INTRODUCTION OF INNOVATIVE MECHANISMS INTO THE PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION PERSONNEL EVALUATION SYSTEM
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.31470/2786-6246-2025-13-85-92Keywords:
public administration, personnel, public servants, evaluation, innovative mechanisms, multi-rater methods, HR analytics and machine learning, competency modelsAbstract
The article substantiates the introduction of innovative mechanisms into the public administration personnel evaluation system. The author analyzed the following mechanisms: multi-rater methods (360° assessment) - obtaining multidimensional feedback from managers, colleagues, subordinates and external stakeholders for a comprehensive assessment of competencies; key performance indicators and result-oriented assessment systems that allow linking individual performance results to the strategic goals of the organization; HR analytics and machine learning – the use of statistical and predictive models to identify success factors, assess personnel risks and increase the accuracy of management decisions; digital monitoring platforms (electronic assessment systems, online scoreboards), which ensure the efficiency of data collection and the openness of procedures; competency models, which allow to assess not only the tasks performed, but also the professional and behavioral characteristics of employees; gamification and individualized learning systems, integrated with assessment, which increase motivation and stimulate professional development.
The introduction of innovative mechanisms into the public administration personnel assessment system forms a qualitatively new approach to human resource management in the public sector, focused on combining efficiency, transparency and development of personnel potential. The use of competency models allows to assess not only the results of the tasks performed, but also professional and behavioral characteristics, which ensures the complexity of diagnostics and the possibility of forming individual development trajectories. The use of multi-rater methods (360° assessment) increases the representativeness and reliability of measurements due to the involvement of different groups of stakeholders, but requires careful design of the procedure and control over biases.
The integration of key performance indicators and result-oriented mechanisms with the performance management system of state institutions contributes to the alignment of individual achievements with organizational and sectoral goals. The use of digital monitoring platforms, online scoreboards and electronic assessment systems increases the efficiency of information collection, ensures the openness of procedures and creates conditions for data-driven management. The use of HR analytics and machine learning algorithms opens up opportunities for forecasting personnel needs and optimizing processes, but at the same time raises questions of ethical and algorithmic responsibility. Additional value is created by innovative educational solutions, in particular gamification and individualized learning systems, which are integrated with personnel evaluation and contribute to increasing motivation and professional development.
References
OECD: Reviews Skills for a High Performing Civil Service. www.oecd.org. Retrieved from https://www.oecd.org/content/dam/oecd/en/publications/reports/2017/09/skills-for-a-high-performing-civil-service_g1g80382/9789264280724-en.pdf?utm.com [in English].
Lockyer, J., & Sargeant, J. (2022). Multisource feedback: an overview of its use and application as a formative assessment. Can Med Educ J, 13(4), 30-35. doi: 10.36834/cmej.73775 [in English].
Kenneth, M., & Nowack, S. (2012). Evidence-based answers to 15 questions about leveraging 360-degree feedback . Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research, 64, 3, 157–182. Retrieved from https://www.apa.org/pubs/journals/features/cpb-64-3-157.pdf?utm.com [in English].
OECD: Good Practices for Performance Budgeting. www.oecd.org. Retrieved from https://www.oecd.org/content/dam/oecd/en/publications/reports/2019/05/oecd-good-practices-for-performance-budgeting_0a446f98/c90b0305-en.pdf?utm.com [in English].
Indicators of Inputs, Activities, Outputs, Outcomes and Impacts in Security and Justice Programming. assets.publishing.service.gov.uk. Retrieved from https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5a7eb9fae5274a2e87db1828/Indicators.pdf?utm.com [in English].
Linardatos, P., Papastefanopoulos, V., & Kotsiantis, S. (2020). Explainable AI: A Review of Machine Learning Interpretability Methods. Entropy (Basel), 23(1), 18. doi: 10.3390/e23010018 [in English].
Cheng, Z., Wu, Y., Li Y., Cai, L., & Ihnaini, B. A. (2025). Comprehensive Review of Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) in Computer Vision. Sensors, 25. 4166. https://doi.org/10.3390/s25134166 [in English].
Chen, Z. (2023). Ethics and discrimination in artificial intelligence-enabled recruitment practices. Humanit Soc Sci Commun, 10, 567. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-023-02079-x [in English].
OECD: The OECD Digital Government Policy Framework. www.oecd.org. Retrieved from https://www.oecd.org/en/publications/the-oecd-digital-government-policy-framework_f64fed2a-en.html?utm.com [in English].
Reports on Computer Systems Technology. nvlpubs.nist.gov. Retrieved from https://nvlpubs.nist.gov/nistpubs/legacy/sp/nistspecialpublication800-137.pdf?utm.com [in English].