Transcript
Transcript: Efficient Practices for Faster Staffing Processes
[00:00:01 The CSPS logo appears on screen.]
[00:00:05 The screen fades to Jean-Mychel Gay.]
Jean-Mychel Gay (Manager of Staffing Support at the Public Service Commission of Canada): Hello and welcome everyone. My name is Jean-Mychel Gay and I'm the manager of staffing support with the Public Service Commission of Canada. I will be your host for this prerecorded session. And before I go any further, I'd like to acknowledge that today, I am in Gatineau, Quebec, on the traditional territory of the Algonquin Anishinaabe people. Some of you are watching this today from different parts of the country, working on different Indigenous to traditional territory. And I encourage you to take a moment to recognize and reflect on this and to seek to understand the long history of this territory.
The time it takes to staff position in the public service has always been a hot topic and we've all experienced it. Long processes, unexpected delays and the pressure to fill positions quickly while still ensuring fairness, transparency and merit. Today's session is all about tackling that challenge head-on by sharing practical and effective ways to reduce staffing timelines. These aren't just theoretical ideas, but actual strategies that organizations like yours can apply to make a real difference in your time to staff. So, because reducing staffing timelines isn't just about speed, it's also about building a stronger workforce, improving service delivery and freeing up time to focus on what matters most, we hope you'll leave today's session inspired and equipped with some actionable ideas to bring back to your own organization. And with that, let's get started. Please join me in welcoming our speakers also from the Public Service Commission.
[00:01:33 Simon Lachaine appears on screen.]
First, we have Simon Lachaine, staffing support advisor. Simon works closely with the departments and agencies to identify practical solutions to staffing challenges, and he has a deep understanding of the realities faced by hiring managers across the public service.
[00:01:49 Marie-Claude Jacques appears on screen.]
And joining Simon today is Marie-Claude Jacques, also a staffing support advisor with the Public Service Commission. Much like Simon, Marie-Claude has great experience supporting organizations and improving their staffing strategies and also navigating complex staffing situations. So, together today, Simon and Marie-Claude will walk us through some straightforward and effective approaches that can help reduce delays and improve the overall efficiency of your staffing processes. So, over to you, Simon and Marie-Claude.
Marie-Claude Jacques (Staffing Support Advisor at the Public Service Commission of Canada): Thank you for that introduction, Jean-Mychel. So, without further ado, let's begin with an overview of today's info session.
[00:02:23 A slide titled "Overview" is shown with text that reads:
"Preface – Effective and efficient staffing is the cornerstone of good human resources management and ensures organizations hire the strongest candidates that best fit the role to be performed."
"Purpose – This presentation outlines challenges in reducing the time it takes to hire new talent while exploring leading practices that organizations can implement to streamline staffing processes."]
Even though time to staff is not a new concept, as Jean-Mychel mentioned in the public service, it continues to pose significant challenges to organizations in their hiring process. Although an indicator of an efficient staffing system, time to staff is complex and can be difficult to navigate. Our goal for today's session is to create a better understanding of time to staff while sharing practical and effective solutions to streamline staffing processes. That being said, we understand that many organizations are currently facing budget restraints and may limit the ability to staff in the coming months. So, let's explore why focus on time to staff now in the next slide.
[00:03:12 A slide titled "Background" is shown with text that reads:
"Mandate Letter – Reducing the "time it takes to hire new public servants" was identified in the Prime Minister's 2021 Mandate Letter to the President of the Treasury Board."
"Current Context – Even in this current climate of budget restraints, there are benefits in exploring effective solutions to reduce delays in the staffing process that will assist in recruiting and retaining talent in the public service."
"Upward Trend – Despite the PSC's efforts to simplify staffing through the New Direction in Staffing, we have seen time to staff (TTS) increase over the years."]
First, time to staff remains a commitment in response to the Prime Minister's 2021 mandate letter. This letter to the President of the Treasury Board reinforced time to staff reduction as a public service-wide priority. Second, even in times of restraint, staffing will continue and it becomes even more critical that we don't lose talent. It is also a period when you can take the time to look at your processes and your current practices and find a new approach to quickly recruit. That said, despite the PSC's effort to simplify staffing when we revised the policy framework with a new direction in staffing, we have seen the time to staff increase over the years. It is important to note that time to staff is calculated based on the median. I'll digress here to refresh your memory. The median is the measure of central tendency that indicates the centre of the data series. It therefore corresponds to the value that separates and ordered distribution into two groups containing the same number of data. The current median for external time to staff is currently at 214 calendar days compared to 167-day target. For internal time to staff, it is at 210 days while the target is 158 days.
