Discussing Open, merit-based,
transparent recruitment in Europe
Hugo Horta
Center for Innovation, Technology
and Policy Research IN+/IST
Presentation contents
• What is open, merit-based, transparent
recruitment?
• A challenging issue: discrepancy of “perceived
understandings” of the same phenomena
• A complex social phenomena full of nuances
• Results of a questionnaire: good practices and
recent initiatives to foster open, merit-based,
transparent recruitment
• Open the floor: specific cases
Recruitment issues a key policy
Recruitment procedures
at European universities
characterized as open,
transparent, and meritbased are understood as
a prerequisite for the
realization
of
the
European Research Area
(ERA)
What is it?
Funders or employers of
researchers in their role as
recruiters should be
responsible for providing
researchers with open,
transparent and
internationally comparable
selection and recruitment
procedures. (pg 5)
incorporates the principles of
equal opportunity to ensure
that the most capable person is
selected for a position on the
basis of merit, and refers to the
right of every individual to be
given
scrupulously
fair
consideration for any job for
which they are skilled and
qualified
European Charter for Researchers and the
Code of Conduct for the Recruitment of
Researchers
University of Technology of Sidney:
http://www.equity.uts.edu.au/equalopportunity/employment/recruitment/wh
at.html
Open, merit-based, recruitment
• Open – wide - advertisement of positions tailored to
the type of positions advertised
• Streamlined applications (avoiding overburdening of
the application process)
• Transparency in application (# vacancies, career
prospects)
• Fairness in selection (diversity of expertise in
selection committees, multi-evaluation methods)
• Merit (take into account experience of the candidate,
judged quantitatively/qualitatively, life constraints)
A challenge: a perception issue, yet a
relevant issue
Gap of perception Gap between policymakers and
researchers on open, merit-based, transparent recruitment.
• The vast majority of national policymakers understand the
recruitment systems in place to be fair and transparent;
• A substantial share of researchers do not perceive it as
such. They perceive recruitment rules and procedures as:
- not open, fair, and transparent.
- tend to mention lack of open access to vacancies and job
opportunities as a major disincentive to start or remain in
the research career track in Europe.
More 2 survey
Around 34% to 40% of European
Union researchers “dissatisfied”
with the levels of openness,
transparency and the existence of
merit-based recruitment at their
institution
But we can also understand this
from other perspective: 60% to
65% reported to be satisfied. Is the
glass half full, half empty
dilemma…
More 2 survey
The levels of satisfaction were found to be country specific.
This is a result concerning open recruitment but the results on merit-based and transparent
recruitment mirror the one above
More 2 survey
Those in the early career researcher stages that are most dissatisfied with their
recruitment experiences:
• R1 researchers are the least satisfied with the levels of openness in recruitment
• R2 researchers show the lowest levels of satisfaction concerning transparency
and merit-based recruitment.
Also:
• females show lower levels of satisfaction with recruitment processes when
compared to males.
Open recruitment
Transparent recruitment
Merit-based recruitment
R1
R2
R3
R4
56.1%
62.3%
67.3%
58.6%
60.6%
60.1%
60.1%
65.0%
66.9%
63.3%
68.8%
67.9%
%
satisfied
60.0%
64.6%
65.7%
Table 1: Satisfaction with recruitment process at home research institution (EU27)
Note: % of researchers that were satisfied (vs. not satisfied) with the researcher recruitment process (n=9,016); Source: MORE2 Higher Education Survey (2012)
What these results hint at?
Perception discrepancy may be related to the
evolution of scientific and higher education systems
themselves and national traditions
And the knowledge
that change takes
time at all levels and
that universities are
amongst the most
resilient institutions
in the world
Hiring Women Faculty in the Schools of Science and Engineering at MIT
What these results hint at?
Perception discrepancies may be sometimes more
associated with the dynamics of scientific and
academic institutions than to the norms in place
established at national level.
One finds close recruitment practices in research universities of countries with
more developed scientific and higher education systems (Japanese research
universities).
But, not unheard of to find more research oriented universities in countries
developing their knowledge base fashioning open recruitment dynamics
(Lisbon MBA: collaboration between the Nova University of Lisbon and
Catholic university ).
A lot seems to depend on the institutions “competitive horizons” (Hoffman et al., 2008)
What these results hint at?
Some disciplinary fields tend to be more linked to
open recruitment processes (science and engineering)
while others to close recruitment processes.
This is related to the ethos and disciplinary traditions,
as well as the variability of their international scope.
This is something that cannot be perceived as a black box:
Variability in the adoption of open and close recruitment processes can
happen within countries by institutions, and within the institutions by
disciplinary field
Question 1
To what extent can national level policies
influence the effective implementation of
open, merit-based, transparent recruitment
practices in universities and research
institutes?
