[PJamo]

Not to say that there isn't necessarily an obvious candidate or 2 inside the organisations and from otside this looks like a wholly inefficient exercise but..........................................

When it comes to employment in publicly-funded bodies there seems to (in general) be a fairly broad issue with the efficiency with which posts are filled.

Despite the obvious (and some would argue) most deserving candidate being right there on payroll already, oftentimes when the 'new' post is in some way different from that which it replaces (maybe a change or responsibility, grading - or changes of what responsibility means for the grading compared to the last time the job was appointed, or contracted hours) it will be externally advertised.

You only have to look at recruitment in other publicly funded bodies to see examples of posts being advertised with one very obvious candidate sitting right there, often already doing the job that is being advertised. The post will still have to be advertised externally, allowing for candidates from far and wide, and the 'internal' candidate will still have to go through the exact same application and recruitment process as everyone else, despite the actual people who will be responsible for appointing to the role having worked with them for some time by that stage.

Does it see fair to the person already in position? No.

Does it seem like a waste of time and resources? Yes.

Can it be argued that somebody 'external' didn't get a fair shot? No.

When it's public funds I think that last line's the key decider for how these things play out.