How We Overcame Bias in Pursue of an Inclusive Recruitment
Building a diverse and inclusive team is socially responsible and highly important when working with #ESG but also a smart business decision. However, we know that good intentions are not enough - it takes a systematic approach to address the #unconsciousbias in the hiring process.
As a small startup based in Copenhagen, we have faced challenges and frustrations in the area of inclusion, e.g. cultural collaboration and high-performance teams. As always, we want to share our experience and the valuable lessons that we learned with our clients. So, let us take you through our step-by-step process for reducing bias in hiring, with some practical advice along the way.
Step 1: Anonymize Applicants
We began by anonymising applicants as much as possible, asking them to remove their name, picture, address, and age from their application. We refrained from looking up their profiles on social media to avoid any potential biases.
Step 2: Screen for Minimum Requirements
After receiving 110 applications, we screened out all applicants who did not meet the minimum requirements, especially anonymising as we asked. This left us with a more manageable pool of candidates.
Step 3: Assess Candidates on Defined Criteria
We assessed all candidates based on four soft skills and four hard skills, allowing us to score and narrow down the pool of candidates.
However, assessing qualifications for a student position based on CVs is still subjective and challenging. It is fair to assume that our candidates have been met with inequality in their short time in the workplace, so how do we give everybody a fair chance? For a senior position, you will have more experience in verifying qualifications - but it is still unequal. And how do you measure potential without being subjective about it?
The first step, however, is to evaluate each candidate fairly based on their qualifications, experience, and skills and avoid making assumptions based on gender, age, or other personal characteristics. This step was time-consuming and resource-intensive, but it led us to step 4, which was valuable besides being aware of subjective assessments.
Step 4: Acid Test Selected Qualifications
We acid-tested the selected qualifications to ensure they were relevant to the role we were hiring for. We asked ourselves if specific qualifications were more important than others and whether they should be weighted accordingly. This step required experience and judgment related to our business to narrow down the pool, but assessing candidates fairly and effectively was crucial. Being mindful of potential biases is essential because hiring highly relies on judgement. By noticing which criteria you use to shortcut your list, you can discover potential unconscious bias or be more aware of essential qualifications for the next hire to put in the job-add or screening process.
Step 5: Semi-Structured Interviews
Next, we invited 4-6 candidates to a semi-structured interview, where the same interviewer asked everyone the same questions. To reduce bias, we held the conversation without a camera. By default, we are all trained to recognise and avoid bias, and we highly recommend that your hiring employees are also trained. We also recorded the interview questions and answers (with the permission of the candidates, of course) so that we could later go back to the recordings and dive into detail about what the candidates answered. This was important to us because when working with biases, emotional impressions last longer than our memory of what was exactly said- so we could end up liking a candidate because they appeal to our biases more, as opposed to their qualifications.
Step 6: Final Anonymous Interview
After the semi-structured interview, we selected the top two candidates and invited them to a final anonymous interview with our CEO, Helene. This interview had a different format with a few short clarifying questions. However, both candidates were asked the same questions, and the camera was still off.
Step 7: Find out what your choice relies on
We made the final decision based on our assessments of the candidate's qualifications, performance, and culture add to the team.
When you hear yourself vote for a candidate with "I think…" or "I feel…" then check yourself. Is it a gut feeling? Where does your opinion originate from?
Step 8: Assess Culture Add
Finally, we assessed "culture add" regarding personality and professional knowledge, as we believe that hiring for diversity is not about producing Minions but rather a high-performing team. We decided that culture add was the most important qualification for us among equally qualified candidates. However, it was challenging. It required that we reflected and didn't go on autopilot and gut feelings but made a decision that was right for our business strategy. It required thoughtful moves.
What did we learn
With in-depth reflections on how hard it is to asses qualifications and potentials based on CVs, the last step in the hiring process is the most challenging. In this step, hiring managers must be mindful and assess candidates as equal - this is where it often goes wrong when hiring managers have yet to be trained. They find excuses that hide a bias. Therefore we recommend being very conscious of the tipping point - aka what you chose your candidate on.
We understand that some clients may ask if it's acceptable to select a candidate based on their gender or other diversity criteria. When the goal is to increase diversity, selecting a candidate who helps achieve that goal is perfectly acceptable. Actually, this is what needs to be done to achieve targets and equity.
We are putting the last hands on a Tool for diversity in leadership and a white paper for overcoming resistance. But we also urge our clients to know that #inclusion comes before #diversity. Therefore, we encourage you to read our whitepaper on Inclusive Leadership and contact us at hello@diversityfactor if we can assist your organisation. We tailor-make all our solutions in collaboration with you so they are unique and context relevant. We will be more than happy to help you build an environment where everybody thrives.
What to be mindful of:
The point is not to remove bias. We neither can nor must. We have to become familiar with our own unconscious biases and navigate around them. All in all, we must make decisions with open eyes and make conscious choices. We have to deal with conditions in a CV in a larger context - as long as we do not exclude candidates based on unconscious bias.
When you reduce bias and anonymise candidates in various ways, you also remove a significant basis for normal gut feelings that draw on experience, good and bad. It can strengthen the focus on other matters because you must decide based on something. Therefore, be conscious to the end so that the focus is on what is essential.
A bias-reduced process is quickly counter-mined, so sticking to a process with shutters turned on in the individual steps is vital. Outside of agreed procedures, conversations about the candidates with those involved in the hiring process create bias. It does the same if some have information that others do not from getting involved in processes they shouldn't. Overall, each individual in the process should take a stand-alone, preferably written down, after which it can be discussed altogether.
We recommend ensuring that the process and system can handle such requirements to eliminate bias. Alternatively, a fair process with #bias-blockers can be ensured by having different people in the process
Although some bias might need to ben uncovered if it poses as an obstacle to hiring talent, the information behind it may be necessary. If the job requires you to be a resident within reasonable transport time, for example, you must ensure you get the relevant knowledge.