Examining the Influence of Political Intervention on Recruitment Outcomes in Government Agencies

This study examined the extent of political intervention in recruitment processes and its impact on recruitment outcomes in a government agency. Political intervention was assessed in terms of political patronage, political pressure, government policies, and partisan influence, while recruitment outcomes were measured through candidate selection, job fit, employee qualifications, and diversity and inclusion. Results showed that all dimensions of political intervention were rated “Good,” with political patronage (M = 3.09) being the most prominent, suggesting that favoritism and connections remain influential. Recruitment outcomes were also rated “Good,” though candidate selection (M = 2.75) scored lowest, indicating concerns about transparency and fairness. Correlation analysis revealed that political intervention significantly affects task efficiency (r = .555, p < .001), quality of work (r = .525, p < .001), and overall productivity (r = .382, p < .01), while having no significant impact on time management or teamwork. Overall, the findings suggest that while agencies maintain acceptable recruitment standards, political considerations continue to undermine fairness and meritocracy, raising doubts about transparency and inclusiveness in hiring practices. Strengthening institutional safeguards against political influence is therefore crucial to promote equity, accountability, and effective workforce performance.