[00:05:00 A slide titled "Understanding TTS" is shown with text that reads:
"Calculation – TTS is measured from the opening date of the advertisement to the date of the first notification (for internal appointment) or first external hire (for external appointment). Certain staffing efficiencies are not included in the calculation of TTS (Annex A). Therefore, faster staffing actions do not necessarily results in a TTS median."
"Limitation – There are limitations in our ability to pinpoint the causes for longer TTS as each process has unique factors. Current staffing systems do not capture data on the duration of each steps in the hiring process."
"Causation – Some causes for staffing delays include security screening process, requirements related to timeliness of pay, time required for second language evaluations (SLE), as well as general workload capacity of managers."
"Ultimately, the ability of managers to prioritize hiring and dedicate sufficient time to prepare may be the largest single factor affecting time to staff."]
Now, in the second slide, let's take a look at the duration of the staffing process. Time to staff is measured from the opening date of the advertisement to the date of the first notification or hire. In a sense, it is the time as viewed from the candidate's perspective from the moment they applied. It is important to remember that certain staffing efficiencies are not included in the calculation of time to staff, which means faster staffing does not necessarily mean a reduced time to staff median. There are limitations of what data is available to the PSC. For example, we cannot measure staffing processes conducted on alternative sites such as Recruiter. We also face limitation with our staffing systems. For example, the Public Service Resourcing System that we call PSRS does not capture the duration of each step in the staffing process, nor the location from which the process was conducted, versus the actual location of the position staff.
Also, PSRS cannot factor in organization-specific procedures and requirements that might impact time to staff, such as organization-specific security clearing processes or additional internal specific approvals and HR processes. The PSC has conducted analysis in the past to identify trends based on various factors such as job classification and location. However, this unfortunately does not result in any new information or trends to report. We understand that lengthy time to staff can be caused by various factor, thinking of delays with security clearance processes, timeliness of pay, second language evaluation, in various competing priorities managers are faces on a day-to-day basis. That being said, the largest single factor affecting time to staff is the ability of managers to prioritize hiring. I'll now hand over to Simon.
[00:07:25 A slide titled "External TTS: Where we are today -> 214 Days" is shown with a diagram of a sample timeline based on current external TTS mediation which reads:
- Planning – 50 days
- Priority Consideration – 14 days
- Advertisement – 19 days
- Pre-screening – 35 days
- Assessment – 40 days
- Second language evaluation – 40 days
- Security and conditions of employment – 55 days
- Selection and appointment – 10 days
- Timeliness of pay – 15 days.
Text below the diagram reads "Although certain requirements are established by PSC and the employer, hiring organizations are the key accountable stakeholder leading activities to achieve each stage of all staffing processes. Additional details provided in Annex B."]
Simon Lachaine (Staffing Support Advisor at the Public Service Commission of Canada): Thank you, Marie-Claude. So, where are we today when it comes to external time to staff? On this slide, you will see a visual representation of the more traditional approach to conducting staffing process with its linear and less efficient sequence of assessment steps. Each step of the process is carried out one after the other. If we are going and if we want to improve the median time to staff, we need to move away from this sequential step-by-step approach to staffing and in order to find efficiencies in our staffing processes. We know that each process is different and has a number of unique factors, such as the number of applicants, the requirements for language testing, and also the number of qualifications that we establish for our staffing process. Equally, we know that collective staffing processes can be an efficient use of resources, resulting in multiple candidates appointed even though these processes tend to take a little longer to complete. However, we do risk losing candidates and create a poor brand for the public service, which could turn and impact our ability to attract and hire talent in the future. So, that's the reason why we need to improve time to staff. Moving on to the next slide about improving time to staff.
[00:09:20 A slide titled "Action plan" is shown with text that reads:
"The PSC has developed an action plan to reduce the time it takes to hire public servants, comprised of three categories:
"Improve Understanding
- Identify pain points to better understand hiring delays (Annex C)
- Review leading practices to identify paths to reduce the length of staffing processes"
"Build Accountability and Influence
- Reinforce organizational accountability at the deputy head level
- Maximize benefits through empowerment via reporting of organizational TTS data"
"Modernize PSC Support
- Leverage existing PSC systems and programs to support the reduction of TTS
- Liaise with TBS to identify and promote flexibilities related to security screening process"".]
