Bias

This behaviour remains common despite abundant technological progress that allows any HR staff to conduct tests accurately. Unfortunately, such HR staff or companies don’t use the test results as the dominant factor when hiring new employees. They have the “X factor” that they prefer to keep as a secret. This confuses the candidates and wastes much of their time.

What is bias in hiring?

Bias in hiring means using subjectivity, personal preferences, or stereotypes as the biggest factor in recruiting new workers. In this practice, the company prefers accepting candidates who meet their subjective factors despite their lack of technical knowledge and skills. You can still find this fact even in multinational firms, which prefer hiring male over female workers, for instance.

Bias in hiring can occur at various stages of the recruitment process. Some firms deliberately skip moving further to the next stage once they read certain names of the candidates. The other case is when resumes are received from applicants who are older or younger than the desired qualification.

An in-person interview is probably the most popular stage where a hiring bias occurs. During this stage, the HR staff can talk directly to the candidates. They can see how these individuals behave, give gestures, and handle questions. The results significantly impact the outcome of the session. With this, the HR team probably won’t take the candidates simply because of their attitude during the stage.

Types of bias in hiring

Bias in hiring comes in many forms, and they basically stem from two large groups: conscious and unconscious. In conscious prejudice, the HR staff already have dislikes for certain individuals or specific groups. This category is also known as explicit prejudgements. This is easy to spot and solve. The next one, the unconscious, is more difficult to grasp.

This is because in unconscious hiring bias, the HR team relies on the “trust its gut” technique. The HR staff ignores the results of the previous technical tests. Instead, they follow their intuitions, which come from their past hiring experiences. The list below breaks down the other types of prejudices that you may experience.

Affinity bias

This prejudice involves the similarity of background, experience, or interest between the interviewers or the HR staff and the candidates. In this regard, the interviewers will favour those who share the same background, such as graduating from the same university. This practice is unfair because it prioritises familiarity and personal comfort over merit.

Halo effect

In this bias, the interviewers overemphasise the positive qualities of a candidate, such as charisma or a prestigious educational background. The interviewers jump to an incomplete judgement that the candidate is excellent. They don’t take into account the candidate’s results in other exams and ignore the weaknesses. The result is inaccurate hiring decisions.

Confirmation bias

In this type, the interviewers already have an unconscious tendency before talking with the candidates. The tendency can be positive and negative. This behaviour is dangerous because the interviews will only consider information from the interview session that supports their intuitions. They dismiss other insights from the session that oppose their views.

Name bias

As hinted above, some recruiters can’t move forward with certain names as they go through CV by CV. They consciously go deeper beyond just names. They relate certain names to race, gender, and ethnicity. The hiring firms can’t work with names carrying specific race, gender, and ethnicity without any objective reasons.

First impression bias

This prejudice stems from what the interviewers think of a candidate upon their first meeting. Such a practice is tricky. A potential worker may intentionally seem attractive and convincing for the first interview stage. But this doesn’t directly mean they have strong technical and soft skills. Therefore, the recruiters must assess all of the exam results before deciding.

Dangers of hiring bias

Both hiring firms and candidates “suffer” greatly from a hiring bias. Relying on subjectivity and personal preferences will make such companies employ incompetent staff. They are those who can’t contribute optimally to the firms. The negative impacts are significant, from poor task results to delayed project deliveries. The long-term effect is to lower the profits of the companies.

In addition, hiring bias may have legal consequences. This is especially common for firms that apply discriminatory practices. Some countries, such as the United States, Canada, and the United Kingdom, take legal steps to protect applicants from discriminatory hiring prejudices. The candidates can report their experiences if they don’t get work chances due to race, religion, sex, age, or disability factors.

Besides, hiring prejudices bring in losses for candidates. They can’t access the jobs that will allow them to apply their knowledge. This leads them to earn a lower salary and work in positions that don’t value their skills. Lastly, working in a biased environment may discourage workers from joining or staying longer in the workplace.