Today, I was reminded of a staffing approach my managers and I implemented in a division I headed up in the early 2000s. During a consultation with our employees, we heard that they were frustrated that job openings were being advertised and sometimes filled before they had a chance to express interest.

So we devised an approach that added a step before a manager would advertise or fill a job. Hiring managers would send an email to all staff in the division whenever they planned to staff a position. The email would indicate the group and level of the job, whether the position would be filled on a permanent or temporary basis, and what qualifications were required. Employees had a week to come forward, after which the manager would proceed with their staffing, as planned, if there were no interested internal candidates. Employees didn't automatically get a job just by expressing interest. For example, an employee might be encouraged to apply for a position being filled on an indeterminate basis, or, if they had or were close to having the abilities required for the job, the manager might offer them an acting opportunity while the competition proceeded.

In most cases, no divisional employees came forward to express interest in the positions being filled. But that didn't make the effort a waste of time. The point was to avoid two things: employees feeling passed over for opportunities and employees feeling surprised when new people showed up to assume jobs the existing team members weren't even aware were being filled. When employees had no information about a job beyond its group and level, they might conclude: "I could have done that job, but I wasn't given a chance." Once the new system was in place, employees could review the requirements for a job before it was filled and approach the hiring manager to express interest, or apply for the job when the competition opened, or screen themselves out if they felt that they didn't meet the requirements of the position.

In some cases, internal candidates did come forward. On more than one occasion, I was surprised at the career changes employees were open to making. We ended up giving some employees opportunities that we would not have even realized they were interested in. It was a good learning experience for us managers. We learned that we couldn't and shouldn't predict who would be interested in a position. Our role was to assess any people who came forward against the requirements for the job.

We had enough internal candidates identified and promoted through the process to demonstrate that it was a win-win approach. Employees got an opportunity to demonstrate their interest in a job or, at the very least, to compete in a staffing process that they were now aware of. They felt that there were more career advancement opportunities for them in the division. We managers sometimes found people to fill jobs from within our own team, which improved employee retention and job satisfaction. And we had a standardized process through which to clearly communicate the requirements of a position.

I still see merits in this approach, some 20 years later. Managers might wish to adopt elements of this concept—especially:

When employees see opportunities for career advancement in their teams—even if not every job is filled through a competitive process—they are more likely to feel that the staffing system is fair and that they are valued.