tag:theconversation.com,2011:/us/topics/merit-based-hiring-51911/articlesMerit-based hiring – The Conversation2021-01-28T18:15:37Ztag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1455182021-01-28T18:15:37Z2021-01-28T18:15:37ZTrump wasn’t the first president to try to politicize the civil service – which remains at risk of returning to Jackson’s ‘spoils system’<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/381160/original/file-20210128-19-bzgg9j.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=129%2C120%2C5622%2C3707&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Trump put a portrait of Andrew Jackson in the Oval Office when he was president. </span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/president-donald-trump-speaks-during-an-event-with-members-news-photo/880468366">Oliver Contreras-Pool/Getty Images</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>The federal government’s core civilian workforce has long been <a href="https://catalog.hathitrust.org/Record/001540761">known for its professionalism</a>. About <a href="https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R43590.pdf">2.1 million nonpartisan career officials</a> provide essential public services in such diverse areas as agriculture, national parks, defense, homeland security, environmental protection and veterans’ affairs. </p>
<p>To get the vast majority of these “competitive service” jobs – which are protected from easy firing – federal employees must <a href="https://www.opm.gov/policy-data-oversight/classification-qualifications/classifying-general-schedule-positions/">demonstrate achievement in job-specific knowledge, skills and abilities superior to other applicants</a> and, in some cases, pass an exam. In other words, the civil service is designed to be “<a href="https://www.govexec.com/management/2020/10/why-merit-matters/169657/">merit-based</a>.”</p>
<p>It wasn’t always so. </p>
<p>From Andrew Jackson until Theodore Roosevelt, much of the <a href="https://doi.org/10.1086/ahr/11.1.172">federal workforce was subject to change after every presidential election</a> – and often did. Known as the spoils system, this pattern of political patronage, in which officeholders award allies with jobs in return for support, <a href="https://doi.org/10.2307/1893171">began to end</a> in the late 19th century as citizens and politicians like Roosevelt grew fed up with its <a href="https://www.jstor.org/stable/1845445">corruption, incompetence and inefficiency</a> – and its role in the <a href="https://www.nps.gov/articles/000/the-federal-civil-service-and-the-death-of-president-james-a-garfield.htm">assassination of a president</a>.</p>
<p>Less than two weeks before Election Day, former President Donald Trump <a href="https://www.govexec.com/management/2020/10/stunning-executive-order-would-politicize-civil-service/169479/">signed an executive order that threatened</a> to return the U.S. to a spoils system in which a large share of the federal government’s workforce could be fired for little or no reason – including a perceived lack of loyalty to the president.</p>
<p>While President Joe Biden <a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/presidential-actions/2021/01/22/executive-order-protecting-the-federal-workforce/">quickly reversed the order</a> soon after taking office, the incident shows just how vulnerable the civil service is.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="An old picture shows a crowd of people in front of the White House in 1829." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/375959/original/file-20201218-17-14hpknu.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=50%2C39%2C941%2C633&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/375959/original/file-20201218-17-14hpknu.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=482&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/375959/original/file-20201218-17-14hpknu.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=482&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/375959/original/file-20201218-17-14hpknu.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=482&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/375959/original/file-20201218-17-14hpknu.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=605&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/375959/original/file-20201218-17-14hpknu.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=605&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/375959/original/file-20201218-17-14hpknu.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=605&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">People seeking government jobs crashed the White House on the day of Andrew Jackson’s inauguration.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://picryl.com/media/presidents-levee-or-all-creation-going-to-the-white-house-robert-cruikshank-1">Library of Congress</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Birth of the spoils system</h2>
<p>The government of the early republic <a href="https://www.brookings.edu/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/the-early-federal-workforce-by-p-kastor.pdf?utm_campaign=Brookings%20Executive%20Education&utm_source=hs_email&utm_medium=email">was small</a>, but the issue of whether civil servants should be chosen on the basis of patronage or skills was hotly debated. </p>
<p>Although George Washington and the five presidents who followed him <a href="https://doi.org/10.1086/ahr/11.1.172">certainly employed patronage</a>, <a href="https://books.google.com/books?id=_j_YiYda81AC&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_atb#v=onepage&q&f=false">they emphasized merit</a> when making appointments. </p>
<p>Washington wrote that relying on one’s personal relationship to the applicant <a href="https://doi.org/10.1086/634173">would constitute</a> “an absolute bar to preferment” and wanted those “as in my judgment shall be the best qualified to discharge the functions of the departments to which they shall be appointed.” <a href="https://doi.org/10.1086/ahr/11.1.172">He would not even appoint</a> his own soldiers to government positions if they lacked the necessary qualifications.</p>
<p>That changed in 1829 when Andrew Jackson, the seventh president, entered the White House.</p>
<figure class="align-right zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/379832/original/file-20210120-21-1cnf97x.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="An illustration of Andrew Jackson riding a horse on a statue with the words, 'To the victors belong the spoils,' while several men seeking jobs bow down to him." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/379832/original/file-20210120-21-1cnf97x.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/379832/original/file-20210120-21-1cnf97x.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=661&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/379832/original/file-20210120-21-1cnf97x.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=661&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/379832/original/file-20210120-21-1cnf97x.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=661&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/379832/original/file-20210120-21-1cnf97x.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=831&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/379832/original/file-20210120-21-1cnf97x.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=831&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/379832/original/file-20210120-21-1cnf97x.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=831&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Political cartoon by Thomas Nast depicts office seekers seeking jobs from Andrew Jackson.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/political-cartoon-by-thomas-nast-with-the-caption-cant-you-news-photo/96743647">Fotosearch/Getty Images</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Jackson came to office <a href="https://jhupbooks.press.jhu.edu/title/andrew-jackson-0">as a reformer</a> with a promise to end the dominance of elites and what he considered their corrupt policies. He believed that popular access to government jobs – and their frequent turnover through a four-year “<a href="https://jhupbooks.press.jhu.edu/title/andrew-jackson-0">rotation in office</a>” – could serve ideals of democratic participation, regardless of one’s qualifications for a position.</p>
