In today's digital age, bias has a way of rearing its ugly head
Candidates with ‘European-sounding’ names have a 75% higher likelihood of securing an interview than those with ‘Asian-sounding’ names. In fact, interview bias is one of HR’s most growing areas of concern – an yet one they seem unsure of how to approach. According to one CEO, it’s a lack of training and awareness that’s causing the chaos.
Read more: McDonald's taps on Meta's Workplace to boost employee experience
“Interviewing is one of the most crucial elements from a job or decision making standpoint,” Sanjoe Jose, founder and CEO of TalView, told HRD. “However, it's also a space which is highly known today. Most interviewers receive little training on how to do interviews, and most organizations do not have a formal interview guideline or even review of the interviewing quality at the organization. As such, while it's being used to make the most important decisions, which is whom to hire, whom to promote, whom to retain, a lot of those decisions are based on interviews as a form of assessment. It's completely ignored by most organizations. That’s a major challenge which we see in the industry today.”
Bias in hiring, and in the recruitment process overall, is a major bugbear for employers. In today’s digital age, where everything is conducted online, bias has a way of rearing its ugly head. Whether it’s the questions you’re asking or the way you’re asking them, it’s important to identify and eradicate bias – before your reputation is tarnished.
“Bias in hiring has been a challenge for most organizations for many decades, especially with globalization and with people from different cultures coming together with people of different backgrounds starting to work together,” added Jose. “A lot of limitations which we have as humans, come in the way of making objective decisions in hiring - it starts with mitigating any form of bias and generating awareness. That's the first step. Second is a very thorough review on what is acceptable and what's not acceptable when it comes to the kind of questions you ask in an interview.
“Third, and probably the most impactful measure, is about doing periodic review of how interviews are done within your organizations.”
To tattoo or not to tattoo?
And it’s not just name-based bias that’s causing havoc in HR – a surge of tattoo-based discrimination has been uncovered in organizations. A report from LinkedIn found that while 60% of recruitment professionals believe a bias against tattoos and physical image has decreased over the years, nine out of ten employers think a candidate’s tattoos could limit their career progression.
“With almost a fifth of adults currently estimated as having a tattoo, the current attitude around visible tattoos and physical image means that businesses and recruiters could be missing out on top talent,” added LinkedIn’s Rebecca Drew. “Despite this, it’s encouraging to see that so many talent professionals are taking active steps to help reduce this bias and encourage more self-expression in the workplace.
Read more: ‘People shouldn’t have to look to their employers to receive basic human rights’
“As we continue to see AI tools incorporated into hiring processes, we hope this will help recruiters remove some of the human bias from the process and focus on judging candidate potential against the most important things.”