Now that we have a better understanding of time to staff, let's shift our focus to practical and concrete ways we can reduce the time it takes to hire public servants. So, at the PSC, we do have an action plan in order to improve time to staff. However, we do know that organizations are the key stakeholder leading each stage of all staffing processes. But the PSC remains committed to supporting the reduction of time to staff. The initial objective of the action plan is the reason why we are here today. We want to improve our collective understanding of time to staff and we also want to share leading practices. For the second objective, we recently began submitting quarterly reports on time to staff for internal and external processes by organization, and this is something that we shared through the Public Service Management Advisory Committee, the PSMAC.
This complements the annual internal and external time to staff number that we published through our data visualization app that is available to EDs of human resources within organizations. So, in addition to providing the most recent available data on time to staff for your respective organization, this report, the report that is shared through the PSMAC, is an opportunity for the PSC to share progress and improvements that are made in your own organizations, improvements that are made by your own programs, by the services, by the various areas of influence that you have within the organization. Finally, the PSC has established an ongoing collaboration with the Security Policy Division at TBS to discuss the links between time to staff and the security screening process. Although security screening ultimately falls under the mandate and authority of the employer, the PSC is committed to liaising with TBS in order to identify and promote flexibilities that are available to organizations.
[00:12:07 A slide titled "Beyond the numbers" is shown with text that reads:
"In 2023-24, advertised external selection processes used to calculate TTS accounted for only 15% of all external hires:
- The remainder were appointments from existing pools and inventories, as well as non-advertised appointments
- These types of efficient staffing practices account for 85% of all external hires and do not count in the current calculation of TTS
- Although staffing efficiencies may expedite recruitment and hiring, these practices may not be reflected in your TTS data"
"Although not directly reducing the median for TTS, some staffing options still contribute to faster external hiring:
- Priority Entitlement Talent Pool
- Inventory of Medically Released Veterans
- Virtual Door to Talent with Disabilities
- Indigenous Career Pathways"".]
So, moving on to the next slide. So, let's revisit our earlier message that faster staffing action do not necessarily result in reduced time to staff median, okay? As we see in this example, using data from 2020-2024, some staffing efficiencies like non advertised appointment process, pools, inventories, those type of staffing actions, they account for 85% of all external hires. Since these types of efficiency practices are not included in the calculation of time to staff, they will not be reflected in your organization's data. So, that's very important to take into consideration. Therefore, although your organization may feel that staffing is moving at a quicker pace, the data will not or may not reflect this reality. We understand at the PSC that there are circumstances where staffing quickly is the priority, which is why there are efficient staffing options that are available to subdelegated managers and to organizations. But all of that to say that if your organization is looking for ways to directly reduce the median time to staff as per the calculation that Marie-Claude talked about, there needs to be a focus on results within the limitation of how time to staff is measured, and those are the actions that should be prioritized if you want to directly reduce your median time to staff. So, I will now hand it over to Marie-Claude.
[00:14:10 A slide titled "Focus on results" is shown with text that reads:
"Proactive and intentional staffing practices are key to directly impacting TTS"
"Second Language Evaluation – Schedule and assess candidates through the Candidate Assessment Tool for written expression and reading comprehension tests immediately following the pre-screening phase."
"Security Screening – Provide pre-screening candidates with security screening forms to complete in advance of interviews."
"Review Requirements – Review language profiles and security screening levels of positions prior to staffing to avoid unnecessary over-classification."]
Marie-Claude Jacques: Now, let's look at the results. To have a direct impact on the duration of staffing processes, proactive and intentional staffing practices are key to directly impact time to staff. We have a few examples that can impact the time to staff. For second language evaluation, scheduling and testing candidates through the Candidate Assessment Tool for written comprehension and reading comprehension evaluation immediately following the pre-screening phase will ensure that those proceeding to the next phase of the assessment meet the language requirement for reading and writing. For security, providing pre-screen question with candidate pre-screening… candidates… sorry, with the form to complete in advance for the interview will ensure that those proceeding to the next phase of the selection process are ready to submit their information for security screening. In conclusion, the review of requirement is very important, as we see overclassification of language profile is common. Do you know that Treasury Board submissions and other memos to Cabinet are no longer required to be classified as secret? This is based on the recent change in the Privy Council Office policy on the security of Cabinet Confidence. Therefore, it is expected that the security requirement of many public service positions can be reduced to reliability, which could reduce screening time and potentially time to staff.
