Recruitment

Why refreshing talent management policies with a diversity and inclusion lens is important

We've been working with many clients to hard-wire diversity and inclusion in talent policies.  

We systematically review each policy to identify ways to minimise the potential for unconscious bias, attract a diverse candidate pool, and actively seek out leadership candidates with an inclusion competency.

This type of review is important because unconscious biases in organisational processes, systems and cultures often work against creating a level, objective foundation for decision-making. 

Unconscious biases in organisational processes, systems and cultures often work against creating a level, objective foundation for decision-making.

Unconscious biases in organisational processes, systems and cultures often work against creating a level, objective foundation for decision-making.

While we all like to think we recruit the ‘right person for the role’ solely on merit, the reality is that recruitment and promotion processes can lead to what we call an 'orthodoxy of talent' because of the impact of affinity bias and confirmation bias, among other types of unconscious bias.

Unconscious bias plays out in a number of ways. It's particularly challenging because this type of bias is implicit or unconscious - that is, we're often not aware of it.

And while it's important to educate leaders on ways they can personally challenge unconscious bias through leadership development programs, it's equally important to review existing policies and practices. Making these types of changes strengthens the opportunity for positive cultural change. As Harvard professor and behavioral economist Iris Bohnet explains, '...it’s easier to change your processes than your people'.

When we review policies, we often find that job descriptions capture the attention of, and funnel in, people who think and act in a particular way. Particular words stereotypically associated with men or women (for example, ‘dominant’, ‘determined’, ‘loyal’) influence who applies. As does stating that a role must be done full time rather than flexibly.

Resumes may be put aside because of experience gaps, such as taking time out of the workforce to raise a family.

The gender of the people currently doing the role will influence who is seen as most suitable.

Interviews that don’t follow a structured question template leave room for affinity bias (our preference for people like us) to creep in. And candidates who don’t conform to stereotypes will be less likely to be hired and promoted.

It’s because of these imbalances and biases, identified in many global studies, that we recommend organisations refresh talent management policies to reduce the potential for unconscious bias and actively seek diversity in talent pipelines.

We recently helped one large organisation in the infrastructure sector fine-tune its policies. While the firm has traditionally had a strong and progressive commitment to diversity, we found several opportunities to improve their policies to avoid unconscious biases narrowing their talent pool. In the case study below, we share some recommendations we made.

The upside for the organisation is that leaders are now more likely to attract talented people from diverse backgrounds, and keep them.

We found several opportunities to increase the use of inclusive language and avoid unconscious biases narrowing the talent pool.

Diversity Partners Case Study: Minimising bias in recruitment and HR processes / policies

Client industry: Infrastructure

The brief:

Analyse job descriptions, job advertisements and a wide range of people policies to identify potential areas of bias, increase the use of inclusive language, and widen the pool of potential candidates both applying for roles and successfully being hired.

The outcome:  

The review of both the job description template, as well as ‘live’ leadership roles being advertised online, identified a number of areas where bias could be reduced. Some of our findings included:

·       Inconsistent use of the job description template by recruiting managers, (which can lead to subjective hiring decisions for ‘cultural fit’ against the firm’s culture, skill and experience).

·       A heavy focus on technical capability in the majority of advertised leadership roles, without transparency on what weighting would be given to these skills over relationship or leadership skills (e.g. prerequisite, preferred or critical). This could potentially strike out good talent if hiring managers aren’t clear on the balance.

·       Only some job descriptions included an explicit mention of the company’s commitment to diversity, as well as the requirement of leaders to foster inclusion in their teams. We recommended this be added to all job descriptions, as well as mention of the firm’s commitment to a flexible working environment.

·       Wording such as ‘you’ll be required to manage a busy schedule and have to accommodate change and adjust arrangements accordingly’ was repeated in several position descriptions. This wording could deter candidates who have caring responsibilities or other out-of-work requirements from applying. Our recommendation was to modify wording to include a reference to flexible working options.

·       Several instances of gendered language in job descriptions, including terms such as ‘The role will require agility and the ability to think and perform based on competing demands and pressures’. An alternative was recommended: ‘The role will require agility in thinking to manage various elements such as timelines, budgets and stakeholder relationships’.

These are just a few of the recommendations we made to improve the use of inclusive language and reduce the potential for unconscious bias across all talent management policies.

If you’d like us to undertake a review of your policies, drawing on our learning from many recent client engagements and global best practice, please call us or email info@diversitypartners.com.au to talk through your needs. 

