Talent Cloud Results Report

Typical GC Staffing Process

This section looks at how a typical GC staffing process maps against a typical staffing process using Talent Cloud. It’s important to note that there are always variations in each GC staffing process, and the description below is not meant to convey, as an absolute, what always happens. That being said, the description of a typical GC staffing process is consistent with what we heard over and over again during user-testing with applicants, hiring managers and HR advisors. It is also consistent with departmental findings reported under Blueprint 2020, as well as the extensive mapping and research work of the Red Tape Reduction Team that explored the issue of time to staff from 2014-2016.

In a typical GC staffing process, we heard that managers usually started by using an existing Statement of Merit Criteria (SOMC) for the same classification and level, provided by their HR team as reference in drafting their own SOMC. Often, the same list of criteria were used in the new SOMC, as the previous SOMC, even in cases where the specifics of the job varied. Most of the criteria specified years of experience as a requirement. Other information about the job (e.g. team culture, key tasks, etc.) was usually minimal or non-existent.

During the application process, we found that applicants were often asked to provide detailed examples on how they meet each of the criteria. Applicants usually provided long responses and used keywords from the job advertisement to maximize the likelihood of being screened in. Many processes also required applicants to submit their resume.

We heard that it was quite usual for a staffing process to receive hundreds or even thousands of applications, which many HR advisors and managers described as overwhelming. Some departments used various methods, such as random selections, to reduce the volume before reviewing the applications. The applications were downloaded as a single PDF file by the HR advisor and shared with managers. (In processes where the number of applications was very large, several dozen applications would be included in each file, and managers would receive several files.) Managers needed to use their own method to keep track of the applicants.

Many departments required managers to develop an assessment plan and assessment materials before having access to the applications. During the assessment process, whether candidates received communications on their status depended on individual managers and HR advisors. Support for managers varied significantly across departments when it came to developing assessment materials, assessing applicants, and communicating results to applicants at different stages.

Once a candidate was selected, depending on the position, they might need to undergo official language evaluations. All selected candidates needed to obtain the appropriate security clearance. Second language evaluations could only be scheduled by HR advisors, whereas the security clearance process varied by departments.

To finalize the staffing process, the HR advisor gathered all the required documents from both the candidate and the manager to obtain internal approval. The list of required documents varied slightly across departments, so was the internal approval process. These documents were usually submitted in a package while the candidate was undergoing second language evaluation and security clearance. The Letter of Offer was issued once internal approval was obtained, second language evaluation was completed, and security clearance was granted.

What is different about Talent Cloud?

Questioning and testing every element

All aspects of the Talent Cloud site are rigorously tested with users. Collectively, these independent elements impact time-to-staff and hiring results.

We placed a strong focus on elements facing external applicants. For many, this is their first introduction to GC hiring, and the look and feel of a site has a huge influence on whether or not top talent decides to apply. Many users infer that the organization will be much like the platform itself, particularly when it comes to recruiting digital and tech talent.

We worked with users to question everything - and we do mean everything - that went onto the site. We looked at everything from colour scheme to reading level to gender review of language to ease of use for those with alternative accessibility considerations. Indigenous communities and underrepresented groups were engaged in the design process, and provided amazing insights into elements of language, process and platform configuration that enabled or blocked them from feeling included and applying for jobs.

In addition to all that, we tested the simple courtesy requirements of hiring: do applicants feel the process is fair, understandable, inclusive, responsive, and timely?

Talent Cloud also significantly reimagined the process by which managers arrive at the Statement of Merit Criteria (SOMC), introducing impact-driven staffing design and a new bias-reduction methodology that emphasized skills over years of pre-determined experience. Both the theories and the implementations involved looking at every step throughout the job poster crafting process.

Changing what and how information is shared

When Talent Cloud went live in October 2018, it standardized the inclusion of the following components in a job advertisement: impact statements, key tasks, skill requirements, information on the team culture, manager profiles, and whether or not remote work, flex hours and telework were permitted in the role. These were novel additions at the time for a Government of Canada job advertisement. Talent Cloud also designed its platform to publicly show the number of applications received in real time on each job advertisement.

The platform includes tools for crafting a job poster that would be optimized to yield the best hiring result and an assessment planning tool (but not the assessments themselves). By linking the list of criteria to the assessment plan, managers and HR advisors can have informed discussions on how the choices made on the job advertisement could impact the time for assessment. All tools were developed to deliver a focus on reducing time to staff, increasing diversity of applications, and honing in on the best candidate for the position, taking into account both hard skills and culture fit.

Paying attention to human behaviours

Many of our interventions seek to encourage desirable behaviours or remove pain points for our users. The application process is divided into different sections to make it easier for applicants, especially those who have never applied to government jobs, to navigate. There are behavioural-based instructions throughout the process to encourage applicants to carefully consider whether they are a good fit for the position, but also guidance on how to submit a good application. We have also specifically designed an integrity pledge to nudge applicants in submitting truthful information.

In designing, we paid close attention on how to make the staffing process easier for managers (while still meeting HR requirements), including examining the roles procrastination and communication played in determining the average time to staff. Interventions range from auto-completing some job poster fields based on the manager’s selection, to presorting applications by priority, veteran, and citizenship status.

Similarly, when there are desirable behaviours from managers and HR advisors that could contribute to reducing time-to-staff or improving the quality of hire, we built in nudges throughout the process to encourage those behaviours. For instance, managers are nudged to support remote work and flexible hours. They are also reminded of optimizing selection criteria for best results. In addition, Talent Cloud created separate HR and Manager portals with time tracking features, allowing all involved in a process to know exactly who had the next step in moving the process forward, and what any hold ups might be.

What is not different about Talent Cloud?

Out of all the parts of the hiring process, finalizing the hire is the area in which Talent Cloud has the least influence. Interventions here were minimal. Notably, this is also the element of the staffing process that Talent Cloud was almost entirely unable to influence in terms of reducing time to staff (see section on experiments related to Reducing Time to Staff.)

That being said, we tried to provide all relevant information to applicants so they can be prepared in advance. We also worked with managers and HR advisors to rethink how some of the steps (e.g. second language evaluation and other assessments) could occur in parallel. We’ve done extensive work on finalizing the HR record. Notably, we only release the related features in stages, with alpha and beta versions. Not all features (such as time tracking and the record of decision tools) have been fully released yet.

For security clearance, we worked with the security office to design and build an online reliability clearance form as a prototype.