## Notes from 21 June 2025 [[2025-06-20|← Previous note]] ┃ [[2025-06-22|Next note →]] I've just read this new policy brief from The People Lab at HKS, and it offers a interesting data-driven perspective on the US government's struggle to attract young talent. The report effectively reframes the "human capital crisis" in government. Instead of blaming a "crisis of motivation" among young people, it points squarely at a **crisis of process** - and highlights a proven model for fixing it. The researchers tracked thousands of applicants to four major US public sector fellowship programs over nearly two decades. They compared the career paths of those who were selected as **"fellows"** with those who made it to the final round but weren't placed, a group they call **"finalists"**. This isolates the effect of the program itself, since both groups were highly motivated to work in public service from the start. Here are my key takeaways from their findings: - **The core problem isn't lack of interest, it's bureaucracy.** The report opens by stating that the federal hiring process takes an average of **98 days** - more than twice as long as in the private sector. It's bogged down by unclear civil service exams and other logistical hurdles. This isn't about young people not wanting to serve; it's about a system that makes it incredibly difficult for them to start. - **Fellowships are a powerful and lasting on-ramp to government service.** The data is clear: participating in a fellowship dramatically increases the likelihood of working in government. In the year immediately after their program, fellows are **30 percentage points more likely** to hold a government job than their finalist counterparts. This isn't a short-term blip; the effect remains significant for up to **eight years**. Fellowships effectively get people's foot in the door and keep them there. - **Without a clear path, motivated talent will go elsewhere.** The study shows what happens to the equally motivated finalists who don't get in: they are significantly more likely to take jobs in academia, professional services (like management consulting), and the private sector. This is crucial evidence. It proves that a pool of willing and qualified talent exists, but if the government's front door is closed or too hard to open, they will happily walk through other doors that are wide open. - **The real lesson: fix the main process by copying the fellowship model.** This is the report's most important conclusion. The solution isn't just to create more niche fellowship programs. It's to learn from what makes them successful and apply those lessons to traditional government hiring. This means incorporating practices like: - **Cohort-based hiring** (bringing in groups of peers at the same time). - **Skills-based selection** (focusing on what applicants can do, not just credentials). - **Providing more support during onboarding.** By making the standard recruitment process feel more like the streamlined, supportive experience of a fellowship, the government could fundamentally improve its ability to attract and retain the next generation of public servants.