# Challenges of Brazil’s 'Unified Civil Service Exam' (_An earlier Portuguese [version](https://exame.com/colunistas/instituto-millenium/os-desafios-do-enem-dos-concursos/) of this text appeared on October 06, 2023, in Instituto Millenium’s column for Exame magazine_) The recent proposal for a [nationwide Civil Service Examination](https://www.gov.br/gestao/pt-br/assuntos/noticias/2023/setembro/concurso-nacional-unificado-ofertara-6-590-vagas-no-governo-federal) by the federal government represents a significant shift in the way public servants are recruited in Brazil. The exam will be held in a single day, under the coordination of the Ministry of Management and Innovation, and will be administered simultaneously in several cities. The assessment will be divided into two phases: the first will consist of a standard test for all participants, while the second will comprise different tests designed to evaluate candidates separated by "thematic blocks." The agencies that adopt this model may include assessments of academic qualifications and/or prior professional experience, assigning the scores they deem appropriate. The government's goal is to fill more than 6,000 jobs in various agencies, covering diverse careers. The proposed model aims to overcome the limitations of the current system, but, like any innovation, it raises questions about its effectiveness, applicability, and potential repercussions. The concept of a unified examination is not coincidental. It emerges as an attempt to overcome a disjointed and, in many aspects, outdated recruitment method. The proposal for rationalization has its merits. First, it points towards streamlining the management of the workforce in the federal public service, currently impacted by the fragmentation and multiplication of specialized civil service categories (called "careers" in portuguese, similar to France’s civil service _corps_). By unifying recruitment and categorizing evaluations by "career groups," the government is moving towards adopting more transversal approaches to human resources management. This assessment is reinforced by [statements](https://oglobo.globo.com/economia/noticia/2023/10/02/concursos-governo-quer-reduzir-numero-de-carreiras-de-servidores-federais-e-permitir-contratacao-com-clt.ghtml) from government members that demonstrate the intention to consolidate the number of careers. Secondly, by centralizing the organization and administration of the examinations, it is possible that economies of scale can be leveraged. In the current format, the organization of each exam implies planning costs for the public administration, as well as logistical, administrative, and financial aspects assumed by the candidates through the payment of registration fees. In this sense, unification can represent direct savings through the rationalization of procedures within the public administration, as well as freeing up private resources that currently feed the civil service exam preparation industry. This is, in fact, one of the most interesting points of the government's proposal: combating "exam-taking behavior." Many candidates, driven by the search for increasingly attractive salaries, alternate between various exams without a defined focus of action. Over time, this dynamic culminates in a contingent of public servants in roles not aligned with their aptitudes or skills, and who do not invest in developing skills useful for the performance of their duties. Frequently, these individuals ascend in the public service by moving towards higher-paying careers, becoming professionals whose main skill lies in preparing for exams, and not necessarily in solving public challenges. It is a behavior and personality trait that [compromises](https://app.uff.br/riuff/handle/1/11455) the values and quality of public service. The government also argues that the initiative aims to increase diversity in the public service by democratizing access to the exam, which will take place simultaneously in various locations. Additionally, with a single payment, candidates can compete for multiple vacancies, promoting greater economic equity among them. The objectives are commendable. However, the issues associated with civil service exams are widely recognized, and the unified exam does not seem to address essentially any of them. The evaluations, in many cases, are not relevant to the activities performed by the civil servants, becoming instruments that predict little about the potential performance of candidates in public roles. As a rule, the tests are encyclopedic assessments, requiring extensive preparation time - a time that, generally, only candidates from privileged socioeconomic backgrounds can afford. The literature suggests that, in certain circumstances, centralized selections can positively influence the quality of public service. However, the currently available evidence is limited and generally alludes to the adoption of large-scale evaluation processes to measure clearly defined knowledge and skills. These, in turn, demonstrate a significant correlation with performance in specific professional activities, such as in the case of teachers and school principals. In situations like this, there is a well-defined competency matrix. From it, precise evaluation methods are determined, capable of identifying candidates who possess the competencies directly associated with their future professional performance. However, the exam proposed by the government follows different guidelines. The variety of positions is vast, and there is no indication of the development of a common competency matrix. It also remains ambiguous how the tests will assess the skills shared by professionals from different careers and how the mentioned "thematic blocks" will be defined. This raises a critical reflection on the essence of the proposal in question. Currently, the most advanced recruitment and selection methodologies tend to prioritize individualized processes tailored to the profile of each position. It is increasingly recognized that an effective assessment of competencies requires evaluation methods that identify, in candidates, the essential skills for the performance of specific functions. The greater the specificity of an evaluation process, the more costly its implementation tends to be, thus justifying the application of intensive evaluation mechanisms to a small contingent of candidates. In this context, a standardized format applied on a large scale, as suggested by the unified exam, could diverge from the most contemporary approaches in recruitment and selection. We are, therefore, facing a potential paradox. Would it be unfeasible to harmonize the possible benefits and challenges associated with the concept of centralized recruitment? Not necessarily. The solution could emerge from the combination of both strategies. The unified exam could act as an initial screening, identifying candidates who demonstrate fundamental and transversal competencies, such as analytical ability, numeracy, and data interpretation. In later stages, more detailed and segmented selection mechanisms could be employed, aiming to assess the compatibility of candidates with certain positions or responsibilities, incorporating instruments such as interviews, practical tasks, and specific training. Such a combined approach would capitalize on the advantages of both approaches: the economy of scale of a centralized process and the accuracy of individualized selections. International experiences highlight the use of large-scale certification mechanisms as preliminary steps for more rigorous selections. There are several examples of high-quality certifications used as eliminatory phases in recruitment and selection processes, such as exams that assess linguistic competencies (TOEFL, IELTS, etc.) or that measure technical skills (such as CPA-10). Certifications of this type could be adopted as an initial evaluation criterion for candidates, but not as the main evaluation instrument. Proposing this type of evaluation would not be new. Law No. 13,846/2019 [stipulates criteria](https://www.gov.br/previdencia/pt-br/assuntos/rpps/investimentos-do-rpps/Perguntasfrequentessobreosrequisitosdoart.8BdaLei9.717de19981.pdf) for the selection of directors of entities managing the social security system in states and municipalities, emphasizing, among other points, professional certification. In 2015, the Ministry of Education [announced](http://portal.mec.gov.br/index.php?option=com_docman&view=download&alias=28491-portaria-1118-pdf&Itemid=30192) the creation of the National Program for the Certification of School Principals, an initiative that, unfortunately, did not proceed. Similar models in countries like [Mexico](https://scioteca.caf.com/bitstream/handle/123456789/2055/Rule-based%20civil%20service.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y) and [Ecuador](https://www.iza.org/publications/dp/13830/does-test-based-teacher-recruitment-work-in-the-developing-world-experimental-evidence-from-ecuador) have shown encouraging results. In summary, although the proposal for the unified Civil Service Examination represents an ambitious attempt to update and improve recruitment in the Brazilian public service, its implementation requires prudence, critical analysis, and, potentially, modifications. A progressive strategy, perhaps starting with experimental projects in specific areas, could provide relevant insights and ensure that the initiative combines innovation and effectiveness.