<p>As a result, at his inaugural reception on March 4, a <a href="https://www.penguinrandomhouse.com/books/112695/american-lion-by-jon-meacham/">huge crowd of office seekers crashed</a> the reception. Jackson was “besieged by applicants” and “battalions of hopefuls,” <a href="https://www.penguinrandomhouse.com/books/17600/andrew-jackson-by-hw-brands/">all seeking government jobs</a>.</p>
<p>Instead of preventing corruption from taking root, Jackson’s <a href="https://www.google.com/books/edition/The_Jacksonians/2V9_twEACAAJ?hl=en">rotation policy became an opportunity for patronage</a> – or rewarding supporters with the spoils of victory. He <a href="https://jhupbooks.press.jhu.edu/title/andrew-jackson-0">defended the practice</a> by declaring: “If my personal friends are qualified and patriotic, why should I not be permitted to bestow a few offices on them?” </p>
<p>Besides possessing a <a href="https://www.jstor.org/stable/1845445">lack of appropriate skills and commitment</a>, office seekers <a href="https://doi.org/10.2307/1845445">were expected to pay “assessments”</a> – a percentage of their salary ranging from 2% to 7% – to the party that appointed them.</p>
<p>Although Jackson <a href="https://jhupbooks.press.jhu.edu/title/andrew-jackson-0">replaced only about 10%</a> of the federal workforce and 41% of presidential appointments, the practice increasingly <a href="https://www.google.com/books/edition/The_Civil_Service_and_the_Patronage/URJPPqndZGYC?hl=en">became the norm</a> as subsequent presidents fired as well as refused to reappoint ever-larger shares of the government. </p>
<p><iframe id="kIe1G" class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/kIe1G/5/" height="400px" width="100%" style="border: none" frameborder="0"></iframe></p>
<p>The peak of the spoils system came under James Buchanan, who served from 1857 to 1861. He <a href="https://books.google.com/books/about/History_of_the_Federal_Civil_Service_178.html?id=dwbvhZnJT9sC">replaced</a> <a href="https://catalog.hathitrust.org/Record/001540761">virtually every federal worker at the end of their “rotation.”</a> William L. Marcy, who was secretary of state under Buchanan’s predecessor and was the first to refer to patronage as “spoils,” <a href="https://www.worldcat.org/title/jacksonians-a-study-in-administrative-history-1829-1861/oclc/498178">wrote in 1857</a> that civil servants from his administration were being “hunted down like wild beasts.”</p>
<p>Even Abraham Lincoln, who followed Buchanan, made extensive use of the system,
<a href="https://www.google.com/books/edition/The_Civil_Service_and_the_Patronage/URJPPqndZGYC?hl=en">replacing at least 1,457 of the 1,639 officials</a> then subject to presidential appointment. The number would have been higher but for the secession of Southern states, which put some federal officials out of his reach.</p>
<h2>A ‘vast public evil’ comes to an end</h2>
<p>The tide began to turn in the late 1860s following <a href="https://books.google.com/books/about/History_of_the_Federal_Civil_Service_178.html?id=dwbvhZnJT9sC">public revelations</a> that positions had been created requiring little or no work and other abuses, including <a href="https://www.worldcat.org/title/jacksonians-a-study-in-administrative-history-1829-1861/oclc/498178">illiterate appointees</a>, and a <a href="https://books.google.com/books/about/History_of_the_Federal_Civil_Service_178.html?id=dwbvhZnJT9sC">congressional report about the success</a> of civil service systems in Great Britain, China, France and Prussia. </p>
<p>In 1870, President Ulysses S. Grant asked Congress to take action, <a href="https://books.google.com/books/about/History_of_the_Federal_Civil_Service_178.html?id=dwbvhZnJT9sC">complaining,</a> “The present system does not secure the best men, and often not even fit men, for public place.” Congress responded with legislation that authorized the president to use executive orders to prescribe regulations for the civil service. That power exists today, most recently exercised in Trump’s own order. </p>
<p>Grant established a Civil Service Commission that led to some reforms, but just two years later a <a href="https://books.google.com/books/about/History_of_the_Federal_Civil_Service_178.html?id=dwbvhZnJT9sC">hostile Congress cut off new funding</a>, and Grant terminated the experiment in March 1875. The number of jobs potentially open to patronage continued to soar, <a href="https://www.census.gov/library/publications/1975/compendia/hist_stats_colonial-1970.html">doubling from 51,020 in 1871 to 100,020 in 1881</a>.</p>
<p>But across the U.S., <a href="https://ufdc.ufl.edu/AA00024784/00001/3x">citizens were becoming disgusted</a> by a government stuffed with the people known as “spoilsmen,” leading to a <a href="https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2508.t01-1-00003">growing reform movement</a>. The assassination of President James Garfield in 1881 <a href="https://www.nps.gov/articles/000/the-federal-civil-service-and-the-death-of-president-james-a-garfield.htm">by a deranged office seeker</a> who felt Garfield had denied him the Paris diplomatic post he wanted pushed the movement over the edge.</p>
<p>Garfield’s murder <a href="https://doi.org/10.2307/1893171">was widely blamed</a> on the spoils system. George William Curtis, editor of Harper’s Weekly and an advocate for reform, published cartoons <a href="https://books.google.com/books?id=_j_YiYda81AC&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_atb#v=onepage&q&f=false">lambasting the system</a> and called it “a vast public evil.” </p>
<p>In early 1883, immediately after an election that led to sweeping gains for politicians in favor of reform, <a href="https://catalog.hathitrust.org/Record/001540761">Congress passed the Pendleton Act</a>. It created the civil service system of merit-based selection and promotion. The act banned “assessments,” implemented competitive exams and open competitions for jobs, and prevented civil servants from being fired for political reasons. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="Donald Trump stands in front of a painting of former President Teddy Roosevelt in the White House." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/379569/original/file-20210119-15-1craue6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/379569/original/file-20210119-15-1craue6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/379569/original/file-20210119-15-1craue6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/379569/original/file-20210119-15-1craue6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/379569/original/file-20210119-15-1craue6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/379569/original/file-20210119-15-1craue6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/379569/original/file-20210119-15-1craue6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Teddy Roosevelt helped end the spoils system.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://newsroom.ap.org/detail/Trump/67fe2946462340c7a4a99409d94f295d/photo?hpSectionId=879083fa405d449fa332cbf742e7d609&st=hpsection&mediaType=photo&sortBy=arrivaldatetime:desc&dateRange=Anytime&totalCount=69&Query=teddy%20AND%20roosevelt&currentItemNo=7">AP Photo/Jacquelyn Martin</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Roosevelt was appointed to the new commission that oversaw the system by President Benjamin Harrison in 1889 and quickly <a href="https://www.opm.gov/about-us/our-mission-role-history/theodore-roosevelt/">became its driving force</a> – even as Harrison himself abused the spoils system, <a href="https://kansaspress.ku.edu/series/american-presidency-series/978-0-7006-0320-6.html">replacing 43,823 out of 58,623 postmasters</a>, for example.</p>