[00:16:06 A slide titled "External TTS Target -> 167 Days" is shown with a diagram of a sample timeline where leading practices allow to meet the external target median which reads:
- Planning – 35 days
- Evaluation of biases/barriers – 5 days
- Priority Consideration – 14 days
- Advertisement – 10 days
- Pre-screening – 15 days
- Assessment (exam, interview, references) – 120 days (Pre-screened candidates undergo reading and writing SLE through CAT, Top interviewed candidates undergo security screening, All interviewed candidates sent for oral SLE testing)
- Selection and appointment – 7 days
- Timeliness of pay – 15 days.
Text below the diagram reads:
"Reliability Status – 2 weeks, Administered by hiring organizations"
"Secret Clearance – 5 weeks, Administered by organizations including CSIS assessment"
"Note: Several assessment activities happen concurrently, such as SLE testing at the onset and completing security screening forms as early as possible in the process."]
Here, we present a diagram that illustrates the staffing process where recommended practices we just presented have been applied. Especially, we see the difference when assessment activities such as second language evaluation and security screening are conducted concurrently, resulting in a reduction of 15 days for this phase of the staffing process. Another key factor is the proactive approach to language testing and security form completion we reviewed in the previous slide. In this version of the staffing process, implementing simple practices can reduce the time to staff to meet the 177-day target, but why 177 days? These targets were published in the June 2019 report of the Standing Committee on Government Operation and Estimates. At the time, the median time to staff for external advertised process was 166 days, and 176 days for internal advertised process. The PSC committed to reduce the time it takes to complete advertisement by 10%. So, by subtracting 10% from this target, we obtain the new target of 167 days for external processes and 158 days for internal. Now, let's look with Simon at some other example of practices that can help reduce your time to staff median.
[00:18:06 A slide titled "Leading practices (1 of 2)" is shown with text that reads:
"Complete Staffing Files (Planning for Staffing) – Job opportunity is only posted when all preparatory work is complete, including confirming dedicated resources, screening questions, booking board members, rating guides, assessment tools, etc."
"Candidate Engagement – Pre-screened candidates are assessed for reading and writing second language evaluation prior to being invited to the first assessment. Most promising candidates are asked to complete the applicable security screening forms as early in the process."
"Transparent Timelines – Dates of written exams and interviews are posted on the job advertisement. Committing to specific dates ensures hiring manager accountability and candidate availability, reducing risk of delays for having to reschedule."]
Simon Lachaine: Right. Okay. So, at the PSC, as part of our various outreach activities, we have noted practices implemented by some or several organizations to reduce time to staff, which we will now share with you. We would also like to thank participants who initially registered for this session and who shared best practices with us. This was very, very helpful and this information is actually reflected in the following two slides. So, for the theme Completed Staffing Files, the vast majority of the practices you shared support a proactive and intentional approach to staffing that will result in a direct impact on your median time to staff. So, example of practices include, for example, an organization told us that they were piloting an advertised process plan where at each step of the advertisement, everything is planned by a start and an end date. So, not only each step of the advertisement, but each step of the whole appointment process.
Everything is planned from a start to an end date, and then, they discuss and they share the plan with hiring managers to ensure their engagement and commitment. Other examples also include that ensuring that all the preparatory work is completed prior to posting a job. So, the most common example for this is that you should have all of your assessment tools ready to use before posting a job advertisement. So, that way, when the candidates are applying to your process, you can keep them engaged and you can start proceeding with the assessment phase as soon as you are done with the pre-screen. Another example would be to engage with pre-screened candidates early in the process by assessing for language and completing security forms. Another example would be to ensure the manager's accountability by committing to specific dates for exam and interview and plan for those dates in advance, so right from the beginning of the appointment process.
[00:21:00 A slide titled "Leading practices (2 of 2)" is shown with text that reads:
"Workshopping – Staffing process is divided into task-specific blocks of time, such as developing the SOMC, conducting screening, administering written exam/interviews, conducting references, etc. The hiring manager and HR advisor guide the process."
"Taking Stock – Pre-process checklist that includes: exploring hiring options from existing processes/pools, reviewing security/language requirements of position, ensuring sufficient resources to run the process, securing time in board members' schedule."
"Staffing efficiencies – All about optimizing workforce management to ensure the right people are in the right roles at the right time."]
