This chapter examines Kazakhstan’s human resources management (HRM) policies in the public sector against selected principles of the OECD Recommendation on Public Service Leadership and Capability and practices across OECD member countries. It explores the role of the Agency for Civil Service Affairs, with a focus on recruitment, professionalisation, and digitalisation of HRM practices. Kazakhstan’s civil service reform agenda, articulated in the Concept 2030 and the Concept for the Development of the Civil Service for 2024–2029, aims to build a more efficient, transparent, and human-centred public service. Key priorities include attracting specialised professionals, improving recruitment processes, and enhancing HRM systems. While these initiatives align with OECD practices, challenges remain in strengthening systemic HR capacities, optimising talent management, and expanding flexible working arrangements. The chapter concludes with recommendations to enhance HRM in Kazakhstan’s civil service and support the development of a more agile, skilled, and responsive civil service.
OECD Public Governance Scan of Kazakhstan
Abstract
The public service is key to sound public governance, ensuring high-quality public services for all citizens. Public administrations, particularly central administrations, must be able to develop, adapt, and implement public policies that benefit the entire population, leaving no one behind. In response to a rapidly evolving socio-economic and technological environment, OECD member countries have worked to modernise their public sectors to deliver more effective, inclusive, and citizen-centred services.
Since gaining independence, Kazakhstan has undergone significant socio-political and economic changes. Recently, its strategies have focused on transforming public administration into a more efficient, transparent, and citizen-centred system. The 2021 Decree "Concept of Development of Public Administration of the Republic of Kazakhstan until 2030" and the 2024 Decree "Concept of Development of Public Administration of the Republic of Kazakhstan for 2024-2029" outline a vision for civil service modernisation for the years to come.
In 2019, OECD member countries adopted the OECD Recommendation on Public Service Leadership and Capability, a legal instrument developed by the Working Group on Public Employment and Management. This Recommendation sets out 14 mutually reinforcing principles across three pillars to guide public service reform. The Recommendation highlights the need to develop:
A value-driven public service, where commonly understood values guide a results-oriented and citizen-centred culture, leadership and the design of policies and services.
A trusted and capable public service with the ability to identify the skills and competencies it needs and to design its employment systems to attract, develop and motivate those skills and competencies.
A responsive and adaptable public service with the skills, resources and agility to respond effectively and efficiently to rapidly changing, ongoing and emerging challenges.
To support these principles, the OECD gathers data on public service models and practices through its Survey on Public Service Leadership and Capability, conducted in 2020, 2022, and 2024. A version of this survey was adapted for Kazakhstan, enabling a comparison with OECD member countries. This work builds upon a civil service reform in Kazakhstan benchmark and a public governance review, which highlighted the need to strengthen competency management, invest in senior civil service systems, and develop a performance-driven culture (OECD, 2018[1]). By leveraging these insights, the OECD continues to support Kazakhstan’s efforts to modernise its public service and align it with global best practices.
This chapter compares Kazakhstan’s public service with OECD member countries and highlights best practices and innovative tools to support its modernisation and professionalisation. It focuses on building a responsive and adaptive public service by enhancing workforce adaptability, implementing flexible working arrangements, attracting candidates with the right skills, streamlining recruitment processes, and strengthening performance management systems. These topics align with Kazakhstan’s ongoing civil service reform plans, ensuring their relevance to the country’s current needs. By addressing these areas, the chapter aims to offer practical insights and recommendations to advance the development of Kazakhstan’s public service.
The OECD Recommendation on Public Service Leadership and Capability recommends developing public employment systems that foster a responsive and adaptive public service, able to address ongoing and emerging challenges and changing circumstances. In particular, this can be done by clarifying institutional responsibilities for people management and building HRM policies on data and evidence.
Kazakhstan’s public administration reform plan calls for strong and clear institutional responsibilities, with HR capacity to implement those changes. The 2021 and 2024 Decrees, outlining the "Concept of Development of Public Administration" and the "Concept of Development of the Public Service," aim to transform the public service. Key goals include making the civil service more attractive to specialised professionals, improving selection procedures, strengthening HRM, professionalising civil service careers, and digitising services. Achieving these goals will require strong in-house capacity within HRM institutions and departments, ensuring that reforms are effectively implemented and sustained over time.
3.2.1. Strengthening institutional responsibilities for people management
The OECD Recommendation on Public Service Leadership and Capability highlights the importance of clarifying institutional responsibilities for people management to strengthen the effectiveness of the public employment system.
Across OECD member countries, these systems exhibit varying degrees of centralisation. In some models, a single agency oversees the structure of public employment and management, while in others, each ministry or agency holds this responsibility. Clarifying these roles is essential for building a cohesive, responsive, and capable public workforce. In Kazakhstan, the Agency for Civil Service Affairs has the institutional authority over public employment matters. This institutional set-up differs from most OECD member countries, as 82% have a central HRM body within a ministry or centre of government responsible for all central government public servants and only 18% have a specialised ministry or agency dedicated primarily to HRM (Figure 3.1) (OECD, 2024[2]).
Share of OECD member countries. The answers in red are the answer choices corresponding to the situation in Kazakhstan.
