Hi Ajay,

This is a very interesting question.

Generally there are some software which are developed for this purpose. The software provides a scale of scores for candidates based on the effective factor that developers/recruiters have assigned.

However, I personally believe that no matter how sophisticated such applications are, even if they possess artificial intelligence, their decisions are not always the best option; since they simply evaluate quantities and statistics, but a true employee/lecturer needs more than a resume. Hence, while a candidate has a lot of potential but is a recent graduate could be rejected, while another unskilled - or better say not our best option - who has been in the field for a longer period of time could be accepted just for a better looking CV.

Therefore, even if you rely on the software, nonetheless you call for an interview and perhaps ask for a demo.

That is a hard question, and I would challenge the suggestion of the removal of the human variable from such types of decision making. Sure you could implement a hypothetical system based on an algorithm which looks for numbers of publications, ranked accordingly, as well as other weighted stats such as teaching experience, interdisciplinary activities, conferences presented etc. However it has been my experience where the 'smartest' candidate is not by any means the best 'fit' for a department or project.

The social failures you mentioned above are real and sometimes grave problems, however removing human involvement seems a bit like using a chainsaw when a scalpel might be required.

@Jean-Paul, your response is appreciated as you mentioned some very good points for minimizing the human interventions in the recruitment and academic promotions.

For recruitment of new personnel:

1. Devise objective criteria of API and minimum marks be allotted to interview. However, if there is interview, human intervention starts because interviewers are also human being. Still we can try allotting minimum marks to interview.

2. Try to involve the experts those are from far off distance and those are not known to people in this area.

For promotions:

1. Tight criteria be prepared for research.

2. Only candidates be promoted those publish researches in best journals indexed on SCOPUS and having ISI T. Reuters Impact factors.

3. Local papers published in proceedings and third rate Journals may not be considered if possible. But in public sector, it is difficult to avoid.

Thanks  

Thanks for your nice suggestions Prof. Kundu.

I fully agree with your suggestions for minimizing the human interventions in academic recruitment and promotions for Government sectors. However, for public sector it is very difficult to avoid such human interventions. Perhaps, this is the reason that the latter is known for partiality, favor, and other interventions.

In my opinion, it is just needed competence and verticality at all levels, dear Ajay. Without this, no system can work properly (even automatic).

Thanks dear  Antonio for your good suggestions

Dear Barbara, I agree with you that transparency, competitiveness, and openness are the keys for recruitment of new staffs. Similarly, the periodic review and evaluation are good for the promotion of existing staffs.

To the best of my knowledge, as on date , there is no such performance index to assess reliably different personal attributes of a scientist.

Dear Dr. Rathore, Thanks for your response.

It is unfortunate that as on today, there is no information available from the organizations on “Detailed marking scheme for the evaluation of attributes of Scientific Officers/scientists" . A sound Quality control/quality assurance (QA/QC) programme is essential for any organization involved in assessment/evaluations. In the absence of detailed marking scheme, the arbitrary marking awarded for the evaluation of attributes based on the so called “actual performance of the individual’s achievements” will continue to differ widely. Moreover, there is no information available, on “the criteria adopted for observing transparency and objectivity in the assessment of attributes for awarding grades in APAR” and again the information received from the department under RTI Act-2005, is as follows: “Assessment is based on the actual performance of the individuals” .This is very clear and self explanatory.. Without proper quality control (QC)/ detailed marking scheme/index (say h=index), the results/assessment obtained are directly dependent on the vagaries of the Assessors, Reviewers/countersigning/, and finally accepting authority, and the procedure adopted by different channel.

Yes, Dr. Rathore I agree with you. But for minimizing the human interventions in decision taking of academic recruitment and promotions many steps can be taken. Some of them were suggested by you and your predecessors.

I personally feel that reliable evaluation is a  very difficult task .

Personal discussion is utmost essential so that point of time human involvement can not be ignored rather it is essential too. Only thing is that the weightage for it could be reduced and a proforma may be developed to develop a metrics regarding the talent of individuals. Thanks

In Italy was enacted a law providing that the relatives within the fourth degree with a professor of the department can not take part in competitions for positions of researcher and professor as competitors. Unfortunately, passed the law, find the loophole. The relatives are made to transfer to another department and then the competition can start and the outcome is obvious.