<p>At first, the system <a href="https://ufdc.ufl.edu/AA00024784/00001/5x">covered just 10.5% of the federal workforce</a>, but it was gradually expanded to cover most workers. Under Roosevelt, who became president in 1901 after William McKinley was assassinated, the number of covered employees <a href="https://www.opm.gov/about-us/our-mission-role-history/theodore-roosevelt/">finally exceeded those not covered</a> in 1904 and soon reached <a href="https://ufdc.ufl.edu/AA00024784/00001/5x">almost two-thirds of all federal jobs</a>. At its peak in the 1950s, the competitive civil service <a href="https://ufdc.ufl.edu/AA00024784/00001/5x">covered almost 90% of federal employees</a>.</p>
<p>[<em>Deep knowledge, daily.</em> <a href="https://theconversation.com/us/newsletters/the-daily-3?utm_source=TCUS&utm_medium=inline-link&utm_campaign=newsletter-text&utm_content=deepknowledge">Sign up for The Conversation’s newsletter</a>.]</p>
<p>New York, where Roosevelt was an assemblyman, and Massachusetts were the first states to implement their own civil service systems. Although all states now have such systems in place at local, state or both levels, it was not until <a href="https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003055411000256">after 1940 that most states adopted a competitive civil service</a>. </p>
<h2>Teddy’s unfinished work</h2>
<p>Trump’s <a href="https://freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/3896676/posts">Oct. 21 executive order</a> would have undone over a century of reforms by stripping potentially hundreds of thousands of civil servants of the protections that keep them from being summarily fired for political reasons. Insufficient loyalty to the president would be enough to lose one’s job. </p>
<p><a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/presidential-actions/2021/01/22/executive-order-protecting-the-federal-workforce">Biden revoked the changes</a> two days after taking office, but the episode is a reminder just how fragile the system supporting a merit-based government workforce remains. </p>
<p>While Trump’s effort to meddle in the civil service was particularly brazen, administrations of both parties still have a habit of doing so. For example, a common practice of outgoing administrations – including Trump’s – is to convert political appointees into permanent and protected civil servants in a process known as “<a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2021/01/06/some-trump-officials-are-burrowing-into-government-jobs-what-does-that-mean-exactly/">burrowing</a>.” Whether an effort to plant people who can <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/biden-trump-burrowing-federal/2021/01/24/a495ae76-5c02-11eb-b8bd-ee36b1cd18bf_story.html">carry on a previous administration’s policies</a> or simply meant as a patronage reward, such appointees can be very hard for the incoming one to remove. </p>
<p>Both Trump’s executive order and the bipartisan practice of burrowing show the civil service needs stronger protections and that Teddy Roosevelt’s work is still unfinished. If, on a whim, a president can undo over a century of reforms, then the civil service remains insufficiently insulated from politics and patronage. </p>
<p>It may be time Congress passed a new law that permanently shields one of America’s proudest achievements from becoming another dysfunctional part of the U.S. government. </p>
<p><em>This is an updated version of an <a href="https://theconversation.com/trump-revived-andrew-jacksons-spoils-system-which-would-undo-americas-138-year-old-professional-civil-service-150039">article originally published</a> on Jan. 21, 2021.</em></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/145518/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Barry M. Mitnick does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>For decades, presidents beginning with Andrew Jackson routinely replaced large swaths of the government workforce, often requiring them to pay fees to political parties in exchange for their jobs.Barry M. Mitnick, Professor of Business Administration and of Public and International Affairs, University of PittsburghLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1500392021-01-21T13:14:22Z2021-01-21T13:14:22ZTrump revived Andrew Jackson’s spoils system, which would undo America’s 138-year-old professional civil service<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/379567/original/file-20210119-15-1ix1ga6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=85%2C183%2C2900%2C1790&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">A picture of Andrew Jackson hung in the Oval Office during Trump's tenure.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://newsroom.ap.org/detail/Trump/9e764f20ddfc448faca0727a96481f80/photo?hpSectionId=879083fa405d449fa332cbf742e7d609&st=hpsection&mediaType=photo&sortBy=arrivaldatetime:desc&dateRange=Anytime&totalCount=6008&Query=%22Donald%20Trump%22%20AND%20%22Oval%20Office%22&currentItemNo=28">AP Photo/Patrick Semansky</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>The federal government’s core civilian workforce has long been <a href="https://catalog.hathitrust.org/Record/001540761">known for its professionalism</a>. About <a href="https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R43590.pdf">2.1 million nonpartisan career officials</a> provide essential public services in such diverse areas as agriculture, national parks, defense, homeland security, environmental protection and veterans affairs. </p>
<p>To get the vast majority of these “competitive service” jobs – which are protected from easy firing – federal employees must <a href="https://www.opm.gov/policy-data-oversight/classification-qualifications/classifying-general-schedule-positions/">demonstrate achievement in job-specific knowledge, skills and abilities superior to other applicants</a> and, in some cases, pass an exam. In other words, the civil service is designed to be “<a href="https://www.govexec.com/management/2020/10/why-merit-matters/169657/">merit-based</a>.”</p>
<p>It wasn’t always so. </p>
<p>From Andrew Jackson until Theodore Roosevelt, much of the <a href="https://doi.org/10.1086/ahr/11.1.172">federal workforce was subject to change after every presidential election</a> – and often did. Known as the spoils system, this pattern of political patronage, in which officeholders award allies with jobs in return for support, <a href="https://doi.org/10.2307/1893171">began to end</a> in the late 19th century as citizens and politicians like Roosevelt grew fed up with its <a href="https://www.jstor.org/stable/1845445">corruption, incompetence and inefficiency</a> – and its role in the <a href="https://www.nps.gov/articles/000/the-federal-civil-service-and-the-death-of-president-james-a-garfield.htm">assassination of a president</a>.</p>