Note: N=33 OECD member countries. Preliminary answers.
Original survey question: Which of the following institutions exist to lead, implement and/or enforce people management and HRM policies at the central/federal level of government?
Source: OECD (forthcoming), Survey on Public Service Leadership and Capability
Similarly to a majority of OECD member countries, the Agency for Civil Service Affairs is tasked with developing and implementing the public service selection system, seeking to ensure the establishment of procedures and policies for selecting candidates in public agencies. It therefore plays a key role in strengthening the attractiveness of the public service, by overseeing talent management initiatives, creating strategies to enhance the skills and capabilities of public servants. It also sets qualification standards for various state administrative and political positions, seeking to maintain high competency levels within the civil service. Its responsibilities extend to developing test procedures, assessing candidates' personal qualities, and developing legal acts and regulatory frameworks. It coordinates personnel management services, oversees the Presidential youth personnel reserve, and manages training and career advancement for reservists. Additionally, it recognises outstanding public servants through awards, like the "Best Civil Servant" badge. Finally, the Agency supports the digitisation of selection processes and offers advisory services to civil servants and citizens.
Recent reform plans have highlighted the need to strengthen HRM capacities to implement these ambitions effectively. The Agency has been instrumental in modernising Kazakhstan’s civil service through the 2021 and 2024 Decrees. The 2021 Decree outlines a roadmap to attract specialised professionals, improve skills development, refine selection procedures, strengthen HR management, and digitise services. It also seeks to enhance citizen engagement, aiming for a responsive, trustworthy, and coherent administration by 2030. Building on this, the 2024 Decree introduces a hybrid career model combining career-based and position-based elements, notably by offering both vertical and horizontal development opportunities, to professionalise the administration. The Decree also revises the performance bonus system and reinforces the ethics of civil service careers with a focus on professionalism.
Similarly to almost half of OECD member countries (48%) with a centralised HRM system, Kazakhstan faces challenges related to competing interests in different institutions (OECD, forthcoming[3]). This is notably due to the Agency for Civil Affairs being responsible for HRM strategy and reform, while the Ministry of National Economy remains in charge of headcount and remuneration of civil servants – a relatively widespread model across OECD member countries. However, Kazakhstan does not identify challenges related to lack of personnel, financing or cross-institutional coordination and communication, despite these being faced by 45% of OECD member countries.
3.2.2. Collecting more and better data
As part of a principle on developing a long-term, strategic and systematic approach to people management based on evidence and inclusive planning, the OECD Recommendation on Public Service Leadership and Capability highlights the need to use HR and workforce data for strategic and predictive analytics.
Across many OECD member countries, the use of data in public administration remains notably limited, hindering the ability to identify emerging challenges and design effective human resource management policies (OECD, forthcoming[4]). Often, metrics are collected only at the ministry level, which restricts the capacity for a more comprehensive and centralised analysis. This lack of coordination can pose significant challenges, particularly in countries where public employment and management systems are centralised. In Kazakhstan, efforts to address these issues are advancing through the ongoing implementation of e-Qyzmet, an integrated information system for digitising human resource management in the public sector. This platform consolidates HR data – such as age, marital status, and job titles – while offering a wide range of functions, including recruitment, performance evaluation, management, and ethical compliance. By integrating these processes, e-Qyzmet seeks to simplify administrative tasks for users and provides prospective civil servants easy access to job vacancies and relevant information, streamlining their entry into the public service. Currently piloted by in 44 different state bodies, the Kazakh platform is expected to be fully rolled-out and operational by the end of 2025. Its effective implementation should be monitored carefully. Similarly, the Korean government has developed a standardised electronic system called e-Saram. This system is digitising the overall personnel administration from recruitment to retirement, aggregating and managing data related to HR decisions, salary, performance evaluation, education and training. Additionally, e-Saram offers a feature to analyse and forecast the current status of the workforce and adapt HR policies accordingly.
For instance, the speed and quality of recruitment processes across OECD member countries are often not accurately monitored, leaving potential gaps in optimising talent acquisition efforts (OECD, 2020[5]). Aside from the number of applicants per opening, a minority of OECD member countries is tracking selection (25% of OECD member countries collect and aggregate it at a central level, 15% at a ministry level only), acceptance (respectively 24% and 18%) or drop-out (respectively 18% and 18%) rates. In Kazakhstan, these data points should soon be collected and aggregated centrally through e-Qyzmet and specific online surveys targeting perceptions. The roll-out of e-Qyzmet to all public administrations should support the Agency for Civil Service Affairs in improving and clarifying the public service-wide recruitment process.
Similar challenges are faced by public administrations across OECD member countries regarding metrics used to evaluate employee retention, creating challenges regarding strategic workforce planning (OECD, 2020[5]). Less than 50% of OECD member countries are collecting and aggregating data centrally regarding absenteeism (46%), turnover or attrition rates (40%), early retirement (40%) or retention rates (26%) (Figure 3.2). In Kazakhstan, most of these metrics are collected and aggregated centrally through e-Qyzmet. However, the extent to which this data is used and will be used to inform HRM policies should be further examined.
