Potentially Hired, Probably Overlooked
The growing representation of women in the labour population has not been matched by their representation in managerial or leadership roles. Researchers at the University of Kent looked into the hiring process to understand why.
Overall, the literature suggests that women are less likely to be appointed to top leadership roles as compared to men. Hence, we might expect there be some inherent gender bias in the hiring and promotion of female leaders.
In an experiment conducted by the University of Kent and published in April 2019, researchers found that when ranking potential candidates for a job, participants overlooked leadership potential when ranking female candidates when compared to male participants.
Chart: Mean rank for each candidate for résumé evaluation, future performance, and hire choice (the lower the better).
Key findings from the study include:
Candidates’ gender moderates the evaluation of their leadership characteristics.
When participants judged female candidates, they preferred leadership performance over leadership potential.
In male candidates, leadership potential led to an “upgrading” of equivalent male candidates relative to female candidates.
Women were anticipated to be held to higher standards than men in the selection process because their leadership potential would be less likely to be considered.
Pick up the challenge:
How can you quantify leadership potential?
What checks and balances could you put into place to mitigate bias in the hiring process at various stages?
Source: https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/psychology/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00755/full
03/2024.