Future of Work

The 3 biggest unconscious biases in hiring decisions

Shana Lebowitz
Strategy Reporter, Business Insider
Share:
Our Impact
What's the World Economic Forum doing to accelerate action on Future of Work?
The Big Picture
Explore and monitor how Future of Work is affecting economies, industries and global issues
A hand holding a looking glass by a lake
Crowdsource Innovation
Get involved with our crowdsourced digital platform to deliver impact at scale
Stay up to date:

Future of Work

In an ideal world, an interviewer would evaluate job candidates based exclusively on their professional qualifications.

In reality, so many other factors come into play — like what part of the world the candidate is from or what their favorite sports teams are. For the most part, these biases are unconscious, so we aren’t always aware that they could be influencing our choices.

We spoke with Madan Pillutla, Ph.D., a professor of organizational behavior at London Business School who studies trust and fairness in interpersonal interactions, about the three biggest unconscious biases in hiring decisions.

1. We gravitate toward people who are similar to us.

According to the similarity-attraction hypothesis, we tend to like people who are similar to us — whether that means they come from the same state or sport the same haircut.

One way to explain that phenomenon, Pillutla said, is that people with a decent level of self-esteem are satisfied with their personalities. So when they see their qualities reflected in someone else, they tend to like that person, too.

Another potential explanation, which is slightly harder to test, is that people have evolved to like people who look and act the way they do. At one point in human history, it was important to trust only people in your small social group. Even though that behavior is no longer necessary today, we can still act as though it is.

The problem, Pillutla said, is that “if I keep hiring people like myself, very soon I’ll have an organization of people who think similarly, who act similarly.” Yet research suggests that diversity of backgrounds and perspectives is important to a company’s success.

2. We base our decisions on stereotypes about people’s competencies.

One common example of stereotyping, Pillutla said, is that Americans tend to assume Indians who come to the US are skilled at math. So American hiring managers might be inclined to select an Indian candidate for a math-heavy position because they think he or she will excel in that role — even though it’s possible another candidate could be more skilled in that area.

But while it’s possible to unlearn ethnic biases, “stereotypes about gender tend to be a little deeper” and harder to reverse, Pillutla said.

For example, one recent study found that people were more likely to hire a male candidate over a female candidate to perform a mathematical task, even when they learned that the candidates would perform equally well.

3. We’re wary of anyone who we perceive as a threat to our status in the organization.

Pillutla and his colleagues recently published some of the first research on this topic.

In an organization with a highly competitive culture, managers might be disinclined to bring on someone more competent than they are, especially if they feel insecure in their role.

“Even if people are well-meaning and well-intentioned, it’s very difficult to act against your own self interest” by hiring someone who could outperform you, Pillutla said.

In terms of countering these three biases, Pillutla pointed to recent changes in the way musicians audition for spots in an orchestra. Now, many orchestras hold “blind auditions,” in which the musicians play behind a screen, so they don’t know what the candidates look like. As a result, they’ve accepted more women.

In fact, some companies in other fields have already adopted similar hiring strategies.

Alternatively, Pillutla said, “It’s not entirely outside of the realm of possibility that for a lot of jobs we don’t even need to interview people.” Instead, employers could have candidates come in and work for a day, so that they could see how those candidates would really perform. This is potentially a more objective strategy that could make it harder to let our biases influence our decisions.

“It’s a little out there, but I do think it would be a good thing,” he said.

This article is published in collaboration with Business Insider. Publication does not imply endorsement of views by the World Economic Forum.

To keep up with the Agenda subscribe to our weekly newsletter.

Author: Shana Lebowitz is a Strategy reporter for Business Insider. 

Image: Japanese college graduates listen to speeches during a job-hunting rally at an outdoor theatre in Tokyo. REUTERS/Thomas Peter.

Don't miss any update on this topic

Create a free account and access your personalized content collection with our latest publications and analyses.

Sign up for free

License and Republishing

World Economic Forum articles may be republished in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International Public License, and in accordance with our Terms of Use.

The views expressed in this article are those of the author alone and not the World Economic Forum.

Share:
World Economic Forum logo
Global Agenda

The Agenda Weekly

A weekly update of the most important issues driving the global agenda

Subscribe today

You can unsubscribe at any time using the link in our emails. For more details, review our privacy policy.

Green job vacancies are on the rise – but workers with green skills are in short supply

Andrea Willige

February 29, 2024

About Us

Events

Media

Partners & Members

  • Join Us

Language Editions

Privacy Policy & Terms of Service

© 2024 World Economic Forum