author, is Australia's only Mental Nutritionist® specialising in mind and language practices that help people build flexible thinking, confident speaking and quality connections with people. Visit www.mentalnutrition.com to learn more about Mental Nutrition. Visit www.selectioncriteria.com.au for free resources unlocking the mysteries of public service jobs.