2019
DOI: 10.1111/puar.13053
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Do Competitive Examinations Promote Diversity in Civil Service?

Abstract: The representative bureaucracy literature provides a growing body of empirical evidence that a representative public workforce enhances the efficacy and legitimacy of public services. However, little attention has been paid to the capacity of civil service competitive examinations to give equal opportunity of access to public jobs to equally competent citizens. To fill this gap, the authors use French databases to analyze whether competitive examinations comprising both written and oral tests ensure equality o… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

2
8
0
1

Year Published

2019
2019
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 13 publications
(11 citation statements)
references
References 43 publications
2
8
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…There are 184 fields (settore concorsuale) and approximately 370 subfields (settore scientifico-disciplinare). 15 In about 60 percent of the cases the candidate and the eligible evaluator belong to the same subfield (Table C3).…”
Section: Research Similaritymentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…There are 184 fields (settore concorsuale) and approximately 370 subfields (settore scientifico-disciplinare). 15 In about 60 percent of the cases the candidate and the eligible evaluator belong to the same subfield (Table C3).…”
Section: Research Similaritymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…We consider three possible interactions: (i) the evaluator was a member of candidate's thesis committee; (ii) one of them had invited the other to sit in her students' thesis committee; or (ii) both of them sat in the same student thesis committee 15. Historically, each Italian researcher was a assigned to certain settore scientifico-disciplinare.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…As dehumanization has been shown to be more powerful when used toward minority groups, future work should determine whether dehumanization used toward racial or ethnic minorities, women, and LGBT individuals operates in a different way than when used toward an ostensibly white male. Given the push to reevaluate HRM practices to encourage social equity, further examination of dehumanization may shed light on how to reduce cognitive biases against traditional underrepresented groups ( Greenan et al, 2019;Hall and Battaglio, 2018). Further, we focus only on negative dehumanization, but dehumanization with a positive connotation may be especially relevant to the workplace, as it is in athletics.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…To test for procedural discrimination, we adopt an approach similar to that of Breda and Ly (2015), Breda and Hillion (2016), and Greenan et al (2019) by testing for gender differences in the non-anonymous orals once the anonymous written CSE scores are held constant. Contrary to those examined by Breda and colleagues, however, the oral and written tests we compare are not in the same subject areas.…”
Section: Procedural Discriminationmentioning
confidence: 99%