With reference to my question 2017/2811, since your 2018 review of name-blind recruitment in the GLA, what proportion of, and how many, recruitment processes in each of the GLA group of organisations have used name-blind shortlisting for job applicants? Are any future changes planned to procedures in each organisation to increase this proportion?
I said in the answer to Mayor's Question 2017/2811 that the GLA would review progress with anonymous recruitment in the Autumn of 2018. This review of the diversity of candidate fields between December 2016, when the GLA introduced ‘name-anonymous’ recruitment, and Autumn 2018 was undertaken by the GLA’s Resourcing Manager.
The review found that the shortlisting figures in this reporting period demonstrated positive outcomes for both women and BAME candidates, with the percentage of female candidates shortlisted rising from 55 per cent to 58 per cent and BAME candidates from 24 per cent to 27 per cent. However, without a far more in-depth review this cannot be attributed to the introduction of name-anonymous shortlisting alone.
Since the review, the number of recruitment processes in each of the GLA group of organisations that have used name-anonymous shortlisting for job applicants and the proportion this represents of total recruitment processes are:
319 recruitment campaigns, 319 name-anonymous = 100%.
Future changes planned to increase the proportion: Of the 319 campaigns advertised, 31 were for the Housing and Land directorate. As part of this large recruitment campaign, the GLA trialled a CV and cover letter application process using software which, in addition to removing candidate names and personal data, also removed names of educational establishments and employers. A review of this trial will be completed Autumn 2019.
71 recruitment campaigns, 71 name-anonymous = 100%.
Future changes planned to increase the proportion: LFB will continue to employ and monitor the use of name-anonymous recruitment.
61 recruitment campaigns, 53 name-anonymous = 87%.
Future changes planned to increase the proportion: LLDC is committed to ensuring that where possible they operate a fully name-anonymous process and are working with their applicant tracking provider to ensure that this is fully name-anonymous in order that when CVs are requested these are fully redacted (names removed).
17 recruitment campaigns, 17 name-anonymous = 100%.
Future changes planned to increase the proportion: MOPAC will continue to employ and monitor the use of name-anonymous recruitment.
The MPS does not use name-anonymous shortlisting for the vast majority of police officer and police staff recruitment. For initial police officer recruitment, candidates who meet the eligibility criteria progress to an assessment centre, therefore no shortlisting takes place. Anonymous shortlisting is used in some annual police officer promotion processes – they typically run 5 corporate process annually (Sergeant - Chief Superintendent).
Future changes planned to increase the proportion: The MPS will be considering further use of this approach in the future.
8 recruitment campaigns, 8 name-anonymous = 100%.
Future changes planned to increase the proportion: The OPDC mirrors the GLA’s recruitment processes, so will continue to employ and monitor the use of name-anonymous recruitment.
No recruitment has been name-anonymous to date.
Future changes planned to increase the proportion: TfL have partnered with a recruitment solutions supplier who specialise in name-anonymous recruitment. This follows successful trials last year and they are in the process of ensuring this solution meets their stringent cyber security and information governance requirements before the solution is fully implemented. Once these requirements have been met, the solution will be switched on and name-anonymous recruitment will apply to all recruitment delivery at TfL.