So, those are notable practices that were shared for this first theme. Then, we have the candidate engagement theme. So, for example, for this one, it was really many examples about initiating the security clearance earlier in the process. Another example was for bilingual processes, many organizations told us that they start with second language evaluation as a first step of evaluation to reduce the time required for screening when they have a large volume of applications. So, even before the screening, they do the second language evaluation. For the next theme about transparent timelines, we had a few examples about home exams, proceed with home exams and give candidates more time to complete their exam. And so, for example, you would send the exam to the candidates and you would give them a week and then they can work or perform the assessment during this timeframe, and we were also told that this created less requests for accommodations. Another example would be also for bilingual processes, where organizations once again started with the second language evaluation as a first step to reduce the time required for screening when they have a large number of applicants. So, this is also helpful for transparent timelines because this is something that could be shared to the candidates through the advertisement or at the very beginning of the appointment process. So, please move on to the next slide, yes, thank you, for other best practices. For workshopping, this was very interesting, some organizations told us that they are dedicating blocks of time with important stakeholders to complete the key tasks. So, they were booking time right at the beginning of the process. So, therefore, the process was managed a little bit more like a project. Okay, so this was also helpful to keep all stakeholders on track and to make sure that all steps of the appointment process were being done as planned basically. Taking stock, this was really related to the fact that HR-to-pay must be taken into consideration throughout the recruitment process. And finally, we had good practices that were shared to us that were all related to efficiency in staffing. And so, we have a few examples here. So, for example, we had an organization told us that they maintained an open deployment inventory for managers to consider applicants whenever there was a need. So, with this, they were also telling us that they were making sure to adjust the start date to the Thursday following a pay cycle to allow less delays in pay. That's another relation with HR-to-pay. Other examples, collective staffing. This is something that the Public Service Commission, all people working in HR, have talked about since the Public Service Employment Act basically, that more collective staffing should be done by organizations. So, this is something that for sure, we are still recommending whenever it's feasible.
Another example was not to create forms that are not required. Okay, this is something that was shared by many, many organizations because organizations, sometimes whenever there's a risk, a new form is created but it's not always the perfect solution. Okay, so whenever you decide to create a new form, make sure that it will really be helpful and make sure to think about the potential impact on time to staff. We also had examples of reusing assessment results from another process. There's lots of flexibility. We will talk about this during our scenarios. There's a lot of flexibility that is available to subdelegated managers when it comes down to assessment. And for sure, the reusing of assessment results that were performed in a previous process or in a process either from another organization or another division, those are flexibilities that are available and they should be used whenever it's reasonable to do so. Also, with that example about the use of performance appraisals and appointment processes, us at the PSC, this is something that we've talked a lot about. So, please remember that this is an option, and another great option or example is to reduce the number of essential qualifications that are required for an appointment process. You have to remember that every time you add an essential qualification to your appointment process, this is something you will need to assess. Therefore, make sure that you really put what's essential under your essential qualifications. So, moving on to Marie-Claude.
Marie-Claude Jacques: Thank you. So, now let's put some of what we've talked about to practice with two scenarios that we've prepared for you. We will read the scenarios and we'll pause to let you think about your answer. We will then follow up with the correct response. Scenario one, related to re-using existing assessment information. As a subdelegated manager, you wish to re-use the assessment from another appointment process to staff a position quickly, even though there are some differences in the merit criteria. In the next slide, you have four options. Options A: You cannot use the assessment from the other process because the merit criteria are different. A new job ad is required. B: You cannot adopt the merit criteria and assessment used in the other process if it meets the needs of the new appointment. C: Due to the differences, you have to ignore the other assessment and complete an independent assessment of the new qualifications. Or D: You can decide how much of the previous assessment is relevant to the new appointment and complete an assessment of the other qualifications. We'll give you a moment to think of your response.
Simon Lachaine: Marie-Claude, do you want me to play a little music for you while the people are thinking about their answer?
Marie-Claude Jacques: Sure, Simon.
Simon Lachaine: (sings) Doo doo doo doo doo doo doo doo. Ding!
Marie-Claude Jacques: The answer is B or D. The Public Service Employment Act, as for Section 36, and the PSC appointment framework provides subdelegate, the subdelegated manager with discretion to make decisions about the assessment methods appropriate to determine whether a person needs each of qualification for an appointment. This includes re-using relevant assessment information gathered from another process. Also, from Section 36.2 of the PSEA, it requires of subdelegated managers to conduct an evaluation to identify whether the assessment method and the matter in which it will be applied includes or creates biases or barriers that disadvantage persons belonging to any equity-seeking group, and if one is identified, make reasonable efforts to remove it or to mitigate its impact on those persons. So, every appointment must be based on merit, which means the person, to be appointed, must possess each and every essential qualification, and the manager can also take into account any qualification considered an asset, any operational requirement, and current or future organizational need. We would also like to provide you with other considerations you may want to think about as a hiring manager or an HR expert. In this scenario, you may want to reflect on if the decision is reasonable in these circumstances. Is this decision taken in good faith, free from biases and personal favoritism? As the subdelegated manager, consider the PSEA preambles. What are the effects on those involved in the appointment process and on persons with priority entitlements? If this is an external process, have preference provisions been respected? Did the previous assessment gather information on the same scope and complexity of each qualifications? These are all considerations you may want to address and will also be applicable to the next scenario that Simon will present.
