Reducing Bias in Hiring
A workplace that values all opinions and employees regardless of outside factors like race, gender, and sexuality is an extremely enviable environment, for both employees and supervisors. After all, most people like knowing that their thoughts and feelings are taken into consideration without the feeling of being underrepresented. Some companies might be losing out on valuable experiences and employees by consistently overlooking underrepresented populations through gatekeeper bias in hiring.
Gatekeeper bias occurs when the decision maker in the hiring process bases their decision on their perceived preferences of their existing employees that the new hire would be working with (Bauges & Fordyce-Ruff, 2019). An audit study of race and employee hiring behaviors found that white applicants were called back approximately 50% more often in job recruitment stages than African-American applicants, regardless of occupation or industry (Correll & Benard, 2006). A similar study found that participants required African-American applicants to show more leadership skills than their white counterparts (Biernat & Kobrynowicz, 1997). These studies show certain racist biases in the hiring process, discriminatory behavior informed by what some researchers term “modern racism”, and a shift social norms that makes explicit expression of prejudice less seen yet still covert (Bendick & Nunez, 2011).
A key component in this process is that employers and hires may not even be able to process their own racism, as they filter all applicants through their own biases and stereotypes, a seemingly natural process to them. With numerous studies continuously heralding the benefits of a diverse workplace such as making recruiting easier, avoiding high employee turnover, and increasing employee productivity (Bauges & Fordyce-Ruff, 2019), the time has arrived for employers to set aside their own pride and stereotypical views to create a fairer and more equitable hiring environment. The following suggestions are a few of many steps that employers can take to create that environment.
The first important step is for employers to be aware of the implicit biases they possess. It may be difficult for people to recognize and admit that they categorize people in life based on their appearances, history or culture-conforming attributes, but until they do, they will never completely win the battle against implicit biases. A good first step in reducing implicit biases would be to have hiring management take implicit bias tests and training, so that they may be aware of the biases they are holding onto and subsequently let them go.
Employers should consider if they are careful when making hiring decisions that you and your associates are not putting too much weight on “gut-feelings” or “likeability”, which are two hard to define characteristics that allow partiality to enter the hiring process. These feelings are usually just implicit biases in disguise. For example, an employer might be interviewing a candidate with a different cultural background and experiences a bad “gut feeling” perhaps an individual who was raised in a different culture than the employer was triggered a bad “gut feeling” or suggesting the candidate won’t “fit in” at the company, even though they might be the best candidate for the job. but they could still clearly be the best candidate for the job. Consider adding a separate element to the hiring process focused around working in groups and interpersonal interactions if those are key components of the job description rather than relying on your own instincts.
Many employers also find it helpful to have clearly defined rubrics for the hiring process. Creating a system for the hiring process creates a great environment for selecting the best qualified candidate for the job, without letting other biases seep into the process. Consistently refer to the job description when asking questions and stay on task. Some may find it useful to assign a numerical value to how well a potential employee’s answer demonstrates their ability to perform specific job tasks.
One of the most simple fixes for bias in the hiring process is just to diversify the hiring panel. This could be as simple as having multiple different employees in the workplace responsible for giving feedback on potential new hires. Having candidates meet with current employees one on one will add numerous different perspectives on the potential hires, though a larger group meeting format may work as well. Ensure the hiring panel consists of individuals with different genders, cultures, and ages. While this may not mean every employee has an equal say in the hiring process, it will ensure that the feedback going into the process of hiring is varied and more likely to be free from individual biases.
Since studies about race and racism in the workplace have taken place, many corporations have taken leaps and bounds to ensure they provide a solid, healthy environment for their minority employees, but they still may be overlooking many qualified, solid candidates throughout the hiring process because of implicit biases in management teams. As studies have shown, discrimination in hiring does not stop once an employee is turned away from a job. The biases in the hiring process can carry over to the post-hiring process creating biased results for like important workplace situations like in areas including performance evaluations, raises, promotions, and terminations (Bendick & Nunez, 2011). The fate of an employee’s post-hiring workplace experience hangs in the balance when minimizing implicit biases in management. This means it is equally important to follow structures for both the hiring and post-hiring process that will provide the best employee for the position. This can be accomplished through means like by having management take implicit bias tests and training, not relying on “gut-feeling” in the hiring process, creating clearly defined rubrics for the hiring process, and diversifying hiring panels. Creating a fair environment for hiring by reducing implicit biases benefits everyone in the workplace, from new hires, old current employees, potential candidates, management, and the hiring team. all the way to the hiring team and management.
If your team is interested in learning more about best hiring practices, adverse impact, unfairness, differential validity or additional consultation services, please contact us at info@legacycrg.com or fill out the form below. We look forward to working with your team.
References:
Bendick, Marc & Nunes, Ana. (2011). Developing the Research Basis for Controlling Bias in Hiring. Journal of Social Issues. 68. 238-262. 10.1111/j.1540-4560.2012.01747.x.
Correll, S.J., & Benard, S. (2006). Gender and Racial Bias in Hiring.
Bauges, Brenda M. and Fordyce-Ruff, Tenielle. (2019). Avoiding Gatekeeper Bias in Hiring Decisions. Concordia University School of Law. 154.
Natasha Hamlin, LMFT
Micah Dalton