Q41.
Is there an established, independent, transparent, and objective appointment system for the selection of military personnel at middle and top management level?
41a. Formal process
Score
SCORE: 100/100
Rubric
New Zealand score: 100/100
Score: 0/100
There is no established appointment system for military personnel.
Score: 25/100
There are formal processes in place, but they are regularly undermined by undue influence or inappropriate conduct in the promotion process. The civil service is not involved in the appointment process at all.
Score: 50/100
Appointments do not always apply objective job descriptions and standardised assessment processes, e.g., decisions may be unjustifiable based on objective criteria, or promotion boards may have members from within the chain of command. However, this is not a widespread or common practice.
Score: 75/100
The system for appointment of military personnel at middle and top management applies objective job descriptions and standardised assessment processes, though there is little independent scrutiny being paid to the promotion of senior personnel, e.g., promotion boards may not have independent observers.
Score: 100/100
The system for appointment of military personnel at middle and top management applies objective job descriptions and standardised assessment processes. Promotion boards are open and representatives from other branches of the armed forces are invited and regularly sit on the board. The civil service is involved for very high level ranks.
Assessor Explanation
Assessor Sources
41b. Scrutiny
Score
SCORE: 100/100
Rubric
New Zealand score: 100/100
Score: 0/100
There is no external scrutiny of the appointments of military personnel at middle and top management.
Score: 25/100
Appointments are only superficially audited for high profile positions, and parliament has no involvement.
Score: 50/100
Appointments are externally audited for high profile positions, but this process is not elaborate and may even be superficial. Parliament scrutinises decisions for very high level appointments.
Score: 75/100
Appointments are subject to external scrutiny for high profile positions, but this is not a regular practice. Parliament also scrutinises decisions for very high level appointments.
Score: 100/100
Appointments are subject to external scrutiny for high profile positions, which includes both process audits and a sample of individual promotions. Parliament also scrutinises decisions for very high level appointments.
Assessor Explanation
Assessor Sources
41c. Transparency
Score
SCORE: 50/100
Rubric
New Zealand score: 50/100
Score: 0/100
Little to no information is released about the appointment process.
Score: 50/100
Information on the appointment processis only partially available on websites or to the public and/or may be incomplete with regards to selection criteria.
Score: 100/100
Information on the appointment process is publicly available and includes the selection criteria for each rank.
Assessor Explanation
Assessor Sources
Compare scores by country
Please view this page on a larger screen for the full stats.
Country | 41a. Formal process | 41b. Scrutiny | 41c. Transparency |
---|---|---|---|
Albania | 75 / 100 | 0 / 100 | 100 / 100 |
Algeria | 25 / 100 | 0 / 100 | 0 / 100 |
Angola | 25 / 100 | 0 / 100 | 0 / 100 |
Argentina | 75 / 100 | 0 / 100 | 0 / 100 |
Armenia | 75 / 100 | 0 / 100 | 50 / 100 |