<p>Less than two weeks before Election Day, Donald Trump <a href="https://www.govexec.com/management/2020/10/stunning-executive-order-would-politicize-civil-service/169479/">signed an executive order that threatens</a> to return the U.S. to a spoils system in which a large share of the federal government’s workforce could be fired for little or no reason – including a perceived lack of loyalty to the president.</p>
<p>While President Joe Biden appears <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/biden-trump-federal-employees/2020/11/10/5a1c9f42-2388-11eb-8599-406466ad1b8e_story.html">likely to reverse the order</a>, its effects may not be so easily undone. And he may have his own reasons for keeping it temporarily in place. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="An old picture shows a crowd of people in front of the White House in 1829." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/375959/original/file-20201218-17-14hpknu.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=50%2C39%2C941%2C633&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/375959/original/file-20201218-17-14hpknu.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=482&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/375959/original/file-20201218-17-14hpknu.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=482&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/375959/original/file-20201218-17-14hpknu.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=482&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/375959/original/file-20201218-17-14hpknu.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=605&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/375959/original/file-20201218-17-14hpknu.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=605&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/375959/original/file-20201218-17-14hpknu.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=605&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">People seeking government jobs crashed the White House on the day of Andrew Jackson’s inauguration.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://picryl.com/media/presidents-levee-or-all-creation-going-to-the-white-house-robert-cruikshank-1">Library of Congress</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Birth of the spoils system</h2>
<p>The government of the early republic <a href="https://www.brookings.edu/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/the-early-federal-workforce-by-p-kastor.pdf?utm_campaign=Brookings%20Executive%20Education&utm_source=hs_email&utm_medium=email">was small</a>, but the issue of whether civil servants should be chosen on the basis of patronage or skills was hotly debated. </p>
<p>Although George Washington and the five presidents who followed him <a href="https://doi.org/10.1086/ahr/11.1.172">certainly employed patronage</a>, <a href="https://books.google.com/books?id=_j_YiYda81AC&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_atb#v=onepage&q&f=false">they emphasized merit</a> when making appointments. </p>
<p>Washington wrote that relying on one’s personal relationship to the applicant <a href="https://doi.org/10.1086/634173">would constitute</a> “an absolute bar to preferment” and wanted those “as in my judgment shall be the best qualified to discharge the functions of the departments to which they shall be appointed.” <a href="https://doi.org/10.1086/ahr/11.1.172">He would not even appoint</a> his own soldiers to government positions if they lacked the necessary qualifications.</p>
<p>That changed in 1829 when Andrew Jackson, the seventh president, entered the White House.</p>
<figure class="align-right zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/379832/original/file-20210120-21-1cnf97x.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="An illustration of Andrew Jackson riding a horse on a statue with the words, 'To the victors belong the spoils,' while several men seeking jobs bow down to him." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/379832/original/file-20210120-21-1cnf97x.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/379832/original/file-20210120-21-1cnf97x.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=661&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/379832/original/file-20210120-21-1cnf97x.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=661&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/379832/original/file-20210120-21-1cnf97x.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=661&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/379832/original/file-20210120-21-1cnf97x.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=831&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/379832/original/file-20210120-21-1cnf97x.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=831&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/379832/original/file-20210120-21-1cnf97x.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=831&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Political cartoon by Thomas Nast depicts office seekers seeking jobs from Andrew Jackson.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/political-cartoon-by-thomas-nast-with-the-caption-cant-you-news-photo/96743647">Fotosearch/Getty Images</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Jackson came to office <a href="https://jhupbooks.press.jhu.edu/title/andrew-jackson-0">as a reformer</a> with a promise to end the dominance of elites and what he considered their corrupt policies. He believed that popular access to government jobs – and their frequent turnover through a four-year “<a href="https://jhupbooks.press.jhu.edu/title/andrew-jackson-0">rotation in office</a>” – could serve ideals of democratic participation, regardless of one’s qualifications for a position.</p>
<p>As a result, at his inaugural reception on March 4, a <a href="https://www.penguinrandomhouse.com/books/112695/american-lion-by-jon-meacham/">huge crowd of office seekers crashed</a> the reception. Jackson was “besieged by applicants” and “battalions of hopefuls,” <a href="https://www.penguinrandomhouse.com/books/17600/andrew-jackson-by-hw-brands/">all seeking government jobs</a>.</p>
<p>Instead of preventing corruption from taking root, Jackson’s <a href="https://www.google.com/books/edition/The_Jacksonians/2V9_twEACAAJ?hl=en">rotation policy became an opportunity for patronage</a> – or rewarding supporters with the spoils of victory. He <a href="https://jhupbooks.press.jhu.edu/title/andrew-jackson-0">defended the practice</a> by declaring: “If my personal friends are qualified and patriotic, why should I not be permitted to bestow a few offices on them?” </p>
<p>Besides possessing a <a href="https://www.jstor.org/stable/1845445">lack of appropriate skills and commitment</a>, office seekers <a href="https://doi.org/10.2307/1845445">were expected to pay “assessments”</a> – a percentage of their salary ranging from 2% to 7% – to the party that appointed them.</p>
<p>Although Jackson <a href="https://jhupbooks.press.jhu.edu/title/andrew-jackson-0">replaced only about 10%</a> of the federal workforce and 41% of presidential appointments, the practice increasingly <a href="https://www.google.com/books/edition/The_Civil_Service_and_the_Patronage/URJPPqndZGYC?hl=en">became the norm</a> as subsequent presidents fired as well as refused to reappoint ever-larger shares of the government. </p>
<p><iframe id="kIe1G" class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/kIe1G/5/" height="400px" width="100%" style="border: none" frameborder="0"></iframe></p>
