Is anyone troubled that the study found bias against qualified candidates (who happen to be male) in current hiring practices?
Is the objective to have hiring practices that are fair to all applicants (woman, minorities and even males)? Or is the objective to have a diversity quota?
FTA: "We found the opposite, that de-identifying candidates reduced the likelihood of women being selected for the shortlist."
The trial found assigning a male name to a candidate made them 3.2 per cent less likely to get a job interview.
Adding a woman's name to a CV made the candidate 2.9 per cent more likely to get a foot in the door.
Is the objective to have hiring practices that are fair to all applicants (woman, minorities and even males)? Or is the objective to have a diversity quota?
FTA: "We found the opposite, that de-identifying candidates reduced the likelihood of women being selected for the shortlist."
The trial found assigning a male name to a candidate made them 3.2 per cent less likely to get a job interview.
Adding a woman's name to a CV made the candidate 2.9 per cent more likely to get a foot in the door.