Complex picture: food for thought
Staffing options
Benefits
Drawbacks
Open Recruitment is a competitive process
that seeks a broad pool of qualified, diverse
applicants and normally utilizes a search
committee to screen, interview and identify a
candidate for hire.
• Assures greatest access to available pool of
qualified candidates
• Allows greatest opportunity for interested
parties to compete
• Invigorates and brings new skills and
perspectives to unit workforce
• Provides an opportunity to address
underutilization within the classification
and/or job group
• Recruiting the most qualified candidates is
critical to campus succession planning
• Requires allocation of resources for
outreach and advertising
• Process can take several months
Close/internal Recruitment is a competitive
process that normally utilizes a search
committee to screen, interview and identify a
candidate for hire. Advertising and outreach
focused on the institutional community (but
not only limited to it)
Problematic if Advertising and
outreach limited to the institutional
community
• Allows all campus employees access to a
promotional opportunity
• Provides an opportunity to hire most
qualified internal applicant
• Reduces perceptions of inequity or
unfairness that can result from
reorganizations or non-recruitments
• Decreases hiring risks
• It may limit the pool of applicants
impacting the diversity of the pool of
applicants
• If effectively closed it does not allow other
qualified applicants to apply
Adapted from UCSC - Comparison of Staffing Options
A scenario for reflection
• Is close/internal recruitment always a “no-no” option?
• What if the advertizement is not only focused on the
institutional community and the selection is based on
merit?
• What if there is no nepotism, parochialism and
particularism involved in the recruitment process?
An example: Studies show that academic inbreeding
is detrimental to academic endevours but this
practice is also seen as “valid” as a means to retain
the “best” and to maintain teaching activities fluid
Question 2 and 3
Are close/internal recruitment practices necessarily at odds with
open/external recruitment practices? Can these explain patterns
of greater dissatisfaction concerning recruitment procedures
among R2 researchers?
Can public policies contribute to diminish recruitment practices
such as academic inbreeding, and others associated to nepotism
and parochialism? Are competitive research funding and
internationalization policies a possible solution?
Advance our knowledge through
mutual learning: a questionnaire
1) assessment of open, merit-based, transparent
recruitment in the various countries as perceived
by the respondents
2) identification of good practices and recent
changes in terms of policy and incentives to
facilitate or encourage open recruitment
Findings on challenges
There is an overall agreement that:
• universities have a publicly available and open
recruitment policy in place
• the job specificities are included in the job ads,
and that these include clearly defined working
arrangements, standards, and transparent
procedures for appointment.
• appointment decisions are primarily based on
excellence and merit.
Findings on challenges
Major barriers to the establishment of an open, merit-based,
transparent recruitment were also identified:
• Language seems to be problematic in terms of the selection
and appointment of the best applicants.
• Although most countries stated that the application
procedures should not be considered as burdensome for the
applicants, a few countries suggested that this occurs
sometimes, while in others this was deemed to be a
challenge.
• Most respondent countries believe the advertisements are
reaching the best possible applicants to the job, although a
few countries consider that this happens only in some cases.
Findings on challenges
Lesser issues related to the establishment of an open, meritbased, transparent recruitment were the following:
• Most respondent countries state that the recruitment
procedures are transparent from application to selection,
although few countries suggest that this only happens in
some cases or regarding some positions.
• The composition of the jury/evaluating committee/hiring
committee is made available to the applicant, either
systematically or upon request in the majority of the
countries, but some other countries report that this is only
done in some cases.
How would the application procedure of
your country universities compare to the
example below?
Application Procedure
Please send the completed application form and/or full
curriculum vitae, together with copies of qualification
documents, a publication list and/or abstracts of selected
published papers, and names, addresses and fax
numbers/e-mail addresses of three referees to whom the
applicants’ consent has been given for their providing
references (unless otherwise specified), to the Personnel
Office by post or by fax to (852) 3943 1462 by the closing
date.
Please quote the reference number and mark 'Application Confidential' on cover. ThePersonal Information Collection
Statement will be provided upon request.
Question 4
Language and administrative issues were identified
in the questionnaire as barriers to open, meritbased, transparent recruitment. To what extent
solving these issues represent a major step towards
an effective open recruitment system for researchers
in your country?
Findings on good practices adressing open,
merit-based, transparent recruitment
Most countries reported having good practices
implemented concerning:
• an easier accessibility to information and
procedures of recruitment for international
researchers,
• transparency of selection process/evaluation
criteria,
• setting
or
introducing
national
and/or
international guidelines concerning open, meritbased, transparent recruitment.
Findings on good practices adressing open,
merit-based, transparent recruitment
• Very few countries identified good practices regarding
the transparency of job information (opening of
vacancies).
