Identifying OpportunitiesProSelect can be used to identify opportunities for increasing the diversity of your workforce. For example, let's say that you interviewed and evaluated four candidates and they were scored as follows:
We'll assume the job category of the vacancy you're filling shows under representation for females. Your highest ranking female is only in third place according to the scoring system. Given the fact that under-representation exists, you should study the results carefully. To begin with, there is only a seven point difference between Sally and the highest rated person. This may not be a "significant difference" in a statistical sense. This situation should be looked into more deeply. Review your interview guides to identify exactly why you scored Sally somewhat lower than Fred. Let's say that your review reveals that Sally scored low in her technical knowledge of some of the equipment involved in the job. And, if she had scored better on this competency her overall score would have been, in fact, the highest. If Sally were hired, what could be done to help her erase this only shortcoming? You realize that the equipment manufacturer's offer training programs on the equipment and after a few training sessions, Sally's knowledge in this area could be improved considerably. So, with some accommodation on your part, Sally could turn out to be a top performer. You decide this is a good opportunity to improve the diversity of the workforce and you hire Sally. The point of the story above is that ProSelect can
provide information that's essential to decision making
when efforts are needed to enhance diversity. It can
clarify opportunities, like the above, and it can reveal
where the likelihood of success is poor. Misguided
efforts to increase diversity usually fail. ProSelect
provides information that helps to avoid these failure
prone decisions. Unconscious Bias We all have biases. They're a product of our upbringing and life experiences. We are aware of many of these biases and we attempt to control or eliminate those we know are wrong or invalid. However, we also have biases we are not conscious of and these can affect our decision making behavior without our realizing it. It seems safe to assume that decision making by interviewers is sometimes affected by unconscious bias. However, there is evidence that structured interviewing tends to reduce unconscious bias. A research study was featured in TRAINING magazine, (Interviewer Training: The Key To An Innovative Selection Process That Works, Dec. 1983 p.57). In this study, both structured and traditional approaches were used separately in comparable units of a large retail company and then evaluated. Results showed that 55% more minority employees were hired when the structured approach was used compared to traditional interviewing. These results are supportive of the notion that unconscious bias is reduced due to the inherent fairness of the structured approach. Opening screen |