Share of OECD member countries. The answers in red are the answer choices corresponding to the situation in Kazakhstan.
Note: N=35 OECD member countries.
Original survey question: Please indicate which of the below metrics are routinely used to evaluate employee retention in the public service.
Source: OECD (2020), Survey on Public Service Leadership and Capability, OECD (2024) Survey on Public Service Leadership and Capability of Kazakhstan
One of the three pillars of the OECD Recommendation on Public Service Leadership and Capability focuses on investing in public service capability in order to develop an effective and trusted public service. In particular, this can be done by attracting and retaining employees with the skills and competencies required from the labour market, recruiting, selecting and promoting candidates through transparent, open and merit-based processes, and assessing, rewarding and recognising performance, talent and initiative.
Kazakhstan's ongoing reforms in public employment and management align closely with this pillar and the subsequent principles of the OECD Recommendation. Indeed, recent initiatives deriving from the Concept of Development of the Civil Service seek to make the Kazakh central administration a more attractive employer, notably by increasing the readability and facilitating access to recruitment processes. However, similarly to virtually all OECD member countries, Kazakhstan faces challenges attracting the right candidates to the desired positions.
3.3.1. Attracting the right candidates with needed skills
The OECD Recommendation on Public Service Leadership and Capability highlights the need to attract and retain employees with the skills and competencies required from the labour market, in particular through positioning the public service as an employer of choice and determining what attracts and retains skilled employees. Strengthening the attractiveness of the public service is key to ensure public administrations are able to address citizens’ expectations and develop and implement political priorities. This includes identifying attraction challenges and developing proactive recruitment strategies such as employer branding.
Virtually all OECD member countries face attractiveness challenges (OECD, 2020[5]). These challenges vary from a job category to the other and can be explained by different factors. For instance, 76% OECD member countries face challenges in attracting data professionals, while only 12% of countries face challenges attracting general office clerks (Figure 3.3). Similarly to many OECD member countries, Kazakhstan has identified attractiveness challenges specific to STEM professionals (a challenge for 60% of OECD member countries), senior level public servants (57%), policy advisors (34%) and HR professionals (34%). More specifically, the Concept states that “there is a shortage of workers with specialised skills in the sectoral divisions of state bodies”, calling for concerted efforts to tackle attractiveness challenges (Republic of Kazakhstan, 2021[6]). More specifically, some regions face acute shortages in the fields of technical sciences, agriculture, health care, housing, communal services, and transport. On average, there are only three applications per job opening, underlining the scale of the challenge (Republic of Kazakhstan, 2024[7]) Across OECD member countries, uncompetitive remuneration, negative perceptions of the public service as an employer of choice or lack of awareness of opportunities in the public service can represent barriers to attracting the right candidates with the right skills (OECD, 2023[8]).
Share of OECD member countries. The answers in red are the answer choices corresponding to the situation in Kazakhstan. No data is available for the answer choices not coloured in red.
Note: N=35 OECD member countries. Total is not always equal to 100% as some countries do not know about challenges regarding specific professions.
Original survey question: Does the central/ federal administration experience particular challenges in attracting any of the following groups of applicants/ skills?
Source: OECD (2020), Survey on Public Service Leadership and Capability, OECD (2024) Survey on Public Service Leadership and Capability of Kazakhstan
To tackle these challenges, public administrations are developing proactive strategies to attract more and better candidates with in-demand skills (OECD, 2021[9]). Traditionally, public administrations have relied on their reputation as stable employers to draw in and retain new public servants. However, and as mentioned, they now face growing difficulties in securing the right candidates for specific roles. This calls for more proactivity in attracting talents, a multifaceted effort captured by the OECD composite index on the use of proactive recruitment practices (Figure 3.4). This index considers various aspects of employer attractiveness, such as the content of recruitment materials, policies designed to attract skilled candidates, methods for identifying what appeals to prospective employees, appropriate pay systems, and actions to enhance the representation of underrepresented groups. Leveraging such tools allows employers to better understand what drives candidates to apply for public service roles, thereby positioning themselves as employers of choice. Compared to most OECD member countries, Kazakhstan scores relatively low on this index. This is largely due to the absence of specific action to improve the representation of specific groups in the Kazakh central administration and the rigidity of the pay system. However, and as mentioned below (Setting transparent compensation), the latter should be viewed in light of the transparency and fairness benefits offered by a standardised pay system, which helps prevent arbitrary and discretionary compensation.
Note: The composite indicator is made up of the following aspects of employer attractiveness: 1) elements highlighted in recruitment material; 2) policies to attract more and better candidates with in-demand skills; 3) the use of methods to determine what attracts skilled employees; 4) adequate pay systems to attract good candidates; and 5) having actions in place to improve the representation of under-represented groups. The index ranges from 0 (no use of proactive recruitment practices) to 1 (high level of use of proactive recruitment practices). Costa Rica was not an OECD member country at the time the composite index was published.
