Shutterstock.com
How Federal Managers Can Improve Hiring Practices Right Now
We need to stop thinking of this as a selection process and start imagining what we can do to recruit better.
One of the most important functions of federal managers is hiring new workers and building the workforce of the future. There are many studies and analyses with recommendations to improve federal hiring at the strategic level and even at the department or agency level. While leaders and scholars debate these issues, there are several small, practical steps that individual hiring managers can do now to make immediate improvements.
We’re all familiar with the standard practices we have to follow that require developing a position description, organizing a selection board, and developing selection criteria. The position is advertised on USAJobs, resumes are reviewed and screened, and the selection board reviews the qualified candidates, conducts interviews of the most qualified candidates, and makes a selection. Usually the position description and selection criteria are updated from previous hiring boards and the cycle continues. The system works when strong and motivated candidates put in the time and effort to navigate the process. As a federal manager who has hired dozens of federal civilians over a 30-year career, and hired some terrific employees, I think we can do better.
We need to stop thinking of this as a selection process and start imagining what we can do to recruit better. If we are only advertising on USAJobs, for example, we’re only selecting from candidates who are already interested in a federal job. Every job should be advertised and promoted on job sites and social media in order to attract a wider audience. Our jobs are interesting and support important causes and missions. We need to tell that story in our advertisements and in our position descriptions. We should not write for the Human Resources Office, we need to write for that recent graduate who may not know about these missions. Many hiring managers may not realize that we can advertise everywhere — there are no rules against it, we just don’t do it enough.
When we put together selection boards, we need to insist on creating a diverse board. We can’t afford to put the boards together based on who is available around the office. This may not be a rule we have to follow, but it should be a requirement we insist upon.
We need to change how we write our selection criteria. Traditionally, we've measured experience by the years of experience a candidate brings. Unfortunately, this criterion encapsulates years of systemic bias in the federal hiring process. Is someone who has done the same job for 20 years more qualified than someone who has done that same job for 10 years, or even 5 years? The answer to that question is probably no. For many technical jobs, however, is it more likely to be true that someone who has 20 years of experience or more is likely to be a white male? Statistically, the answer to that question is going to be yes. We need to recognize that using years of experience in this way we are supporting, perhaps inadvertently, previous years of bias or at least favoritism. Instead, we should ask candidates to relate their experiences to our missions and evaluate the quality and understanding of that experience rather than the duration. Similarly, education qualifications should not be limited to specified degrees and institutions. Candidates should be encouraged to demonstrate how their educational experiences relate to our missions and we should evaluate them on those qualities.
In these days of COVID-19, we have used the remote interview process more and more. But when it’s safe again, we need to bring candidates into our offices for interviews. That means insisting on the funding to pay for their travel and per diem. Some offices and organizations do it as a matter of best practice. We all need to do it, and insist upon it, so that we aren’t excluding candidates from economically disadvantaged circumstances.
These are just a few practical measures we can follow now, and we need to demand that our agencies support them. The benefits will not only help us build a stronger and more diverse workforce, but these practices will also help the public and our communities better understand our critical — and interesting — missions.
William M. Moon retired from the Defense Threat Reduction Agency in 2019 after 30 years of federal service. He managed programs that worked cooperatively with Russian and other former Soviet countries to secure and eliminate thousands of nuclear weapons. Mr. Moon received the Arthur Fleming Award from the Arthur Fleming Foundation and George Washington University for Outstanding Federal Service in 2002.