There’s a good conversation going on over at the Six Figures blog about the scepticism in the community about goverment advertised jobs and whether the advertising of ‘market test’ jobs is deceptive conduct.

Here is the comment that I appended to that post - I would be keen to hear your thoughts:

Having worked with the Department of Defence and Department of Foreign Affairs myself, and  with a recruitment company in Canberra trying to recruit candidates for government departments, I agree that there is nothing more frustrating than the government’s “market test” obligations with respect to job vacancies.

The merit principle and the requirement to obtain the best possible value for taxpayers’ money obligates ALL government departments to advertise ALL job positions (with some exceptions).

For example, a government department must advertise a position for an IT contractor prior to the end of the incumbent’s contract term, regardless of whether the contractor a) is good and b) has indicated his/her intentions to continue working beyond the end of the contract.

If the incumbent fits the bill and wants to stay on, the likelihood of an ‘outsider’ winning the position is virtually impossible - even if the outsider is better credentialled or costs less, because the incumbent is a known quantity and has established ‘equity’ with the organisation.

Hence, the ‘market test’ recruitment process is simply going through the motions in order to satisfy merit/value principles, which it doesn’t really achieve anyway!

Sometimes it is possible to find out whether a position is a ‘market test’ or whether there is likely to be an internal candidate appointed to the position - do some research, make a phone call to the area in question, speak to the recruitment administrator (normally an APS4 who handles many positions and is not ‘wedded’ to the actual area where the position is located).

But if the government department lets it slip that it is a “market test”, then clearly nobody will apply for the job and the whole process of “testing the market” will be compromised!  This really demonstrates how pointless it all is.

What infuriates people the most is the requirement to submit a detailed selection criteria response for a position which ultimately they have no chance of winning!  And what makes it even worse is government’s tendency to distance themselves from unsuccessful candidates and not to provide any feedback.

This clearly has implications for attracting future talent - many people have been burnt and have vowed never again to apply for government roles.

All in all, government recruitment is terrible (with exceptions) and will have to change if departments hope to attract talent in coming years as skills shortages increase.

A move away from transactional recruitment / treating people like commodities (the government recruits people via tenders and panels in the same way it sources pens and other inanimate items) would be a good start.