Also there have always been roped family which have caused such a scandal. Despite having given rise to criminal proceedings, in the end everything was resolved with nothing done.

This is a phenomenon very difficult to eradicate that demolishes the motivations of young scholars.

Recruitment and promotions of academic staff must be fair, objective and according to a specified criteria. All human interventions, such as, the issues of favor, grouping, corruption, and nepotism must be eliminated., 

Dear @Ajay, I am free to attach my question that is related to yours. Hope it fill be helpful!

I think that human interventions should not be minimized, but forbidden forever!

https://www.researchgate.net/post/Do_you_have_experience_with_caste_employment_at_Universities_in_spite_of_the_law

Dear Ljubomir, Thank you for your contribution. It seems that the issues of favor, grouping, corruption, and nepotism are not limited to a particular region(s). Rather it spreads across the geographical boundaries. You are right in using the words 'forbidden forever' for stopping the said problems at all levels.

For minimizing human interventions, to stop the favor, grouping, corruption, and nepotism etc., in recruitment and promotion processes, the weightage of interview should be kept at a minimum level.

What are the performance indicator of different attributes of scientists?

I have also asked a question as above in my profile.

I think making a standard proforma for accessing the performance of different attributes of a scientist will be helpful, i.e., fix the marks for writing a book, book chapter, international/national journal's articles, conference proceedings...etc. Similarly the marks can also be fixed for the experience gained at the similar/just lower positions etc. as per the requirements of the position.

Dear Brenda, Thank you for your contribution. The one solution could be 'minimizing the weightage of interview' in selection/promotion process.

Hi Ajay,

This is a very interesting question.

Generally there are some software which are developed for this purpose. The software provides a scale of scores for candidates based on the effective factor that developers/recruiters have assigned.

However, I personally believe that no matter how sophisticated such applications are, even if they possess artificial intelligence, their decisions are not always the best option; since they simply evaluate quantities and statistics, but a true employee/lecturer needs more than a resume. Hence, while a candidate has a lot of potential but is a recent graduate could be rejected, while another unskilled - or better say not our best option - who has been in the field for a longer period of time could be accepted just for a better looking CV.

Therefore, even if you rely on the software, nonetheless you call for an interview and perhaps ask for a demo.

Dear Ajay

I agree with Mahfuz in terms that recruitment and promotions of academic staff should be quite fair and highly subjected to specific criteria. Replacing the human variable from taking such decisions as also mentioned by Jean-Paul can be a good suggestion for minimizing the human interventions.

Dear Alireza and dear Mohammad thank you very much for your contributions.

Yes Barbara, You are right, actually no software/computer can replace the human behavior/activity completely. Also the personal interaction is necessary in many cases of new recruitment/promotions, however, I think there is a need of keeping the wieghtage of direct interactions/interviews to a minimum level as suggested in some of the earlier posts.

Dear Prof. Ajay,

Being an alumnus of IIT KGP, I've witnessed there some of the great minds joining as faculty members in the recent past. So, kudos to the selection panel at first. Now, to generalize this situation, I would say the only solution to such problem is that the selection committee should be unbiased. The selection criteria should be pretty open to all. Like, what I've heard is that the head of the department circulates the CV/profile of the candidate once he/she receives any application. Then based on the feedback from all the faculties, they decide whether to call that applicant for a seminar. Finally, based on the performance on seminar and personal interview they select a candidate. I appreciate such procedure. So, in this procedure I think the crucial point is collective responsibility of all the existing faculty members of the department. It's their duty to be fair throughput the procedure and select the right candidate who is well deserved. To make long story short, with software and all, I can't think of any fair and proper selection process for hiring faculties at any stage. It should involve all the right persons and they should be completely fair and give proper justice to the right candidates. Moreover, make the criteria public and if possible, give little feedback to each of the aspirants why the result went in favour /against of him/her.