Source: OECD (2020), Survey on Public Service Leadership and Capability, OECD (2024) Survey on Public Service Leadership and Capability of Kazakhstan
A common dimension to such strategies relates to the development of an employer branding strategy (OECD, 2021[9]). Employer branding seeks to promote administrations as employers of choice to a desired target group. Across OECD member countries, 47% of countries have a common employer branding strategy for the whole central administration (Figure 3.5). However, despite some programmes having clear recognition strategies (the Presidential Youth Personnel Reserve and the Regional Personnel Reserve has their own branding strategies), Kazakhstan does not have an employer branding strategy for the whole government. This impedes Kazakhstan’s capacity to attract more and better candidates to public service job openings. Kazakhstan could therefore envisage broader work to develop a comprehensive strategy going beyond specific programmes or the sole elements highlighted in job descriptions, and including a widely recognised logo, slogan and mission statement. For instance, France developed in 2023 a unique employer brand for the entirety of its public service, called “choisirleservicepublic.gouv.fr” (Choose the Public Service) (OECD, 2023[8]). This brand has been developed in concertation with the three branches composing the French public service and was associated to the creation of a website showcasing all public service job offers.
Share of OECD member countries. The answer in red is the answer choice corresponding to the situation in Kazakhstan.
Note: N=34 OECD member countries.
Original survey question: Which of the following employer branding strategies exist in the central/ federal administration?
Source: OECD (2020), Survey on Public Service Leadership and Capability, OECD (2024) Survey on Public Service Leadership and Capability of Kazakhstan
Proactive recruitment strategies should also include different communication tools used for recruitment campaigns and job openings (OECD, 2021[9]). For instance, 73% of OECD member countries see their public administrations participate in career fairs, 67% target candidates at junior level through partnerships with universities or internships, and 67% develop targeted recruitment campaigns in newspapers or on social media (Figure 3.6). Similarly, the Concept provides steps to improve the attractiveness of the public service to younger candidates, notably by developing early career guidance in universities, or by communicating around non-financial incentives. Public administrations in a majority of OECD member countries materialised these steps through specific actions, such as junior candidate targeting, non-competitive appointment of graduates to specific positions, and participation to career fairs. Additionally, Kazakhstan is currently working on methodological recommendations for searching and attracting talent to the public sector through the country’s Schools for Young Civil Servants (Republic of Kazakhstan, 2021[10]). Moreover, and similarly to 97% and 54% of OECD member countries, Kazakhstan relies on government dedicated job websites and word-of-mouth to communicate about job openings. To build on these advancements in making the public service more attractive, Kazakhstan could consider improving communication through third-party websites and employing headhunting practices to attract specialised talent with high-demand skills.
Share of OECD member countries. The answers in red are the answer choice corresponding to the situation in Kazakhstan.
Note: N=33 OECD member countries.
Original survey question: Which of the following are used to attract more and better candidates with in-demand skills to the central/ federal administration?
Source: OECD (2020), Survey on Public Service Leadership and Capability, OECD (2024) Survey on Public Service Leadership and Capability of Kazakhstan
Moreover, attraction efforts work best when they are complemented by efforts to retain public servants. Turnover rates in the Kazakh civil service remain relatively low, reaching on average 4.9% in state bodies at the end of 2024. While this figure illustrates high levels of retention, it could also underline limited opportunities for mobility outside the organisation.
3.3.2. Streamlining and clarifying recruitment processes
The OECD Recommendation on Public Service Leadership and Capability clearly states the need to “recruit, select and promote candidates through transparent, open and merit-based processes, to guarantee fair and equal treatment”. This underscores the importance of a rigorous and impartial candidate selection process, anchored in well-defined criteria and methods suited to the specific role.
The first step is to clearly articulate these selection criteria. Across OECD member countries, the approach to defining such criteria varies considerably (OECD, 2020[5]). While 76% of OECD countries tailor their selection criteria to the specific requirements of each position, 38% apply criteria tailored to broader job categories, with position-specific criteria often added on top of these general requirements (Figure 3.7). In Kazakhstan, selection criteria are tailored to the specific requirements of each position. These tailored criteria are essential to ensure that recruitment processes accurately assess the skills needed for the job, rather than relying on standardised measures that might serve only as limited proxies for actual on-the-job performance. For instance, Spain has recently undertaken reflexions around its approach to public service examinations (OECD, 2023[8]). This work sought to better define what the future of competitive examinations could look like, highlighting the need to supplement theoretical tests with assessments of professional skills, notably through multiple choice questions and practical cases. Similar work is currently being undertaken in Kazakhstan, where the Concept for the Development of Public Administration mentions the need to shift the emphasis to professional and personal competencies of the candidates, including through the introduction of more individualised methods. Elements of this shift are currently being implemented, for instance by assessing fewer pieces of legislation.
Share of OECD member countries. The answer in red is the answer choice corresponding to the situation in Kazakhstan.
Note: N=34 OECD member countries.
Original survey question: Determination of selection criteria: which of the following apply?
Source: OECD (2020), Survey on Public Service Leadership and Capability; OECD (2024) Survey on Public Service Leadership and Capability of Kazakhstan
The recruitment process itself plays a crucial role in upholding public service transparency standards. As mentioned above (Attracting the right candidates with needed skills), Kazakhstan is currently piloting e-Qyzmet, to also act as a centralised recruitment platform, enhancing transparency throughout the different stages of the recruitment process. This platform offers candidates comprehensive insights into each stage of recruitment and enables them to navigate the entire process – from the initial application to the final interview – through a single, streamlined system. Such full end-to-end remote recruitment process is only possible for all candidates in 34% of OECD member countries (OECD, 2020[5]).
