Problems and Key Issues in Talent Marketplace

“In the case of markets, bad designs can often persist not just because it takes time to discover better ones, but also because there may be lots of market participants with a stake in the status quo and many interests are involved in coordinating any market-wide change.”—Alvin E. Roth

Despite its promise, Talent Marketplace has yet to evolve to realize its full potential. Recent studies have described the Air Force Talent Marketplace’s functionality as “somewhat more market-oriented”¹ and “closer to a digital talent marketplace” but noted that it “does not yet function as a true market.”² While the platform enhances transparency and stakeholder involvement, this chapter addresses the core challenges related to operational execution and technology that must be resolved for Talent Marketplace to function optimally.

The design of Talent Marketplace was intended to balance the art and science of assignment matching. The Air Force Personnel Center Commander, General Brian Kelly, in 2018 defined art as “officer development where a variety of warfighter requirements, special considerations such as join-spouse or Exceptional Family Member Program (EFMP) requests, and individual desires are balanced to help maximize both officer and billet owner satisfaction with solutions sometimes outside of conventional parameters.”³ The science aspect is described as “providing predictability and consistency using defined timelines and rule sets that allow Airmen and families to understand and plug into the process accordingly.”⁴

While the design successfully digitized the existing process onto a new platform to enhance transparency, it failed to address the core intent of the Human Capital Annex vision. The strategy aimed to modernize workforce management in line with present-day research, which indicates that traditional methods of managing people for industrial jobs are inadequate to anticipate and meet an organization’s needs in an information age. It is widely acknowledged that “as technology, speed of operations, and mission flexibility increase, human capital management approaches need to evolve accordingly.”⁵

Although the initial design of the Talent Marketplace wasn’t transformative, General Kelly recognized the importance of an iterative design process, stating, “We are also 100 percent sure we didn’t get it 100 percent right, so we continue to incorporate feedback and make modifications as we go.”⁶ The dynamic and fluid nature of markets necessitates gradual adjustments to meet the evolving needs of the organization and key stakeholders.

However, due to competing digital transformation efforts, the Air Force has not prioritized the evaluation and development of the Talent Marketplace—This is an oversight. The lack of prioritization of Talent Marketplace has led to limited progress over the past three years, with the platform’s advancement taking a backseat to other enterprise initiatives on MyVector, an enterprise solution that aims to support career development and mentoring in the Air Force.

The diversion of resources has resulted in an accumulating backlog of over 300 items, unresolved since the fiscal year 2022.⁷ The backlog items include bug fixes, changes to existing features, and new requirements that have yet to be built. For example, there is a coordination option in Talent Marketplace that needs to be fixed. Currently, it only allows for approval or disapproval of assignment actions, which results in unnecessary rework because it does not allow the user to return or redirect the action. Other items in the backlog involve added capabilities for Officer Assignment Teams (OATs) to pull reports and metrics that gather data from assignment cycle matches. Additionally, there are requests for data automation that adds Personnel Processing Codes and other key information to assignment transactions to reduce errors and delayed reporting.

The backlog continues to grow as Talent Marketplace has become a Total Force platform, resulting in more users and additional requirements to build the desired system capabilities. The absence of prioritization has impacted the overall implementation, wherein iterative design methodologies and feedback loops are not given priority, particularly because of the substantial existing backlog and limited resources. The former Chief of Talent Marketplace attributes the platform becoming a victim of its success due to senior leaders prematurely declaring it as a solution for officer assignments and scaling it too quickly. “We were directed to expand the platform for Total Force assignments when Talent Marketplace was still only a partial solution. Talent Marketplace growth was a priority. However, we did not have the staffing or resources to focus on improving the OAS and scal[ing it] at the same time.”⁸

This misalignment between business growth and strategic resource allocation has left the platform at a basic level of functionality, falling short of fully meeting user needs or evolving. For example, the matching algorithm used in the Talent Marketplace is not working as intended. In one example, when comparing the final assignment matches to the computed ones, the algorithm only achieved approximately a 22 percent match rate, aligning only 22 out of 104 matches.⁹ The algorithm does not account for the unique qualifications of officers or important variables such as positions that must be filled, priority matches for short-tour returnees, or considerations for join-spouse officers.

This has led the OATs to distrust the results, prompting them to manually verify matches using the old process.¹⁰ The decision to employ the deferred acceptance algorithm has been criticized for the absence of evidence-based justification and was noted as a “too-hasty parallel” of the National Resident Matching Program application.¹¹ The faulty algorithm application was acknowledged early on and is listed as one of the many open backlog items.

Another factor leading to the underperformance of the algorithm is a lack of an informed and informative market. Billet owners are not incentivized or compelled to provide detailed job descriptions that clarify the responsibilities, qualifications, and competencies required for each role. Comparatively, there are ineffective mechanisms for officers to convey specific skills, knowledge, and organizational fit for available opportunities other than a member’s comments provided to the OATs. These limitations may result in missed opportunities for billet owners to identify suitable candidates and for officers to align their aspirations with opportunities.

The strong correlation between assignments and retention further exacerbates this misalignment. The 2021 Air Force Exit Survey revealed compelling evidence supporting this link, identifying several Talent Marketplace assignment-related factors influencing members’ decisions to leave the Air Force. Among the top factors influencing exit decisions are job stress, overall job satisfaction, opportunities outside the military, choice of job assignment, and location.¹²

In assessing the shortcomings of the Talent Marketplace, it’s important to consider current national workplace trends. According to Gallup’s 2023 State of the Global Workplace report, 47 percent of employees are actively looking for new jobs with the intention of leaving their current employer, while an additional 52 percent of employees fall under the category of “quiet quitting.”¹³ This group represents a disengaged workforce that remains with their employer but only does the bare minimum, resulting in low productivity and negative impacts on the organization’s bottom line. They are seen as an organization’s “greatest opportunity for growth and change” if proactive measures are taken to address the challenges related to engagement, incentives, and employee well-being.¹⁴

However, the lack of transparency and engagement within the assignment-matching process complicates addressing these challenges. The fundamental principles of the Air Force Officer Assignment System (AFOAS) inherently devalue expressed preferences, as they explicitly prioritize mission needs and an officer’s professional development over the desires of officers and commanders, which can result in an officer receiving an assignment that was not on their ranked assignment preference list.¹⁵ The findings of the 2020 Talent Marketplace Survey draw attention to this disconnect, where survey participants expressed a need for increased transparency regarding how billet owners’ and officers’ preferences are weighted in the matching process.

Respondents also called for a comprehensive explanation regarding the rationale behind the final assignment decisions made by the OATs.¹⁶ The rules and processes that govern the market, including how final matches are made, must be transparent in an internal talent marketplace (ITM). The AFOAS Personnel Delivery Guide offers some guidance, but the ultimate assignment decisions rest with the OATs. If stakeholders do not further understand procedures beyond the current definition of art and science, this decentralized system may lead to different interpretations and execution of the AFOAS.

The challenges of the Talent Marketplace are complex but possible to fix with a clear vision and follow-through. The following chapter will discuss elements of an ideal ITM and identify how organizations are evolving their human capital management strategies.