Elizabeth Sidney OBE FBPS FCIPD, Occupational Psychologist, founded and ran for many years the Mantra Consultancy Group. The group specialised in the selection and development of managerial staff, working nationally and internationally. Elizabeth worked mainly in the Far East, India and Eastern Europe. She particularly promoted equality of opportunity. She is now completing a book on the implications for developing human potential of recent discoveries on the functions of the brain.
Elizabeth was awarded the OBE for services to women and now heads an international federation opposing the treatment of women living under fundamentalist regimes.
OCPA (office of the Commissioner for Public Appointments) trains all its Independent Government Assessors to ensure that selection to Government appointments follow modern selection procedures. Job analysis, Person Specification, open advertising, consistent paper shifting, panels of trained interviewers from a range of backgrounds, standard assessment, and right of appeal. I was relieved to find I had been singing from the same hymnbook.
There is no doubt these procedures do give many candidates a better chance of being considered. In both public and private organisations, it is no longer automatic to prefer the pale males with their (too often) stale perspectives. Recruitment of women and ethnic minorities into the professions has markedly improved, though they still have to take their proportionate share at higher levels.
Yet even in graduate recruitment, some problems arise. How to compare Tom from an excellent school and university with his brilliant exam results and polished presentation with Thomasina who lacks Tom's advantages and yet is full of motivation and ideas? Cognitive tests may well show they have the same intellectual capacity. Interviewers can offset discrepancies in presentation. But the fact is Tom has been unwittingly trained since infancy to think about the profession he seeks to enter, taught by knowledgeable parents working in the field who have conveyed their own interests and appropriate mode of thought. He has already absorbed much of what he needs to know. Thomasina would have a deal of catching up to do. Can the selectors ignore the different demands these candidates will make, at least initially, on the organisation's training resources? Parental training is doubtless behind the fact that so many professions run in families, with young people following their parents into medicine, the law, the civil service, the military and so forth.
This dilemma increases with the seniority of the candidate. Many people apply for public appointments. The less appropriate are removed in preliminary scrutinies, so that those who are called to interview are likely to have considerable records of service in the relevant fields.
Their selectors are of course mainly from the appointing organisation or speciality. At these rarefied levels, it is very likely that one or more of the selectors knows one or more of the candidates quite well, either from working with them or by repute. They may similarly know the candidate's referees. The Government Independent Assessor can ensure that the interviews are structured and the candidates are treated and questioned fairly, but cannot remove from the selectors' minds all their previous knowledge. To him (or her) that hath, will probably be given, and he or she who has fallen behind - for whatever good reason - will not have much chance to catch up.
Also at this level, many considerations not covered in any specification are in the minds of the selectors. The candidates are likely to be socially competent, but selectors will know further that certain styles will help or hinder the newcomer's initiation into the group and facilitate or otherwise his/her ability to handle what may be a highly complex political situation. Their ears will be pricked for any compromising or flippant remark and a referee's statement e.g. that the candidate "speaks his/her mind in committee" may be enough to ensure rejection.
In most interviews it soon becomes clear that the different selectors are putting a different emphasis on aspects of the specification. Is it paramount for the candidate to have the respect of the profession? Or for the candidate to be acceptable to the public? Or for the candidate to gain staff acceptance, especially if an outsider is appointed rather than a popular, competent internal contender?
Even the best specifications are full of weasel words and cliches, which bury or fail to reflect the subtle considerations in the minds of the selectors. If we seek someone with an innovative, creative mind, what does this mean? Is it having an interesting piece of research quoted in many refereed journals? Is it having turned round an ailing department in double quick time? Is it having produced several well-publicised controversial, original speeches and publications? Of course, we all expect the highest standards of integrity. But we will not be impressed by detailed analysis at interview of how expenses could be calculated or even how computer fraud might be detected.
Even the best interviews are conducted within a fairly strict convention, which amounts to neither side rocking the boat too much. Selectors' behaviour must be courteous, their questions can challenge but must be fair and neutrally phrased. John Humphreys and Jeremy Paxman need not apply. On the other side of the table, no candidate who wants the job is likely to say all he or she may privately think about the present situation, especially if that involves challenging the Chair's known predilections.
Afterwards, we discuss all these issues fairly and frankly as we can. I think it is a help to have an independent Government Assessor contributing here, bringing a sometimes different and less introspective perspective. The Data Protection Act has certainly helped to ensure that records are more factual and balanced and free from idiosyncratic phrasing. Our decisions probably ensure that few unsuitable appointments are made. But this is not an objective process.
Could we do better?
Some alternatives to the present situations are unrealistic; for instance removing the human selectors altogether, and using psychometric tests instead. But even if appropriate, valid and reliable psychometric tests could be developed for every position, no appointing body would be likely to accept the results without seeing the candidate.
Assessment centres give candidates the opportunity to perform in a range of situations and selectors the opportunity to observe them over time. Not surprisingly, decisions made on this basis, rather than documents and interviews, show a better match with candidate's subsequent performances. But centres are expensive to design and run and highly time-consuming. They are being developed for some senior posts, but their universal use would be impractical.
Perhaps something could be done on the lines of mini-pupillages or shadowing, followed by a dissertation. Most Barristers' Chambers offer 2 week holiday jobs to students, during which the student learns about the work and Chambers can observe performance. For a senior appointment, a candidate might be offered the opportunity to shadow a senior person in the organisation, and prepare a commentary for the selectors to discuss with him or her.
Candidates might in any event be more strongly encouraged to gather information in advance.
Measures to extend the field of potential candidates are certainly to be welcomed. The latest in a long line of organisations set up with this intention is OFA (Office of Fair Access). The office is not aiming to increase the tanks on Oxford College lawns. Instead, it will look into financial support in the form of bursaries for potential students who may be deterred by the cost of university training.
Nowadays selectors are seldom looking for a replacement candidate. They are - or should be - looking for someone able to progress the organisation into the future. Would they be helped by some political and economic forecasts, produced for example by Demos or IPPR institutions, to add to their consideration as to who is most likely to steer the organisation through future waters?
This is the full version of the shorter article that first appeared in the January 2005 issue of People Matters outlining the challenges in professional selection.