Shortlisting in ORC

How Efficient is Your Recruitment Shortlisting?

Author: Esther Hess, Talent Management Practice Lead, Namos Solutions

Introduction – Extending ORC

Oracle Recruitment Cloud (ORC) is one of the most capable recruitment platforms available today. It is recognised by Gartner as a leader in its space sitting in the top-right corner of Gartner’s Magic Quadrant matrix.

However, platforms like this can’t be all things to all people. And there will inevitably be scenarios where a relatively niche process doesn’t quite fit into Oracle’s existing structure. That’s why Oracle provides tools like APEX and VBCS, which allow organisations to extend the capabilities of the core functionality to encompass these specific instances.

At #TeamNamos, this is exactly what we’ve done, and our brilliant APEX team have built the Shortlisting extension application, which is specifically design for qualitative, panel-based recruitment shortlisting, which is often in use in Higher Education, Public Sector, and additionally, senior positions in potentially any industry.

Let’s take a closer look…

What We’ve Seen

In organisations where panel-based shortlisting is a requirement, with Higher Education being a great example, we’ve consistently seen the same pattern: the shortlisting process requires more than one person to submit scores and decisions then taken based on these scores. This often results in this process taking place outside the recruitment system.

It often looks like this:

  • Shortlisting is done on Spreadsheets or Word documents.
  • Notes are handwritten or stored in personal drives.
  • Emails fly back and forth between panel members.
  • File names like: FINAL_FINAL_REC_SHORTLIST_V7.xlsx

The result? A fragmented process with no single source of truth, difficulties auditing, difficulties justifying decisions, and general inefficiencies.

What the Namos Shortlisting App Does

The first thing to note, is that the Shortlisting App is fully embedded into Oracle Recruiting Cloud (ORC). Unlike using a third-party tool, it appears as a tile within HCM, and uses the same look and feel as the rest of the platform. Users complete the shortlisting process without needing to leave the system.

From the panellist’s perspective, it’s designed to be as straightforward as possible. They log into HCM as usual, open the shortlisting tile, and everything they need is there. No need to go digging through folders hunting down requisitions or candidate details. In one location they can:

  • View what needs to be completed
  • Review each candidate’s application responses
  • See any relevant qualifications or documents
  • Input scores and decisions directly

Once scoring is complete, everything that’s been entered flows through to a centralised view for the Recruitment team. Instead of collating files manually or chasing scores over email, the recruitment leads can:

  • See all panel members’ scores in one place
  • Compare and rank candidates based on aggregated results
  • Track decisions and progress candidates within ORC automatically

Because the entire process happens within the system, everything is trackable, auditable and defensible, enabling the recruitment team and panellists to confidently justify their decisions. Candidate data is also anonymised, eliminating the risk of unconscious bias.

Evolved to be Generic

We didn’t set out to build a product. We set out to solve a problem. Whilst working with multiple universities, we found that they either wanted to move to ORC but could not due to the missing shortlisting functionality, or they were using ORC but were conducting their shortlisting offline.

We began to notice that this wasn’t a unique situation and in many other organisations we saw a wide mix of approaches, some using 3rd party tools, others relying on spreadsheets or manual workarounds. But the result was usually the same, scores scattered, decision making fragmented, and auditability compromised.

We built the first version of the shortlisting app, and this initial solution led to another implementation at a second university, and then a third. We’re now working with other organisations outside of the Higher Education sector, to implement the shortlisting solution. Each new case gave us the opportunity to refine the design and make it more suitable for a broader audience. Over time, we intentionally evolved the application to make it a reusable, generic product, now suitable for any organisation that relies on panel-based shortlisting. And as it is built in APEX, customers still have the flexibility to add customisations, if needed.

Where does AI fit in (And Where Doesn’t It)?

With Oracle now rolling out AI features to support recruitment processes, it’s a fair question: Can’t AI just do the shortlisting?

In many cases, yes. For high-volume recruitment here you’re filtering hundreds of applications based on clear-cut criteria, AI can be a huge help. It’s fast, scalable, and good at identifying specific elements within multiple documents.

But when it comes to panel-based shortlisting, the process changes.

Panellists are often reviewing detailed written responses to pre-screening questions, answers that reflect a candidate’s particular experience, judgment and approach. A Panellist’s decision must be defensible, and the entire process is highly qualitative.

The shortlisting app facilitates this qualitative environment, allowing panellists to use their skills and judgement in an efficient manner, and then seamlessly collate these scores into a central hub.

Conclusion

Our experience working with Higher Education institutions in the UK, highlighted the need for seamless processes when conducting detailed, qualitative, panel-based shortlisting. We evolved an APEX application, that was built for one specific university, into a broad integrated application, suitable for any organisation that requires significant screening processes, panel-based decisions, auditability, and structure.

Because the Namos Shortlisting App is built in Oracle APEX, the only ongoing cost is the database uptime.

Chasing spreadsheets, emailing scores, using too much of panellist’s time? If this sounds familiar, we are here to talk. Don’t be afraid to get in touch.