<p>The peak of the spoils system came under James Buchanan, who served from 1857 to 1861. He <a href="https://books.google.com/books/about/History_of_the_Federal_Civil_Service_178.html?id=dwbvhZnJT9sC">replaced</a> <a href="https://catalog.hathitrust.org/Record/001540761">virtually every federal worker at the end of their “rotation.”</a> William L. Marcy, who was secretary of state under Buchanan’s predecessor and was the first to refer to patronage as “spoils,” <a href="https://www.worldcat.org/title/jacksonians-a-study-in-administrative-history-1829-1861/oclc/498178">wrote in 1857</a> that civil servants from his administration were being “hunted down like wild beasts.”</p>
<p>Even Abraham Lincoln, who followed Buchanan, made extensive use of the system,
<a href="https://www.google.com/books/edition/The_Civil_Service_and_the_Patronage/URJPPqndZGYC?hl=en">replacing at least 1,457 of the 1,639 officials</a> then subject to presidential appointment. The number would have been higher but for the secession of Southern states, which put some federal officials out of his reach.</p>
<h2>A ‘vast public evil’ comes to an end</h2>
<p>The tide began to turn in the late 1860s following <a href="https://books.google.com/books/about/History_of_the_Federal_Civil_Service_178.html?id=dwbvhZnJT9sC">public revelations</a> that positions had been created requiring little or no work and other abuses, including <a href="https://www.worldcat.org/title/jacksonians-a-study-in-administrative-history-1829-1861/oclc/498178">illiterate appointees</a>, and a <a href="https://books.google.com/books/about/History_of_the_Federal_Civil_Service_178.html?id=dwbvhZnJT9sC">congressional report about the success</a> of civil service systems in Great Britain, China, France and Prussia. </p>
<p>In 1870, President Ulysses S. Grant asked Congress to take action, <a href="https://books.google.com/books/about/History_of_the_Federal_Civil_Service_178.html?id=dwbvhZnJT9sC">complaining,</a> “The present system does not secure the best men, and often not even fit men, for public place.” Congress responded with legislation that authorized the president to use executive orders to prescribe regulations for the civil service. That power exists today, most recently exercised in Trump’s own order. </p>
<p>Grant established a Civil Service Commission that led to some reforms, but just two years later a <a href="https://books.google.com/books/about/History_of_the_Federal_Civil_Service_178.html?id=dwbvhZnJT9sC">hostile Congress cut off new funding</a>, and Grant terminated the experiment in March 1875. The number of jobs potentially open to patronage continued to soar, <a href="https://www.census.gov/library/publications/1975/compendia/hist_stats_colonial-1970.html">doubling from 51,020 in 1871 to 100,020 in 1881</a>.</p>
<p>But across the U.S., <a href="https://ufdc.ufl.edu/AA00024784/00001/3x">citizens were becoming disgusted</a> by a government stuffed with the people known as “spoilsmen,” leading to a <a href="https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2508.t01-1-00003">growing reform movement</a>. The assassination of President James Garfield in 1881 <a href="https://www.nps.gov/articles/000/the-federal-civil-service-and-the-death-of-president-james-a-garfield.htm">by a deranged office seeker</a> who felt Garfield had denied him the Paris diplomatic post he wanted pushed the movement over the edge.</p>
<p>Garfield’s murder <a href="https://doi.org/10.2307/1893171">was widely blamed</a> on the spoils system. George William Curtis, editor of Harper’s Weekly and an advocate for reform, published cartoons <a href="https://books.google.com/books?id=_j_YiYda81AC&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_atb#v=onepage&q&f=false">lambasting the system</a> and called it “a vast public evil.” </p>
<p>In early 1883, immediately after an election that led to sweeping gains for politicians in favor of reform, <a href="https://catalog.hathitrust.org/Record/001540761">Congress passed the Pendleton Act</a>. It created the Civil Service System of merit-based selection and promotion. The act banned “assessments,” implemented competitive exams and open competitions for jobs, and prevented civil servants from being fired for political reasons. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="Donald Trump stands in front of a painting of former President Teddy Roosevelt in the White House." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/379569/original/file-20210119-15-1craue6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/379569/original/file-20210119-15-1craue6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/379569/original/file-20210119-15-1craue6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/379569/original/file-20210119-15-1craue6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/379569/original/file-20210119-15-1craue6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/379569/original/file-20210119-15-1craue6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/379569/original/file-20210119-15-1craue6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Teddy Roosevelt helped end the spoils system.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://newsroom.ap.org/detail/Trump/67fe2946462340c7a4a99409d94f295d/photo?hpSectionId=879083fa405d449fa332cbf742e7d609&st=hpsection&mediaType=photo&sortBy=arrivaldatetime:desc&dateRange=Anytime&totalCount=69&Query=teddy%20AND%20roosevelt&currentItemNo=7">AP Photo/Jacquelyn Martin</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Roosevelt was appointed to the new commission that oversaw the system by President Benjamin Harrison in 1889 and quickly <a href="https://www.opm.gov/about-us/our-mission-role-history/theodore-roosevelt/">became its driving force</a> – even as Harrison himself abused the spoils system, <a href="https://kansaspress.ku.edu/series/american-presidency-series/978-0-7006-0320-6.html">replacing 43,823 out of 58,623 postmasters</a>, for example.</p>
<p>At first, the system <a href="https://ufdc.ufl.edu/AA00024784/00001/5x">covered just 10.5% of the federal workforce</a>, but it was gradually expanded to cover most workers. Under Roosevelt, who became president in 1901 after William McKinley was assassinated, the number of covered employees <a href="https://www.opm.gov/about-us/our-mission-role-history/theodore-roosevelt/">finally exceeded those not covered</a> in 1904 and soon reached <a href="https://ufdc.ufl.edu/AA00024784/00001/5x">almost two-thirds of all federal jobs</a>. At its peak in the 1950s, the competitive civil service <a href="https://ufdc.ufl.edu/AA00024784/00001/5x">covered almost 90% of federal employees</a>.</p>
<p>New York, where Roosevelt was an assemblyman, and Massachusetts were the first states to implement their own civil service systems. Although all states now have such systems in place at local, state or both levels, it was not until <a href="https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003055411000256">after 1940 that most states adopted a competitive civil service</a>. </p>
<h2>A return to the spoils?</h2>
<p>Trump’s executive order would mark a significant change. </p>
<p>The Oct. 21 order <a href="https://freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/3896676/posts">created a new category of the civil service workforce</a>, known as “Schedule F,” which would include all currently protected employees in career positions that have a “confidential, policy-determining, policy-making or policy-advocating character.” Because the language is both vague and encompassing, it may apply to as many as hundreds of thousands of the 2.1 million federal civilian workers – potentially to every worker who has any discretion in giving advice or making decisions. </p>