3.3.3. Strengthening performance management
Finally, investing in public service capability requires efficient performance management systems. The OECD Recommendation on Public Service Leadership and capability highlights the need to assess, reward and recognise performance, talent and initiative. This requires, amongst others, assessing individual, team and organisation performance through agreed indicators and criteria which are regularly discussed and reviewed, as well as rewarding employee performance and addressing under-performance.
Formalising performance assessment can help develop a culture of accountability and continuous improvement. By systematically and regularly evaluating the performance of each public servant, public administrations can identify strengths and areas for development, ensuring that employees are both motivated and equipped to meet the evolving demands of their roles. This structured approach can also help aligning individual contributions with broader organisational goals. Across OECD member countries, performance assessment is mandatory for non-managerial professional staff in 76% of countries (Figure 3.8). Furthermore, transparent performance assessments build trust within the public sector and with the citizens it serves, reinforcing the integrity and responsiveness of the public administration. Kazakhstan’s formalised performance assessment for categories A (such as heads of staff and departments) and B (such as heads of structural divisions) can help in the endeavour. Similarly, Canada’s performance management system provides an interesting example of formalisation. In the Canadian public service, performance assessment is formalised and mandatory for all non-managerial professional staff (Treasury Board of Canada, 2021[11]). This performance assessment process starts at the beginning of every year by setting up employees’ work objectives and learning and development plans. Mid-year, the manager reviews the employee’s progress and provides feedback. Finally, by the end of the year, the manager is conducting a formal year-end assessment and rates the employee’s performance. This approach, centred around continuous feedback, coaching, employee recognition, and performance development, can help foster a more performance-oriented culture. It also encourages personal growth and accountability, ensuring that employees are aligned with organisational goals while maintaining a focus on development and improvement throughout the year. Such approach can therefore enhance both individual and organisational performance.
Share of OECD member countries. The answers in red are the answer choice corresponding to the situation in Kazakhstan.
Note: N=33 OECD member countries. Preliminary answers. The answers in red are the answer choices corresponding to the situation in Kazakhstan.
Original survey question: Is formalised performance assessment mandatory for public servants?
Source: OECD (forthcoming), Survey on Public Service Leadership and Capability; OECD (2024) Survey on Public Service Leadership and Capability of Kazakhstan
Defining and assessing performance of public service employees remains a difficult task across OECD member countries. Performance assessments can take different shapes and forms (OECD, 2024[2]). In a majority of OECD member countries, all central government organisations use individual meetings or check-ins with one of their superior (67% of members) or written feedback from a superior (58%) (Figure 3.9). Fewer OECD member countries see performance objectives and goals with manager approvals (48%), individual learning plans (39%) or employee self-evaluation (33%) used by all central government organisations. In Kazakhstan, performance assessments are standardised for managers. Category A employees are evaluated annually based on the achievement of five Key Performance Indicators (KPIs). Category B employees in key managerial roles are evaluated quarterly, with assessments based on three to five KPIs. For other category B employees, a ranking method is used for quarterly evaluations. This method assesses employees based on four criteria: work quality, task completion deadlines, independence, and work discipline. Additionally, all category B employees are evaluated using the 360-degree method, which involves an anonymous survey of their colleagues to assess their competencies. If an employee disagrees with their evaluation, they may request a calibration session. In this process, participants discuss the employee’s assessment and make a final decision on whether any changes should be made. Therefore, performance objectives, written feedback from managers, individual learning plans and 360 degree feedbacks are used in all public administrations, even though they are only used for some categories of civil servants.
Share of OECD member countries. The answers in red are the answer choices corresponding to the situation in Kazakhstan.
Note: N=33 OECD member countries. Preliminary answers.
Original survey question: Which types of performance assessments and tools are used for individuals and to what extent?
Source: OECD (forthcoming), Survey on Public Service Leadership and Capability; OECD (2024) Survey on Public Service Leadership and Capability of Kazakhstan
Additionally, performance management relies heavily on the way performance itself is assessed. In order to be efficient, performance measurement scales should only attribute the highest grade to a small number of proven high performers, with average performers receiving a smaller bonus. Systems where most public servants achieve the highest grade cannot accurately recognise varying levels of performance and may create unintended consequences, such as gaming or cheating. In Kazakhstan, performance assessment scale used is a 5-point scale, which has the potential to identify high performers. Category B staff members who score greater than or equal to 4 points in four consecutive quarters may be promoted without an open competition. In 2024, 200 employees were promoted on this basis. However, all public servants get bonuses, which amount varies depending on the score obtained, but can reach up to two months of salary.