Focus on competence rather than origin of people whatever the origin might be?

Yes, I agree with the recent posts that only competence of the candidates should be considered for the academic recruitment and promotions but this cannot be done unless the selection panel is unbiased and competent. The entire process should also me made transparent.

Should there be a problem whatever the selection panel members involved when procedures would be fully transparent even exceeding the local university frontiers?

What is the relative importance of social competence (e.g. being able to collaborate) versus technical competence versus theoretical competence versus past experience with model systems?

Competence of teachers should be the main criteria for their selection, and employment.

How to know competence of teachers when they are/will be confronted with new education environments?

Is it like football players? They might be outstanding in team A and average in team B?

I think generally the panel focuses on technical competence for new recruitment (mainly for starting positions) and social competence may be considered mainly for senior recruitment/promotions etc.

Good suggestions dear Eraldo. Yes the mentioned points could be helpful in eliminating the issues of favor, grouping, corruption, and nepotism in academic recruitment and promotions.

Hi all, I do feel it is needed to have minimum biased interference in academic recruitment's and promotions but we cannot avoid it completely. Regards 

I do very much like what is written for Equality and Diversity in Employment Policy at University: " The University is committed to developing, maintaining and supporting a culture of equality and diversity in employment in which staff are treated equitably, and where they can realise their potential whatever their age, race, colour, nationality, ethnic origin, creed, disability, sexual orientation, sex, gender identity, marital or civil partnership status, parental status, religion, belief or non-belief, social or economic class, employment status, or any other criteria that cannot be shown to be properly justifiable. Equality of opportunity and inclusivity is fundamental to the vision and values of the University Plan. The principles of equality and diversity are at the heart of University life and are supported by appropriate policies, procedures and good practice."

http://www.york.ac.uk/admin/hr/resources/policy/recruitment.htm

I think that there is a need for devising a system to minimize human interventions in academic recruitment and promotions, but who is going to devise and apply it.

Should a computer recruit and promote, but then who is writing the computer program selection procedure perhaps to be updated frequently ?

Even if a system is devised to minimize human interventions in organizations, still human will apply the system. So there cn be a probability for human intervention.

Dear Abedallah, Thanks for your response. The devising such a system and applying it are the acts of individual institution(s) because the system will incorporate their requirements. So, an universal system may not work for all due to one’s specific requirements.

I agree with the recent posts that the human involvement cannot be eliminated completely in the selection/promotion process. But the question remains that how the human interventions can be minimized, at least, to preventing the issues of favor, group-ism, corruption, and nepotism etc in the process.

This is a good question but the reality is more interference in the system.

To a great extent subjectivity cannot be eliminated in any system which has People controlling the system. Objective parametric controls are ideals for reference in these systems.

Yes, I agree with the recent post(s) that the  subjectivity cannot be eliminated fully in any system which has human involvement at any stage of the process.

Management should ensure objectivity and fairness during the process of recruitment and promotions.

The most important organizational outcomes rely on objectivity of recruitment and promotions process! Fairness is the MUST!

Yes dear Mahfuz, I agree that the management should ensure objectivity and fairness during the entire process of recruitment/promotions.

I agree with Ljubomir that the fairness is the key for avoiding the nepotism and favor in the process of academic recruitment and promotions.

Fairness / Objectivity and Management Controls should be build into the PEOPLE INPUT & PROGRESSION SYSTEM

Yes, dear Krishnan. Management control is an important factor in building the system.

Yes, I agree with the recent posts that the role of management is quite crucial in building the system.

Organization should develop strictly objective, fair and transparent system for recruitment/promotion to curb illicit favour, groupism, corruption, and nepotism. A well quantified criteria indictors and computerized eligibility scrutiny and selection may address the issue to some extent.

Yes, I agree that a strictly objective and transparent system can minimize the illicit favor, groupism, corruption, and nepotism in recruitment and promotions.

Dear RG Fellows,

Your participation is deeply appreciated. Thank you very much.

Happy New Year 2015 with hope that you will have many blessings in it.