Are you really recruiting the best person for the job? Challenging unconscious bias

We know leaders mean well when they share with us that they always hire the ‘best person for the job’.

And we know it can be unsettling when they learn that there are all sorts of hidden biases – unconscious biases – that can impact our decision-making about who is the best person for the job, among many other decisions we make everyday in business.

There’s now extensive research from the fields of business psychology and neuroscience to show we are all biased, even though we like to think that we always apply logic and reason in our decision-making. The reality is we all have these biases so ingrained we hardly notice them.

That’s why we find it useful in our consulting work to highlight a range of cognitive biases that impact decision-making and inhibit diversity progress. It’s powerful when the examples come from leaders in our workshops, particularly when they reflect on what perspectives may have been missed when making key decisions due to affinity bias, groupthink, and sunflower bias among others.

We also draw on research like the study by Yale University social psychologist, John Bargh, in which subjects primed with the concept of the 'elderly' while doing a simple task later walked more slowly when leaving the experiment than subjects in the control group who read words that were not related to the elderly.

Having bias isn’t bad – it’s natural. We naturally gravitate to people who are like us – it’s called affinity bias – particularly in social situations. We like to have our views confirmed rather than challenged (confirmation bias) and groups in the workplace have a tendency to align with the views of leaders, especially when the boss speaks up first (sunflower management).

Having bias isn’t bad - it’s natural.

But this becomes a problem in the workplace when subtle biases and stereotypes associated with different demographic groups lead us to overlook or unintentionally exclude some people and groups in the workplace.

We've compiled some practical tips for leaders to reduce the potential for unconscious bias when recruiting and ensure decision-making is genuinely fair and objective.

We've framed these tips as ‘when-then’ statements because psychologists have shown that having a specific and tangible intention plan is more likely to lead to behavioural change. Put simply, it's about creating 'instant habits' to help us reach our goals. In her 2014 HBR Spotlight article, social psychologist Heidi Grant says that if-then planning increases the likelihood of individuals reaching their goals by 300%.

By making ourselves aware of the possibility for bias, and by taking a simple action, we can reduce (and in some cases even eliminate) unconscious bias.

Our team has compiled a few tips:

When you’re preparing your job advertisement, then …

  • Proof read your role advertisements with a diversity lens to ensure the language is inclusive. It’s important that descriptions have a mix of words associated with male and female characteristics to attract a diverse talent pool. Words such as 'dominant' and 'competitive' have a masculine connotation'; words such as 'committed', 'interpersonal' have a feminine connotation.

When you’re briefing a recruiter or agency, then …

  • Share your expectation of receiving the broadest possible candidate pool. Ask recruiters to provide you with gender-balanced and culturally diverse shortlists for management roles. Explain that you would like them to focus on seeking a range of diverse skills and experience.

When you’re preparing to shortlist candidates, then …

  • Consider receiving the shortlisted CVs as 'blind CVs' with references to gender, age, disability and ethnicity removed. This will ensure you assess each candidate fairly against the requirements of the role and have a diverse mix of talent in your candidate pool.
  • Ask candidates if they have any special requirements for the interview (these may include access requirements to the interview premises, resource or support requirements).

When you’re setting up a selection panel, then …

  • Ensure you ask a diverse group of leaders to sit on the panel, including at least one male and female representative of equal decision making authority. Train those leaders to recognise unconscious biases and encourage them to provide feedback to each other.

When you’re interviewing, then …

  • Focus on the candidate’s skills, experience and knowledge.
  • Use competency-based questions that relate to the inherent role requirements and ensure everyone is assessed on the same questions.
  • Give every candidate the same amount of time so they have equal opportunity to demonstrate their strengths.
  • Appreciate benefits of diversity of thought in team make up.
  • Give adequate time to the process. Stress, time pressures, and cognitive overload can exacerbate our unconscious biases.

And a final crucial point …

  • When finalising the remuneration package, ensure there is no gender pay inequality.

If you'd like to know more about our programs to help reduce bias in decision-making, please call us on 0429 185 700 or email info@diversitypartners.com.au

 

Cognitive biases muddy our decision making. We rely too heavily on intuitive, automatic judgements, and even when we try to use reason, our logic is often lazy or flawed.
— Jack B. Soll, Katherine L. Milkman, and John W. Payne, 'Outsmart Your Own Biases', Harvard Business Review, May 2015