Public administrations are facing unprecedented challenges related to increased uncertainty, emerging ways of working, budgetary pressure and high expectations from citizens. Those challenges are calling for a future-ready public service that is flexible, forward-looking and fulfilling to a diverse range of public employees (OECD, 2021[9]). A flexible public service should be able, when needed, to overcome traditional organisational and programmatic silos to respond to rapidly changing circumstances. To this end, the OECD Recommendation on Public Service Leadership and Capability highlights the need to set the necessary conditions for internal and external workforce mobility and adaptability to match skills with demand and providing transparent employment terms and conditions appropriately matching the functions of the position.
Kazakhstan’s public employment and management system is marked by a relatively high degree of rigidity. While this structure supports integrity and uniformity, the system’s limited flexibility hinders the public administration’s capacity to swiftly respond to evolving workforce needs and the broader challenges the public sector faces. This is highlighted by limited mobility schemes, the limited uptake of flexible working arrangements, or a rigid compensation system. This rigidity can make it difficult to attract and retain a diverse pool of talent, particularly among professionals with specialised skills who often seek more adaptable and responsive working conditions. Over time, these constraints can undermine Kazakhstan’s public administration in its ability to remain effective and competitive in pursuing its long-term governance objectives.
3.4.1. Developing workforce mobility
The OECD Recommendation on Public Service Leadership and Capability clearly states the need to set the necessary conditions for internal and external workforce mobility and adaptability to match skills with demand. Mobility can be a useful human resource management tool to encourage public servants to develop new skills, provide interesting career prospects to public servants, and answer to short- to medium-term organisational priorities. It is a tool that should be used to make the public service more flexible and capable of managing individual expectations and organisational priorities. It therefore plays a key role in strengthening the attractiveness of the public service in the eye of candidates seeking variety in their careers (OECD, 2023[8]).
In particular, mobility requires enabling and encouraging short- and medium-term assignments within the public service (OECD, 2023[12]). Mobility can exist through different modalities, answering to different needs. For instance, micro-assignments are most used for mobility within an institution, whereas longer-term secondments are most used for mobility between public service entities. Almost all (97%) OECD member countries, use short term assignments (less than a year full time), 91% longer term secondments and 86% micro-assignments (working for another team/unit part time) to structure their mobility programmes (Figure 3.10). In Kazakhstan, mobility is possible through longer-term secondments, short-term assignments, micro-assignments and rotation programmes. However, those possibilities are not part of regular and deliberate transfer as part of career planning or corps management, which hinders the strategic nature of mobility schemes and their clear potential to answer to emerging and changing organisational priorities.
Share of OECD member countries. The answers in red are the answer choices corresponding to the situation in Kazakhstan.
Note: N=35 OECD member countries.
Original survey question: Which types of modalities are used for mobility in central administrations?
Source: OECD (2022), Survey on Public Service Leadership and Capability, OECD (2024) Survey on Public Service Leadership and Capability of Kazakhstan
Indeed, the relatively limited targeted use of mobility tools in Kazakhstan can be explained by a lack of strategy setting out the expectations and objectives regarding mobility in the public service. Such strategy can greatly help using mobility schemes strategically, enabling employee development, better allocating resources, or reinforcing collaboration across ministries and agencies. Across OECD member countries, 57% of countries have a single central strategy regarding mobility, and 21% have additional strategies in most ministries (Figure 3.11.) (OECD, 2022[13]). For instance, Australia has developed as part of its Australian Public Service Workforce Strategy 2025 a framework on mobility (OECD, 2023[12]). The framework outlines three sets of interrelated objectives (addressing surges in demand, solving complex problems, and developing employees), each supported through specific initiatives. The Framework operationalises this through separate guidance documents for employees, managers, executives and HR practitioners. It also includes associated targets and metrics through employee census data, employment databases and other sources.
Share of OECD member countries. The answer in red is the answer choice corresponding to the situation in Kazakhstan.
Note: N=33 OECD member countries.
Original survey question: Is there specific strategy/policy that sets out the expectations/objectives regarding mobility in the public service?
Source: OECD (2022), Survey on Public Service Leadership and Capability, OECD (2024) Survey on Public Service Leadership and Capability of Kazakhstan
Often, the lack of strategic mobility derives from a lack of incentivisation within the HRM system. In 60% of OECD member countries, as well as in Kazakhstan, and while mobility is a possibility, it is not encouraged nor recommended. However, most OECD member countries seek to promote and facilitate mobility (Figure 3.12). This promotion is mostly done through individual learning plans for employees that can include mobility (42% of OECD member countries), transparent mobility opportunities (42%), or by stating mobility is a priority of the public service (31%). In 32% OECD member countries, mobility is even embedded into long-term career planning. Such policies can help use mobility more strategically. In Kazakhstan, mobility is only promoted to enter managerial positions and through financial bonuses. This topic is however not perceived as a priority by decision-makers. Embedding mobility into the Kazakh public service would require, amongst others, managerial support, increased visibility of mobility opportunities, and a dedicated administrative process, ultimately seeking to develop a strategic mobility system (Box 3.1.).
Share of OECD member countries. The answers in red are the answer choices corresponding to the situation in Kazakhstan.
Note: N=36 OECD member countries.
Original survey question: Is there specific strategy/policy that sets out the expectations/objectives regarding mobility in the public service?