<p>The first agency to report a list of covered workers, the Office of Management and Budget, <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trump-moves-to-strip-job-protections-from-white-house-budget-analysts-as-he-races-to-transform-civil-service/2020/11/27/d04f6eba-2e69-11eb-96c2-aac3f162215d_story.html">identified 425 professionals</a> – 88% of its employees – as transferable to Schedule F, which means <a href="https://www.govexec.com/management/2020/10/stunning-executive-order-would-politicize-civil-service/169479/">they could be fired at will</a>.</p>
<p>Although the order didn’t formally take effect until Jan. 19, some agencies had already taken actions consistent with it – including an apparent “<a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trump-white-house-purge/2020/11/13/2af12c94-25ca-11eb-8672-c281c7a2c96e_story.html">purge</a>” of career employees deemed insufficiently loyal to Trump. But the Trump administration was <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trump-civil-service-biden/2021/01/18/5daf34c4-59b3-11eb-b8bd-ee36b1cd18bf_story.html">unable to fully implement Schedule F</a> before Biden took over on Jan. 20.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="President Joe Biden and first lady Jill Biden wave as they arrive at the North Portico of the White House on Jan. 20." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/379828/original/file-20210120-17-asygph.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/379828/original/file-20210120-17-asygph.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/379828/original/file-20210120-17-asygph.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/379828/original/file-20210120-17-asygph.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/379828/original/file-20210120-17-asygph.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/379828/original/file-20210120-17-asygph.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/379828/original/file-20210120-17-asygph.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Will Biden make reversing the Trump order one of his early acts of office?</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://newsroom.ap.org/detail/APTOPIXBidenInauguration/cea5f292cf324cdb87b2f67782507b18/photo?hpSectionId=8eeed13412704a308764ffb384c901fd&st=hpsection&mediaType=photo&sortBy=arrivaldatetime:desc&dateRange=Anytime&totalCount=4539&currentItemNo=1">AP Photo/Alex Brandon</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Of course, Biden could quickly reverse the order – and <a href="https://fitzpatrick.house.gov/2021/1/fitzpatrick-connolly-introduce-the-preventing-a-patronage-system-act">there’s already a bipartisan push to forbid these transfers</a> – but rehiring anyone who has been fired won’t be easy or immediate. </p>
<p>Furthermore, Trump had <a href="https://www.propublica.org/article/how-dozens-of-trumps-political-appointees-will-stay-in-government-after-biden-takes-over">tried to “burrow” political appointees deep into the senior executive service</a>, the top level of the civil service. The burrowing included the <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/17/us/politics/nsa-michael-ellis-trump.html">controversial appointment</a> of Michael Ellis as general counsel of the National Security Agency. Senior executive service rules permit some political appointees to be converted to civil servants. This could protect them from easily being removed by Biden.</p>
<p>[<em>Deep knowledge, daily.</em> <a href="https://theconversation.com/us/newsletters/the-daily-3?utm_source=TCUS&utm_medium=inline-link&utm_campaign=newsletter-text&utm_content=deepknowledge">Sign up for The Conversation’s newsletter</a>.]</p>
<p>Biden may want to remove civil servants considered Trump loyalists who may try to subvert his policies. If so, he’ll <a href="https://www.govexec.com/management/2021/01/dont-expect-trumps-workforce-policies-be-reversed-overnight/171488/">have to keep the executive order in place to expedite the process</a> and convert those employees to the new Schedule F classification, which would allow him to remove them. But keeping and using Schedule F, even for a relatively brief period, challenges the most fundamental principles of the civil service.</p>
<p>Trump’s order and Biden’s dilemma show that Teddy Roosevelt’s work is still unfinished. If, on a whim, a president can undo over a century of reforms, then the civil service remains insufficiently insulated from politics and patronage. It may be time Congress passed a new law that permanently shields one of America’s proudest achievements from becoming another dysfunctional part of the U.S. government.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/150039/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Barry M. Mitnick does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>For decades, presidents routinely replaced large swaths of the government workforce, often requiring them to pay fees to political parties in exchange for their jobs.Barry M. Mitnick, Professor of Business Administration and of Public and International Affairs, University of PittsburghLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1014412018-08-21T19:58:39Z2018-08-21T19:58:39ZResearch shows ‘merit’ is highly subjective and changes with our values<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/232231/original/file-20180816-2918-1pywl2x.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=0%2C0%2C6%2C6&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Selection panels interrupt women more than men and ask them more follow-up questions, subtly questioning their competence.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/group-businesspeople-interviewing-woman-office-144677900">Andrey Popov/Shutterstock</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Who is meritorious, what constitutes merit, and how merit and gender targets can operate together are widely misunderstood questions, as <a href="https://www.unsw.adfa.edu.au/public-service-research-group/public-service-research-group/research-projects/role-middle-managers-progressing-gender-equity-public-sector">our new research</a> shows. </p>
<p>We spoke with almost 300 public sector middle managers. The vast majority said they wanted “the best person for the job”. They had less idea, however, of just who that “best person” might be. </p>
<p>Merit is assumed to be an objective standard, based on set criteria, which people meet or fail to meet. There are countless examples, however, of public positions that might not have been filled on merit. <a href="https://www.themandarin.com.au/95942-full-scale-political-row-erupts-over-the-merit-of-three-aps-appointments/">Questions</a> are being raised about several recent high-level appointments in the Australian Public Service. </p>
<p>While generally considered sacrosanct and enshrined in policy, in practice “merit” has been highly subjective and has waxed and waned according to social values. Until the 1960s, seemingly objective recruitment processes were <a href="https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1467-8500.2006.00471a.x">highly discriminatory</a> on the basis of class, ability and race. There were requirements for minimum health standards, certificates of good character and passes in subjects offered only in private schools. </p>
<p>These processes were also highly gender-discriminatory. Merit was interpreted in ways that benefited men and worked against women. Examples included limits on the number of single women that could be employed, and a <a href="https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/ajph.12465">bar preventing married women from competing for jobs</a>.</p>
<p>In the 1980s, there was a brief spotlight on merit and gender. New equal employment opportunity laws <a href="https://www.emeraldinsight.com/doi/full/10.1108/09649420410541263">established clear rules</a> for assessing merit and monitoring gender in employment outcomes. </p>
