Can Selecting the Most Qualified Candidate Be Unfair?

By Jeff Altman, The Big Game Hunter

The American Psychological Association released a study entitled, “Can Selecting the Most Qualified Candidate Be Unfair? Learning About Socioeconomic Advantages and Disadvantages Reduces the Perceived Fairness of Meritocracy and Increases Support for Socioeconomic Diversity Initiatives in Organizations.” 

This is a summary of the study:

This paper examines how efforts to increase fairness in hiring through structured interviews and standardized evaluations can sometimes lead to unintended biases against minority candidates. Structured hiring practices aim to increase fairness by standardizing evaluations using predefined criteria. However, the authors argue that standardization can disadvantage minority candidates in subtle ways.

For example, white interviewers may evaluate minority candidates more critically when rating them on standardized competencies. Minorities may receive lower scores due to biases, even when they are equally or more competent. Standardized interviews can also fail to account for cultural differences in communication styles, causing minority candidates to be rated lower for not demonstrating behaviors defined by white norms.

Efforts to increase fairness through objective evaluations are well-intentioned but can institutionalize majority norms and fail to account for the unique experiences of minority groups. As such, true fairness requires acknowledging these potential biases.

Organizations should ensure evaluation criteria accurately measure abilities needed for success, without introducing majority group biases that disadvantage minorities. Rater training is also essential to reduce unconscious bias in applying standardized evaluations. Organizations should also recognize communication and cultural differences to prevent penalizing qualified minority candidates who express competencies differently.

The authors argue that structured interviews should focus more on work samples and cognitive assessments, reducing biases that arise in unstructured personal interviews. However, even knowledge and skill assessments should be evaluated for cultural biases. True fairness requires scrutinizing presumed objective hiring methods to prevent the perpetuation of privilege. While standardized practices aim to increase fairness, they can unwittingly reinforce majority norms that obstruct diversity.

Ensuring fairness in hiring is complex; it requires balancing standardization to reduce bias with an awareness of how majority assumptions can disadvantage qualified minorities. Overall, this paper provides an insightful critique of how attempts to make hiring more meritocratic can subtly perpetuate privilege. It highlights the need for greater nuance in designing and evaluating “fair” hiring systems.

Ⓒ The Big Game Hunter, Inc., Asheville, NC 2024 

You Don’t Need a Job Description