• The same is true regarding features associated with
the efficiency of job information posting or the
selection process. (This may be explained by the fact that these are
matters more of the realm of universities and other hiring institutions).
• Few good practices seem to have been recognized or
implemented concerning the use of recruitment
mechanisms/tools (such as job portals) to foster
intersectoral mobility.
Findings on good practices adressing open,
merit-based, transparent recruitment
Transparency of
Country
Setting or
Funding to
introducing
attract and
national or
recruit
international
researchers
guidelines
Austria
Belgium
Czech
Republic
Estonia
Finland
France
Greece
Ireland
Moldova
Slovenia
Spain
Switzerland
Netherlands
√
√
√
√
√
UK
√?
Selection
process /
evaluation
criteria
Job
information
(opening)
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
Easy
accessibility
to
Using
information
Attracting
recruitment
and
internationa
tool to bridge
speeding job procedures of l (foreign)
academic
information recruitment researchers
and business
for
international
researchers
√
√?
√
√
Efficiency of
Selection
process /
evaluation
criteria
√
√
√
√
√
√?
√
√?
√?
√
√?
√
√
√
√?
√?
√
√?
√
Findings on Recent changes in policy or
incentives to encourage open recruitment
Recent changes in policy/incentives towards
more
open,
merit-based,
transparent
recruitment practices has been mainly done at
the government or funding agency level, either
through changes to the law or by efforts to
reform the system at national level (in a top
down approach).
Findings on Recent changes in policy or
incentives to encourage open recruitment
• Fewer countries reported policies/incentives
promoted at the university level. When they are,
they tend to be part of reform efforts driven by
the universities, or part of their strategic planning.
• Only a few countries reported increases in
university autonomy as a means to facilitate or
encourage open recruitment.
• Few countries also identified recent changes in
advertising job vacancies, mostly internationally
(can it be it is not an issue anymore?)
Question 5
To what extent greater or smaller degrees of
institutional autonomy can contribute to the
implementation of effective open, merit-based,
transparent recruitment practices?
Findings on Recent changes in policy or
incentives to encourage open recruitment
• Fewer countries seemed to have introduced
policies or incentives to increase the
transparency of selection processes or contracts
(may be derived from a perception that these are not particularly
important barriers regarding the establishment of open, merit-based,
transparent recruitment systems).
• Only one country identified recent changes in
policy (or incentives) towards encouraging open
recruitment that entailed closer cooperation
between societal and economic needs
Findings on Recent changes in policy or
incentives to encourage open recruitment
Country
Austria
Belgium
Czech
Republic
Estonia
Finland
France
Greece
Ireland
Moldova
Slovenia
Spain
Switzerland
Netherlands
UK
Government or
Advertising job
Increasing
University level
agency level
vacancies
transparency of
Legal
selection
policy Reform Increasing Reformi
National Internati process /
or
of
autonom
ng or
contract
ly
onally evaluation
progra system
y
planning
criteria
m
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
Making
Attracting and Cooperating
easy to
giving
societal and
access and intensives to
economic
guiding for
doctoral &
needs
internation postdoctoral
(public &
al
level
private
researchers researchers
sectors)
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√?
√?
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
Additional insights regarding relevant
issues identified in the questionnaire
Dr. Rein Kaarli and Ms.
Ursula Tubli, ESTONIA
1) the efforts that institutions in Estonia are making to make the information about vacancies more easily accessed
nationally and internationally;
2) the efforts that universities have been undertaking to limit language requirements and other restrictions to
the hiring processes.
Dear Dr. Rosa Fernandez,
UNITED KINGDOM
1) the monitoring process of the Concordat as an agreement between the funders and employers of researchers
in the UK;
2) the recommendations implemented in 2013 and in particular the new recommendation for the institutions to
contrast and compare progress across disciplines and departments as a means to identify and share good
practices.
Marie-Louise Gächter-Alge,
SWITZERLAND
1) how the fact that no national laws regulate the recruitment of professors and other staff, and that
universities/faculties provide their own regulations can be considered as an advantage;
2) Provide more details on the centralized online application platform set up by the Swiss universities, and how
this increased transparency and efficiency in facilitating the application process.
Brendan McCormack,
IRELAND
Vasiliki Pletsa, GREECE
Ana Mafalda Dourado PORTUGAL
1) how the Irish universities recognized and swiftly advanced for the voluntary sign up of the EU Charter and
Code;
2) The ongoing implementation of the scientific visa (hosting Agreement) Scheme.
Explaining in greater detail how the increase in university autonomy as facilitated by Laws 4009/2011 and
4076/2012 on Higher Education is impacting and fostering open, merit-based, transparent recruitment processes
at Greek universities.
Explaining how public science policies focusing on research competitiveness and internationalization have
impacted on academic inbreeding practices at Portuguese universities.
Let us continue to discuss and learn
from one another