<p>However, waves of public management reform led to more departmental autonomy and a reduced central focus on merit and gender.</p>
<h2>Two areas of confusion</h2>
<p>Fast forward to today, and this lack of attention to how merit and gender equity can coexist has led to confusion and a simplistic understanding of merit in two main areas.</p>
<p>The first is that managers perceive that they are hampered by process. Public sector managers largely follow a set recruitment procedure. They advertise, develop selection criteria, read resumes, shortlist, interview, check references and then appoint a suitable candidate. </p>
<p>The problem with this is that using the same narrow method and criteria may lead to a <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fallacy_of_composition">fallacy of composition</a>, recruiting more of the same without regard to the context and current gaps in a team.</p>
<p>Biases can influence selection panel members’ decisions. Researchers <a href="http://psycnet.apa.org/buy/2011-04642-001">have found</a> that job advertisements and selection criteria may not be gender-neutral. </p>
<p>Unconscious biases can also come into play when assessing resumes and interviewing candidates. Research shows that selection panels <a href="https://www.smh.com.au/lifestyle/women-face-a-harder-time-than-men-in-interview-recruiting-bias-20170703-gx39j7.html">interrupt women more than men</a> and ask them more follow-up questions, subtly questioning their competence.</p>
<p>The second area of confusion relates to recruitment and gender targets. Some public sector organisations use targets to counter women’s under-representation in senior ranks. In Australia and internationally, <a href="http://www.5050foundation.edu.au/assets/reports/documents/2016-Reporting-Requirements-Targets-and-Quotas-for-Women-in-Leadership.pdf">targets have contributed</a> to an increase in women in leadership positions. </p>
<p>Managers we spoke with, however, were concerned that women being appointed to meet a target were “tokens”, or were chosen over better-qualified men. </p>
<h2>How do you set targets and select on merit?</h2>
<p>Merit and targets can, however, co-exist. Some managers recognised that recruiting to targets can <a href="https://www.wgea.gov.au/sites/default/files/20131119_PP_targetsquotas.pdf">improve organisational outcomes</a>. Others argued that recruiting a diverse range of employees reflects the community they serve.</p>
<p>Some managers were innovative to advance gender equity while recruiting on merit. We heard stories of senior managers directing selection panels, which had shortlisted only men, to take another look at the women applicants or to broaden their search and encourage meritorious women to apply. </p>
<p>Managers recruiting for an ICT position reviewed the job requirements, realised the skills required were not technical but communication-based, and re-advertised based on an amended job description. This attracted more female candidates and a woman was duly appointed on merit. </p>
<p>Additionally, for jobs requiring technical competence, managers considered that technical skills could be learned on the job over time. They viewed capability as more important. </p>
<h2>Systemic approaches work best</h2>
<p>While training for selection panels is important, systemic approaches can more effectively ensure the merit principle is upheld. Organisations may benefit from approaches that include:</p>
<ul>
<li>recruiting for capability rather than past performance</li>
<li>providing training that recognises the myths around merit</li>
<li>encouraging conversations to counter the pervasive misunderstanding of the merit principle. </li>
</ul>
<p>Some public sector jurisdictions are <a href="https://publicsector.sa.gov.au/wp-content/uploads/20070101-Guideline-Protection-of-merit-equity.pdf">providing advice</a> on how to undertake recruitment and selection to minimise biases and promote merit-based processes. But there is still a long way to go for this to become common knowledge. </p>
<p>The public sector has traditionally been considered to be a <a href="http://www.oecd.org/gov/women-government-and-policy-making.htm">model employer</a>. Implementing leading-edge practices that combine merit, gender targets and diversity can ensure it maintains this status.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/101441/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>The New South Wales, Queensland, South Australian and Tasmanian governments participated in, and funded this research; the Australia and New Zealand School of Government was the principal funder. </span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Linda Colley receives funding from the Australia New Zealand School of Government (ANZSOG) for this research, and from the ARC.</span></em></p>The vast majority of managers said they wanted “the best person for the job”. They had less idea of just who that might be, or how to ensure appointments on merit and equity targets co-exist.Sue Williamson, Lecturer, Human Resource Management, UNSW Canberra, UNSW SydneyLinda Colley, Lecturer, CQUniversity AustraliaLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/942692018-04-24T10:51:46Z2018-04-24T10:51:46ZWomen in tech suffer because of American myth of meritocracy<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/214651/original/file-20180413-540-n4d3kp.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Will they disrupt the tech sector? </span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Reuters/Eduardo Munoz</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>The <a href="http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/2053168016672101">American dream is built</a> on the notion that the U.S. is a meritocracy. Americans believe success in life and business can be earned by anyone willing to put in the hard work necessary to achieve it, or so they say. </p>
<p>Thus, Americans commonly believe that those who are successful deserve to be so and those who aren’t are equally deserving of their fate – despite growing evidence that widening inequalities in <a href="https://www.routledge.com/Income-Inequality-in-America-An-Analysis-of-Trends-An-Analysis-of-Trends/Ryscavage/p/book/9781315703541">income</a>, <a href="http://goodtimesweb.org/industrial-policy/2014/SaezZucman2014.pdf">wealth</a>, <a href="http://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/30034640.pdf?casa_token=1kXUGe2PvdQAAAAA:CHiX5oT5xeHEXYK4u5IhmroVwpu-EaDxmjOFhFBvND41PwFfZWKAuuoxPEvW999NmzaN-YaJCDIH1ZIZEAvPY62Cf_uzw9-KXV6Btm5w9Yk3nQ25ut0">labor</a> and <a href="https://ideas.repec.org/b/oxp/obooks/9780198779971.html">gender</a> play a major role in who makes it and who doesn’t.</p>
<p>And this very fact – that Americans believe their society is a meritocracy – is the biggest threat to equality, particularly when it comes to gender, as research by myself and others shows. </p>
<h2>The meaning of ‘meritocracy’</h2>
<p><a href="https://ideas.repec.org/b/oxp/obooks/9780198779971.html">Gender inequality</a> is pervasive in American society. </p>
<p>Women in the U.S. continue to experience <a href="http://dro.dur.ac.uk/16470/1/16470.pdf">gender bias</a>, <a href="https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-94-017-9897-6_6">sexual harassment</a> and little progress in relation to equitable <a href="https://ideas.repec.org/b/oxp/obooks/9780198779971.html">wages</a>. Top positions in government and the business sector remain <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2014/sep/29/women-better-off-far-from-equal-men">stubbornly male</a>.</p>