Source: OECD (2022), Survey on Public Service Leadership and Capability, OECD (2024) Survey on Public Service Leadership and Capability of Kazakhstan
Source: OECD (2023), Public Employment and Management 2023: Towards a More Flexible Public Service, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/5b378e11-en.
3.4.2. Establishing flexible working arrangements
As part of its principle on mobility and adaptability, the OECD Recommendation on Public Service Leadership and Capability recognises the need to make available adaptable and remote working options where possible and suited to the needs of the organisation, in order to enhance productivity. The COVID-19 pandemic and its associated lockdowns in parts of the world has been largely changing the way some public servants work. This increased flexibility has been impacting both the way public servants can adapt their working hours and their work location. With the COVID-19 pandemic no longer being considered a public health emergency since May 2023, public administrations have been able to better understand what flexible working arrangement worked, which one did not, for whom and why. Going forward, an increasing number of public administrations are integrating flexible working arrangements into a “new normal” centred around greater individualisation of working modalities.
This “new normal” redefines candidates and current public servants’ expectations of what a job can offer (OECD, 2023[12]). The increasing use of such arrangements in the private sector further reinforces the competition between private and public sector for some talents and positions. Across OECD member countries, implementing flexible working arrangements is playing an increasingly important role in strengthening the attractiveness of the public service. Factors driving the implementation of flexible working arrangements in most OECD countries include improving well-being of employees (94% of OECD member countries), and changing expectations from employees (89%) and from potential candidates (81%) (Figure 3.13). In Kazakhstan, only the improvement of employee well-being and organisational productivity are seen respectively as being of primary and secondary importance in developing flexible working arrangements in the central administration. To this end, an emphasis is put on the use of flexible working arrangements for parents of young children. This partly explains the limited application of flexible working practices in Kazakhstan.
Share of OECD member countries. The answers in red are the answer choices corresponding to the situation in Kazakhstan.
Note: N=36 OECD member countries. The answer in red is the answer choice corresponding to the situation in Kazakhstan.
Original question: Which factors are most important in driving flexible work policies in the central/federal administration?
Source: OECD (2022), Survey on Public Service Leadership and Capability, OECD (2024) Survey on Public Service Leadership and Capability of Kazakhstan
Indeed, and similarly to many OECD member countries, Kazakhstan offers limited time-based flexible working arrangements (Figure 3.14) (OECD, 2023[12]). Compressed working weeks and trust-based working hours are not offered, while part-time only covers pregnant public servants and parents of children under three years old. However, flexitime, remote work part time and remote work full time are available to most public employees, with some exceptions. Applied to a strategic framework, these modalities can improve the capacity of the public administration to attract, retain and engage skills public servants. To this end and considering the relatively low number of public servants actually using these working arrangements, Kazakhstan could more largely encourage their uptake.
Share of OECD member countries. The answers in red are the answer choices corresponding to the situation in Kazakhstan. Unlike any OECD member country, remote work part time is not offered in Kazakhstan.
Note: N=36 OECD member countries. The answer in red is the answer choice corresponding to the situation in Kazakhstan.
Original question: “Which flexible ways of working are available, and to whom?”.
Source: OECD (2022), Survey on Public Service Leadership and Capability, OECD (2024) Survey on Public Service Leadership and Capability of Kazakhstan
Across OECD member countries, flexible working arrangements tend to be defined in majority either at the central or at the ministry level, depending on the arrangement (OECD, 2023[12]). For instance, 56% of OECD member countries organise part-time work at national level, a situation similar as Kazakhstan’s. In most situations, the national level determines regulations that are implemented at the ministerial level, allowing ministries to structure flexible working arrangements within a broader framework. Moreover, these flexible working arrangements remain overwhelmingly options for the employer. In most cases, as in Kazakhstan, these modalities remain options for the employer, without any obligation to introduce them. However, some countries highlight the use of flexible working arrangements as being an enforceable right of the employee. This is particularly true for part-time work in the public administration, being an enforceable right of public employees in 26% of OECD member countries, and an option which refusal needs to be justified in 26%.
3.4.3. Setting transparent compensation
The OECD Recommendation on Public Service Leadership and Capability emphasises the need to determine and offer transparent employment terms and conditions (e.g. compensation, term length, job security, rights and obligations) that appropriately match the functions of the position, taking into account external and internal labour markets. In order to do so, public service salary systems should seek to be built upon equity, competitiveness, performance, relevance and affordability (Marcinkowski, Butnaru and Rabrenović, 2024[14]). Establishing fair and attractive compensation and employment conditions plays a key role in strengthening the attractiveness of the public service and ensuring that it can attract and retain talented individuals in a competitive labour market. Such employment terms and conditions can help attracting and retaining public servants with needed skills and levels of engagement. This is even more so true for hard-to-attract skills, where pay flexibility can help public administrations to attract the profiles it needs.
Similarly to 86% of OECD member countries, the same pay structures, rules and scales apply to all ministries and agencies in the Kazakh central administration (Figure 3.15) (OECD, 2020[5]). However, and as in 69% of OECD member countries, the pay system does not offer managers flexibility to match market-rates of hard-to-attract skill sets. This flexibility can be useful for hard-to-attract profiles who might seek better compensation in the private sector (profiles with digital skills, IT specialists, financial analysts, etc.).