Simon Lachaine: Okay, thank you. So, now, moving on to scenario number 2. So, I'm going to proceed exactly like Marie-Claude just did. I'm going to read the scenario, read the questions, and read the possible answers, and we will give you a little time to think about your answer. So, the topic for this scenario is options for managing the process. So, your organization has carried out a collective process involving many candidates. Following the review of the candidates experience in the administration of the PSC Standardized Personnel Psychology Centre test, 87 candidates were selected for subsequent assessments as part of the process. As a subdelegated manager, you are looking to staff a position very quickly and you want to conduct a maximum of five interviews among the 87 candidates still being considered in the process. You are wondering about which volume management method to use, so choosing the best answer from the following statements, okay? There might be one or more best answer. A: You can randomly select five of the 87 candidates to interview. B: You can interview the five candidates who had the best results on the Personal Psychology Centre test. C: You can identify the five candidates who meet the greatest number of assets. Or D: You can interview the five candidates who have the most relevant experience for your needs.
So, once again, we will give you a moment to think about the possible answers. Okay. I think I can move on to the answer. So, for this scenario, actually, all of those answers are good or possible answers. Okay, so the answer would be A, B, C, or D, okay? I'm going to explain the reason why. It's really because the Public Service Employment Act, the PSEA, and the PSC appointment framework does not prescribe how an appointment process is managed when you need to make one or more appointments from that process. Those volume management tools are all viable options and could be used by subdelegated managers depending on the circumstances. So, I just want to point out a few considerations that managers accompanied by their HR specialists should think about when they want to use some of these volume management tools. First, you will need to think, is this decision reasonable in this circumstance, okay? So, for example, to randomly select five of the 87 candidates for the interview, it is a possible answer but is it really the option that is going to lead you to finding the best qualified candidates? Okay, maybe you want to focus on bringing to the next step the candidates that have the most relevant experience for your needs.
Okay, so this is something to think about, even though it could be an option depending on your circumstances. So, is it reasonable in the circumstance? This is always something very important to consider when you're making a staffing decision. Another consideration would be, is this decision taken in good faith, free from bias and personal favoritism? And if this is an external process, have preference provision been respected? Okay, this is very important. So, also, when you're doing volume management, you need to ask yourself, what is the purpose? Why am I doing volume management? And by answering that question, this will help you make the determination as to what is the best volume management tool that I should be using. And finally, and this also would apply to any decision that is made by a subdelegated manager in the staffing process, the subdelegated manager has to be comfortable enough with his or her assessment strategy to be able to explain it and defend it if needed. So, hopefully those scenarios were useful and were able to give you a concrete example of how you can reduce time to staff by using the various flexibilities that are available to organizations.
[00:37:16 A slide is shown with text that reads "Questions – Email: cfp.dotationcsd-staffingssa.psc@cfp-psc.gc.ca".]
Now, moving on to the next slide, it's a slide about questions. So, this session is recorded, but if you have any questions, comments about this presentation, if you have any leading practices that you think would be worth sharing with the PSC for us to share amongst organizations, please do not hesitate to contact us at the email address on the question slide, and thank you for listening to the recording. I will now hand it over to my manager, Jean-Mychel, for the closing remarks.
Jean-Mychel Gay: Thank you so much, Simon, Marie-Claude, for sharing your time and your expertise with us today and your very practical insights in terms of improving time to staff. So, your presentation gave us not only a clearer understanding of the challenges around staffing timelines, but also some concrete strategies hiring managers and HR professionals can take back to their own organizations, and it's encouraging to see that there are simple, yet effective ways to improve the process and that support from the Public Service Commission is always available. And to the viewers of this session, our goal is really that you are now able to reflect on your own practices, exchange ideas with your peers, and explore ways to streamline your staffing processes. So, once again, thank you all and have a wonderful day.
[00:38:38 The CSPS logo appears on screen.]
[00:38:43 The Government of Canada logo appears on screen.]
