There's no technology that I know of that exists in the public service that does that. All applications that come externally or internally are reviewed by individuals, by people who actually sift through and sort and read the very lengthy application and determine whether that person meets that first screening.
Remember we talked about the screening process for anonymous recruitment. Those are actually individuals who are going through that application and making that decision with, in some cases, some bias, as we talked about. That's the current system as it exists. Having done it myself, I can tell you that it is extremely lengthy and extremely tiring, and it's extremely easy to say at the end of the day, “Okay, I'm going to leave this aside because my eyes can't focus anymore.” That's part of what we're trying to change. Again, the complex application—to have to respond to 10 different asset criteria or even to describe the criteria—really is too complicated.
The other thing we want is to have managers, when they're interacting with potential candidates, talk more about what their potential is and less about what they've done, and have more of a conversation about what potential candidates could contribute in the future. Again, that's part of merit; it's not just what you bring today to the organization, but what you could bring in the future.
That's more complicated, and we have people in our Personnel Psychology Centre looking at ways that we could systematically assess that. It's much more complicated than just ticking a box that you can write briefing notes for ministers or whatever it may be.