Share of OECD member countries. The answer in red is the answer choice corresponding to the situation in Kazakhstan.
Note: N=35 OECD member countries. The answer in red is the answer choice corresponding to the situation in Kazakhstan.
Original survey question: Which of the following apply to the central/ federal administration pay system?
Source: OECD (2020), Survey on Public Service Leadership and Capability, OECD (2024) Survey on Public Service Leadership and Capability of Kazakhstan
An essential share of compensation in the public service comes from the base salary. Similarly to 71% of OECD member countries, the base salary in the Kazakh central administration is based on the sole job family and grade table (Figure 3.16) (OECD, 2020[5]). Across OECD member countries, other administrations also include collective bargaining (51% of members), regular review and revision of pay levels (40%), and job evaluations (37%) to the calculation of base salary. This job-based approach to salary systems can appear more equitable than an individual-based system where pay is linked to individual competences, which can lead to more complexity and challenges in ensuring fairness and equity.
Share of OECD member countries
Note: N=34 OECD member countries. The answer in red is the answer choice corresponding to the situation in Kazakhstan.
Original survey question: Which of the following are used to determine base salary in the central/ federal administration?
Source: OECD (2020), Survey on Public Service Leadership and Capability, OECD (2024) Survey on Public Service Leadership and Capability of Kazakhstan
Finally, base salary can be complemented to a more or less important share of variable pay, usually based on individual performance. In Kazakhstan, as well as in 46% of OECD member countries, performance bonuses are used in most positions in the central administration (Figure 3.17). Additionally, Kazakh public administration employees of the B category without ongoing disciplinary measures receive a yearly step increase.
Share of OECD member countries. The answers in red are the answer choices corresponding to the situation in Kazakhstan.
Note: N=35 OECD member countries.
Original survey question: Which of the following are used to determine pay increments in the central/ federal administration?
Source: OECD (2020), Survey on Public Service Leadership and Capability, OECD (2024) Survey on Public Service Leadership and Capability of Kazakhstan
The analysis of the survey results and fact-finding interviews suggests some areas to develop further to align with OECD best practice. Deepening the analysis in the follow areas could lead to substantive recommendations that would help to improve civil service capacity, attractiveness and efficiency.
Strengthening systemic capacity for public employment and management
Ensure e-Qyzmet is rolled-out and used by all central administrations by the indicative deadline of mid-2025.
Ensure the analysis of the data collected through e-Qyzmet, to build an HR policy evidence base.
Investing in public service capability
Improve the identification of attractiveness challenges, for instance by analysing the already collected and aggregated number of applicants per opening.
Develop proactive recruitment practices, such as building an employer brand, participating in career fairs and events, or employing headhunting practices for hard-to-attract talent.
Ensure that selection criteria are accurately assessing the skills needed for the job.
Formalise performance assessment by defining a whole-of-government performance assessment process.
Reinforcing flexibility in the public service
Expand the type of existing mobility tools used in the central administration to provide more professional opportunities to public servants and address different organisational needs.
Incentivise strategic mobility by providing managerial support, increased visibility of mobility opportunities, and developing a dedicated administrative process.
Identify factors driving the implementation of flexible working arrangements, and ensure they align with candidates’ and employees’ expectations.
References
[14] Marcinkowski, L., A. Butnaru and A. Rabrenović (2024), “Salary systems in public administration and their reforms: Guidance for SIGMA partners”, SIGMA Papers, No. 71, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/8f08a005-en.
[2] OECD (2024), Survey on Public Service Leadership and Capability.
[12] OECD (2023), Public Employment and Management 2023: Towards a More Flexible Public Service, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/5b378e11-en.
[8] OECD (2023), “Strengthening the attractiveness of the public service in France: Towards a territorial approach”, OECD Public Governance Policy Papers, No. 28, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/ab9ebe85-en.
[13] OECD (2022), Survey on Public Service Leadership and Capability.
[9] OECD (2021), Public Employment and Management 2021: The Future of the Public Service, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/938f0d65-en.
[5] OECD (2020), Survey on Public Service Leadership and Capability.
[1] OECD (2018), Benchmarking Civil Service Reform in Kazakhstan, OECD Public Governance Reviews, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264288096-en.
[4] OECD (forthcoming), OECD Survey on the Composition of the Workforce in Central/Federal Governments.
[3] OECD (forthcoming), Survey on Public Service Leadership and Capability.
[7] Republic of Kazakhstan (2024), Decree on the approval of the Concept for the development of the civil service of the Republic of Kazakhstan for 2024-2029.
[6] Republic of Kazakhstan (2021), Concept for the Development of the Public Administration in the Republic of Kazakhstan until 2030.
[10] Republic of Kazakhstan (2021), Report on the implementation of the Action Plan for the implementation of the Concept for the Development of the Public Administration in the Republic of Kazakhstan until 2030.
[11] Treasury Board of Canada (2021), Performance management program for employees, https://www.canada.ca/en/treasury-board-secretariat/services/performance-talent-management/performance-management-program-employees.html.