The Aspen Institute Kyiv Held a Dialogue: “Transparency in Competitions for Top Civil Service Positions — Too Much or Not Enough?”

Integrity, transparency, and accountability in public governance are among the pillars of Ukraine’s resilience and development. That is why the Aspen Institute Kyiv continues to build a platform for dialogue among Ukrainian societal leaders, helping them better understand what these principles truly mean and how they translate into concrete actions.

On June 6, 2025, the Aspen Institute Kyiv, with the support of the EU4PAR project, held a dialogue titled “Transparency in Competitions for Top Civil Service Positions: Too Much or Not Enough?” The topic is especially relevant today, as the capability of public administration to respond to current challenges directly depends on the role and quality of top-level public officials. Amid staff shortages, high turnover, and growing demands on the public sector, the recruitment, development, and retention of leadership in public service has become a pressing issue. These leaders shape organizational culture, make strategic decisions, unite teams, and ensure the continuity and effectiveness of public policy, even in times of profound transformation and war. Members of Parliament, representatives of the Cabinet of Ministers, top-level civil servants, and civil society representatives participated in the discussion.

Participants addressed the fundamental tension between transparency and candidate privacy in top-level public service competitions. The dialogue focused on trust as a key element in the selection process and examined the problems that the public administration system tries to solve through increased transparency at all selection stages. Participants also reviewed findings from a study on the integrity assessment of category “A” civil servants, conducted by EU4PAR in cooperation with experts from the NGO Technologies of Progress.

The discussion points can be grouped into the following macro-categories:

1. Procedures

• Lack of balance between early-stage transparency and candidate privacy creates risks for participant motivation and protection.
• Formalized competitions are sometimes used to legitimize political appointments, undermining trust in the process.

2. Candidates

• Selection focuses on meeting formal criteria rather than evaluating professional skills, leadership abilities, and institutional management capacity.
• There is a lack of trust in the state as an employer due to constant changes in working conditions, shifting rules, or new post-appointment restrictions (e.g., PEP status).

3. Selection Commissions

• Vague integrity criteria open the door to manipulation and hinder objective candidate assessment.
• Commissions often lack sufficient expertise and resources, which reduces the quality of the selection process.
• Inadequate funding for running competitions, promoting vacancies, and training commission members prevents high-quality recruitment.
• No unified framework or approach exists for filling civil service positions across different categories.

Participants proposed solutions to these challenges:

• Establish precise job requirements and evaluation criteria to reduce subjectivity and enable a more transparent assessment system, including the regulatory definition of selection standards and improved commission quality.
• Strengthen the role of HR and involve external providers for professional recruitment.
• Separate political appointments from administrative selections.
• At the final selection stage, publish candidate information, including asset and income declarations. Involve an independent commission (akin to the HQCJ) in the process.
• Establish a Senior Civil Service School to build a talent pool for future appointments.
• Introduce a new vacancy marketing system to improve public awareness of competitions.
• Optimize role descriptions and set clear job responsibilities.
• Maintain a balance between transparency and privacy.

Denis Poltavets, Director of Program Development at the Aspen Institute Kyiv, and Viacheslav Rudnytskyi, CEO at Savvy, moderated the discussion. Olena Fomina, Director of Program Areas at the Aspen Institute Kyiv, coordinated the event.

We thank EU4PAR for its consistent partnership and support. We sincerely thank all participants for their openness, honesty, and willingness to engage in complex but crucial discussions, the outcomes of which will contribute to the development of the Ukrainian state.