[The Editors' Verdict] How the Citizen Recommendation System Can Avoid Becoming a Public Spectacle

The public response to the "citizen recommendation system," which seeks to have high-ranking government official candidates nominated by the public, has been as enthusiastic as expected. Reportedly, 10,324 recommendations were received in just one day. The purpose of the citizen recommendation system is to avoid various personnel controversies such as closed-door appointments or parachute appointments, and to pursue a more open and transparent personnel process. In that it is a personnel system with direct citizen participation, it can be considered groundbreaking.

Despite good intentions, the citizen recommendation system is fundamentally a form of populism. The most ideal outcome of this system is that the person with the most recommendations becomes a high-ranking official?not necessarily the person most capable for the job. In this sense, success for the citizen recommendation system could just as easily become its failure. While transparency is an important value in policy, it cannot be the goal in itself. At the final stages of recruitment, the need for privacy protection and political judgment arises. Inevitably, some closed-door processes will occur. The issue of accountability in the event of a personnel failure is also a risk. Previous administrations, including those of Roh Moo-hyun and Moon Jae-in, implemented similar systems but did not announce any meaningful results.

There are also more practical issues. The candidate recommendation period runs for one week starting from the 10th. Simple calculations suggest that the total number of submissions could exceed 70,000. It is virtually impossible to thoroughly review each submission one by one. It remains unclear who will be screened out and by what standards during this process.

The number of companies adopting artificial intelligence in their recruitment processes is increasing. Photo by Getty Images Bank

If the likelihood of failure is high either way, a new kind of failure may be preferable. The new administration has made "becoming one of the world's top three AI powers" a core national agenda. It has even decided to establish the position of "Chief AI Officer (Chief of AI Future Planning)" in the presidential office. Why not take this opportunity to utilize AI? Many companies are already using AI in their recruitment processes to efficiently handle large volumes of paperwork. By leveraging AI, tens of thousands of nominees could be quickly and consistently screened in the first round. This would help eliminate human subjectivity and bias. It would also neutralize criticisms such as "Wasn't a pre-selected candidate chosen?" or "Was a particular person excluded from the outset?" Of course, it is true that subjectivity and bias may already be embedded in the initial screening criteria themselves. However, by transparently disclosing those criteria, at least a minimum level of legitimacy can be secured.

If the system works properly, criticism of populism will naturally disappear. This would mean the creation of a citizen participation personnel system that actually functions, rather than existing only in form. This is something previous administrations were unable to achieve. In addition, the government could gain a reputation as a leading administration actively incorporating AI into its operations. Its credibility would also rise as a government that actually delivers on its AI-related promises.

Even failure would not be a bad outcome. The government would be able to directly experience what it means to introduce AI at the national level, as well as the practical limitations and risks involved. While the government would bear some of the costs of failure, citizens and businesses observing the process would gain a "free notebook of mistakes." It would become a vivid case study of why AI projects fail and what to watch out for. This could be an opportunity for the new administration to demonstrate both its interest in and sincerity about AI. I, too, as an ordinary citizen, "recommend" trying out the integration of AI into the citizen recommendation system.