Australia | 75 / 100 | 50 / 100 | 50 / 100 |
Azerbaijan | 25 / 100 | 0 / 100 | 0 / 100 |
Bahrain | 25 / 100 | 0 / 100 | 0 / 100 |
Bangladesh | 100 / 100 | 0 / 100 | 50 / 100 |
Belgium | 75 / 100 | 0 / 100 | 50 / 100 |
Bosnia and Herzegovina | 50 / 100 | 25 / 100 | 50 / 100 |
Botswana | 50 / 100 | 0 / 100 | 0 / 100 |
Brazil | 75 / 100 | 0 / 100 | 50 / 100 |
Burkina Faso | 25 / 100 | 25 / 100 | 0 / 100 |
Cameroon | 0 / 100 | 0 / 100 | 0 / 100 |
Canada | 50 / 100 | 0 / 100 | 0 / 100 |
Chile | 50 / 100 | 0 / 100 | 50 / 100 |
China | 25 / 100 | 0 / 100 | 25 / 100 |
Colombia | 75 / 100 | 75 / 100 | 0 / 100 |
Cote d'Ivoire | 50 / 100 | 25 / 100 | 0 / 100 |
Denmark | 50 / 100 | 25 / 100 | 50 / 100 |
Egypt | 50 / 100 | 0 / 100 | 0 / 100 |
Estonia | 25 / 100 | 25 / 100 | 100 / 100 |
Finland | 75 / 100 | 25 / 100 | 50 / 100 |
France | 75 / 100 | 0 / 100 | 25 / 100 |
Germany | 75 / 100 | 25 / 100 | 0 / 100 |
Ghana | 0 / 100 | 0 / 100 | 0 / 100 |
Greece | 75 / 100 | 0 / 100 | 50 / 100 |
Hungary | 25 / 100 | 25 / 100 | 100 / 100 |
India | 100 / 100 | 25 / 100 | 50 / 100 |
Indonesia | 50 / 100 | 50 / 100 | 50 / 100 |
Iran | 25 / 100 | 25 / 100 | 0 / 100 |
Iraq | 25 / 100 | 0 / 100 | 0 / 100 |
Israel | 75 / 100 | 25 / 100 | 75 / 100 |
Italy | 75 / 100 | 25 / 100 | 100 / 100 |
Japan | 50 / 100 | NEI | 50 / 100 |
Jordan | 25 / 100 | 0 / 100 | 0 / 100 |
Kenya | 25 / 100 | 50 / 100 | 0 / 100 |
Kosovo | 100 / 100 | 0 / 100 | 50 / 100 |
Kuwait | 0 / 100 | 25 / 100 | 0 / 100 |
Latvia | 75 / 100 | 50 / 100 | 50 / 100 |
Lebanon | 25 / 100 | 25 / 100 | 50 / 100 |
Lithuania | 50 / 100 | 25 / 100 | 75 / 100 |
Malaysia | 50 / 100 | 25 / 100 | 0 / 100 |
Mali | 25 / 100 | 0 / 100 | 50 / 100 |
Mexico | 50 / 100 | 25 / 100 | 50 / 100 |
Montenegro | 50 / 100 | 25 / 100 | 50 / 100 |
Morocco | 25 / 100 | 0 / 100 | 0 / 100 |
Myanmar | 25 / 100 | 25 / 100 | 0 / 100 |
Netherlands | 75 / 100 | 25 / 100 | 50 / 100 |
New Zealand | 100 / 100 | 100 / 100 | 50 / 100 |
Niger | 75 / 100 | 0 / 100 | 0 / 100 |
Nigeria | 25 / 100 | 25 / 100 | 50 / 100 |
North Macedonia | 100 / 100 | 25 / 100 | 50 / 100 |
Norway | 75 / 100 | 25 / 100 | 100 / 100 |
Oman | 25 / 100 | 0 / 100 | 0 / 100 |
Palestine | 0 / 100 | 0 / 100 | 25 / 100 |
Philippines | 25 / 100 | 50 / 100 | 0 / 100 |
Poland | 25 / 100 | 0 / 100 | 50 / 100 |
Portugal | 50 / 100 | 25 / 100 | 50 / 100 |
Qatar | 0 / 100 | 0 / 100 | 0 / 100 |
Russia | 50 / 100 | 0 / 100 | 25 / 100 |
Saudi Arabia | 0 / 100 | 0 / 100 | 0 / 100 |
Serbia | 25 / 100 | 0 / 100 | 50 / 100 |
Singapore | 100 / 100 | 25 / 100 | 25 / 100 |
South Africa | 25 / 100 | 0 / 100 | 50 / 100 |
South Korea | 75 / 100 | 75 / 100 | 50 / 100 |
South Sudan | 25 / 100 | 0 / 100 | 25 / 100 |
Spain | 50 / 100 | 25 / 100 | 100 / 100 |
Sudan | 0 / 100 | 0 / 100 | 0 / 100 |
Sweden | 100 / 100 | 25 / 100 | 50 / 100 |
Switzerland | 100 / 100 | 75 / 100 | 75 / 100 |
Taiwan | 75 / 100 | 25 / 100 | 25 / 100 |
Tanzania | 50 / 100 | 25 / 100 | 50 / 100 |
Thailand | 25 / 100 | 0 / 100 | 0 / 100 |
Tunisia | 75 / 100 | 0 / 100 | 0 / 100 |
Turkey | 50 / 100 | 0 / 100 | 25 / 100 |
Uganda | 50 / 100 | 0 / 100 | 0 / 100 |
Ukraine | 75 / 100 | 0 / 100 | 50 / 100 |
United Arab Emirates | 25 / 100 | 0 / 100 | 50 / 100 |
United Kingdom | 100 / 100 | 75 / 100 | 100 / 100 |
United States | 75 / 100 | 25 / 100 | 100 / 100 |
Venezuela | 25 / 100 | 0 / 100 | 0 / 100 |
Zimbabwe | 25 / 100 | 0 / 100 | 0 / 100 |