<p>At the same time, <a href="https://archive.nytimes.com/www.nytimes.com/packages/html/national/20050515_CLASS_GRAPHIC/index_01.html">75 percent of Americans</a> say they believe in meritocracy. This belief persists despite evidence that we tend to use it to <a href="https://www.researchgate.net/profile/John_Jost/publication/270539170_Working_for_the_System_Motivated_Defense_of_Meritocratic_Beliefs/links/55b2a23608ae9289a0858e2f.pdf">explain actions</a> that preserve the status quo of gender discrimination rather than reverse it. </p>
<p>This myth is so powerful, it influences our behaviors.</p>
<h2>‘Work harder’</h2>
<p>Entrepreneurship is an area where the myths and realities of the American meritocracy come to a head. </p>
<p>In the U.S., <a href="https://www.nawbo.org/resources/women-business-owner-statistics">women own 39 percent</a> of all privately owned businesses but receive only around 4 percent of venture capital funding. Put another way, male-led ventures receive 96 percent of all funding. </p>
<p>Yet the meritocracy myth, which <a href="https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2982414">my research shows</a> has a stronghold in the world of entrepreneurship, means that women are constantly told that all they have to do to get more of that <a href="https://nvca.org/pressreleases/total-venture-capital-dollars-invested-2017-track-reach-decade-high/">$22 billion or so in venture capital funding</a> is <a href="https://doi.org/10.1177/1042258717728028">make better pitches</a> or be more assertive. </p>
<p>The assumption is that women aren’t trying hard enough or doing the right things to get ahead, not that the way venture capitalists offer funding is itself unfair. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/214543/original/file-20180412-570-19se1zt.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/214543/original/file-20180412-570-19se1zt.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=432&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/214543/original/file-20180412-570-19se1zt.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=432&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/214543/original/file-20180412-570-19se1zt.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=432&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/214543/original/file-20180412-570-19se1zt.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=543&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/214543/original/file-20180412-570-19se1zt.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=543&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/214543/original/file-20180412-570-19se1zt.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=543&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Ellen Pao, center, sued her venture capital firm for allegedly discriminated against her because she was a woman.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">AP Photo/Jeff Chiu</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>‘Pipeline’ problem</h2>
<p>Another explanation for the lack of funding for women is pinned on the “pipeline” problem. That is, women just aren’t interested in the fields that form the backbone of the industry – science, technology, engineering and math. </p>
<p>Thus, if more women entered <a href="https://theconversation.com/us/topics/stem-8868">STEM fields</a>, there would be more women entrepreneurs, and more money would flow to them. Pipeline explanations assume that there are no obstacles <a href="https://theconversation.com/us/topics/women-in-stem-20447">preventing women</a> from becoming entrepreneurs in technology.</p>
<p>Yet, we know the opposite is true. According to technology historian Marie Hicks and her book “Programmed Inequality,” <a href="https://mitpress.mit.edu/books/programmed-inequality%22%22">women in tech were pushed out by men</a>. </p>
<p>Research I’ve conducted with management professor Susan Clark Muntean on entrepreneur support organizations, such as accelerators, shows that they often engage in outreach and recruitment tactics that <a href="https://doi.org/10.1111/gwao.12225">benefit men rather than women</a>. This is further supported by <a href="https://www.techstars.com/content/blog/diversity-at-techstars-companies/">survey data from Techstars</a>, one of the best-known and respected tech accelerators in the world. About 4 in 5 companies that have gone through their programs are white and almost 9 in 10 are male. </p>
<h2>‘Gender-neutral’ myth</h2>
<p>And yet these tech accelerators are guided by an implicit understanding that gender-neutral outreach and recruitment practices rather than targeted ones will bring in the “best” people. This notion is often expressed as <a href="https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/gwao.12225">“Our doors are open to everyone”</a> to indicate that they do not discriminate.</p>
<p>Ironically, many organizations in the tech sector <a href="http://icic.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/ICIC_JPMC_Incubators_post.pdf">adopt this idea</a> because they believe it is gender-neutral and, thus, unbiased. </p>
<p>Yet claiming to be gender-neutral prevents organizations from recognizing that their practices are actually biased. Most outreach and recruitment takes place through word-of-mouth, alumni referrals and personal networks of accelerator leadership, which are <a href="https://doi.org/10.1111/gwao.12225">predominantly composed of males</a>.</p>
<p>These approaches often bring in more of the same: white male entrepreneurs rather than diverse professionals. As a result, women do not have equal access to resources in entrepreneurial ecosystems.</p>
<p>And all this is despite the fact that data on returns show venture-backed tech startups with women at the helm <a href="https://www.womenwhotech.com/startupinfographic">outperform</a> those led by men. </p>
<h2>Being ‘gender-aware’</h2>
<p>The first step to solving this problem is for tech startups, investors and accelerators to realize that what they call meritocracy is in fact itself gender-biased and results in mostly white men gaining access to resources and funding. By continuing to believe in meritocracy and maintaining practices associated with it, gender equality will remain a distant goal. </p>
<p>The next step is to move away from gender-neutral approaches and instead adopt <a href="https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2018/01/metoo-sexual-harassment-what-experts-say/">“gender-aware,” proactive measures</a> to change unfair practices. This includes setting concrete goals to achieve gender balance, examining the gender composition of boards, committees and other influential groups in the organization, and assessing the tools and channels used for outreach, recruitment and support of entrepreneurs.</p>
<p>The return on investment in <a href="http://reports.weforum.org/global-gender-gap-report-2015/the-case-for-gender-equality/">gender equality</a> is clear: Supporting and investing in businesses started by half the world’s population will create thriving societies and sustainable economies. And it starts with male allies who want to be part of the solution and recognize that meritocracy, as society currently defines it, isn’t the way to go.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/94269/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Banu Ozkazanc-Pan receives funding from The Ewing Marion Kauffman Foundation.</span></em></p>Americans’ widespread belief that they live in a meritocracy where anyone can get ahead actually makes inequality even worse, particularly in terms of gender.Banu Ozkazanc-Pan, Visiting Associate Professor of Engineering, Brown UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.