Overcoming Interview Bias

Heads up, hiring managers: It's time to scrub clean those tainted lenses you're looking through when interviewing. Bias - conscious or unconscious, it's the silent assassin in your interview process. And trust me, it's doing you no favors. So, let's talk about wiping that slate clean. First, standardize those interviews. Same questions, same order, every candidate. No making it up as you go along. It's about fairness, not improv. Next, get your hands on some structured scoring rubrics. They're not sexy, but they're the cornerstone of an objective assessment. Make your decisions based on a scorecard, not a gut feeling. Bring diversity to your interview panel. Different backgrounds, different perspectives - it's your best defense against a narrow-minded hiring process. And don't fall for the 'cultural fit' trap. It's a cop-out, a velvet-gloved form of bias. Focus on 'culture add.' What unique values can the candidate bring to the team? That's the real question. Finally, never stop learning, never stop questioning your biases. It's an ongoing battle, not a checkbox exercise. Get comfortable with being uncomfortable - it's the only way we grow. So gear up, hiring managers. It's time to give bias the boot.

Three unpopular ways companies can remove bias from their hiring process. 👯 More interviewers Those posts that go viral about hiring someone after a single coffee chat? Or mocking hiring managers that need a panel ? That's all bias - decisions based on gut instincts instead of with objective criteria. Instead, involve multiple interviewers with different perspectives - a peers and key stakeholders may have different interactions with the new team member, and their input can help you make a better decision. 🔎 This is backed up research from Harvard that shows that structured interviews with multiple interviewers are 2x more predictive of success in the role than unstructured ones. 🪧 Assess skills I know skills assessments aren't popular, and many people claim that they won't engage in a process that includes them. But lots of people can talk the talk and make up examples in interviews. It's harder to fake hard skills. If you're hiring a financial analyst, ask them to build a model using dummy data. If you're hiring a social media manager, ask them to create a plan for a campaign for a fake product. Work samples are great as well! And then dig in with questions to fully understand what they did, why they made the choices they made, etc. to ensure they didn't just submit something where someone else did the work. 🔎 And the research backs it up: the Aberdeen Group did a study that showed that those who completed skills assessments had a 36% higher rate of retention in their roles than those who didn't. 💰 Don't negotiate Negotiation increases inequity. When companies are big on negotiation, hiring managers will suggest things like "let's go in at X so when they negotiate we can bump up to Y." Then the candidates who don't ask for more end up underpaid. It promotes playing games and the people who are afraid to push are the ones who will be negatively impacted. Instead, companies should be transparent about their salary ranges and how compensation is determined, and then apply those practices consistently across all hires. Adjusting offers should be reserved for the rare cases where a candidate brings new information to the table around their qualifications or ability to have an impact, or the company realizes they're misaligned to the market. Now, I do know that many companies don't operate this way so it never hurts to ask, but just know that if a company comes up a lot with their offer after you negotiate, that's a signal that they were happy to try to lowball you. 🔎 And again, research backs this up: countless studies from McKinsey to Leanin to Harvard show that there are differences in who negotiates and in how negotiation is perceived, and this hurts people from marginalized groups. Like I said, these aren't necessarily popular ideas - they are more work for companies AND candidates. But they are research-backed ways to make hiring more equitable. And that's something we should all support.

🌎🌎"Cultural fit" is costing you your best culturally diverse hires — and it sounds completely reasonable while it does it. Here's what I've noticed working with leaders who manage culturally diverse teams: The bias in hiring rarely shows up as something obvious. ✨It shows up as a gut feeling. ✨A panel debrief where everyone agrees the candidate was "just a bit flat." ✨A score that's hard to justify, but everyone nods at. And the candidate who gets passed over? Often deeply qualified — just shaped by different cultural norms, such as: ➡️Pausing before answering reads as uncertainty. ➡️Modest framing of achievements reads as a lack of ownership. ➡️Building context before getting to the point reads as disorganization. None of those are signs of a weak candidate. They're signs of a different cultural training. The shift I'd ask every hiring manager to make: → Separate communication style from communication quality. Can you follow their reasoning? Is it sound? That's what matters. → Treat bilingualism and global experience as signal, not noise. Someone who navigates multiple languages and contexts daily has a skill most teams desperately need. → Build structure that reduces the weight of "feel." Behavioral questions with defined evaluation criteria leave less room for cultural familiarity to masquerade as competence. 🎯🎯Inclusive hiring isn't about adjusting what you expect from candidates. It's about being honest about where your expectations came from. The talent is there. The question is whether your process is designed to see it. ❓❓What's one thing your organization has done to make interviews more equitable across cultures — and did it actually change who got hired? ☎️☎️ If you're leading a multicultural team and want to unlock the hidden potential already inside your organization, let's talk. 🔗 🔗 The link is on my banner. #MasteringCulturalDifferences #CulturallyDiverseHiring #CrossCulturalLeadership #TalentAcquisition 

Back in 2015, a much younger version of me appeared on a prime time ITV programme called Weighing Up the Enemy with the wonderful Dr Christian. Unbelievably charming, witty, brilliantly sarcastic and genuinely lovely off camera. Many years before the age of Ozempic, the show was very explicitly about weight, and more specifically, my segment was about how weight can influence hiring decisions. It was uncomfortable television in parts, but it was also honest. I was brought on as a careers and recruitment expert to work with a young woman who had been turned down for a role because she was significantly overweight. The question was not whether bias existed, because it clearly did. The question was how she could navigate an interview environment where assumptions were being made before she even spoke. In a mini-interview coaching session, what we focused on then is remarkably consistent with the work I still do today. You cannot control someone else’s bias, but you can influence what evidence you put in the room. I coached her on how she spoke about her work, the examples she chose, and how she demonstrated drive, focus, and follow-through in outcomes rather than descriptors. The aim was not to deny reality, but to make sure assumptions had less space to linger. That experience stayed with me. Over the years, I have seen the same dynamic play out in different forms. Interview and promotion bias linked to sector, background, age, accent, or career history. Weight just happens to be a particularly visible one. In executive interview coaching and outplacement work now, the principle is the same. Strong candidates can be derailed if they assume their experience speaks for itself. At senior level, interviews are not just about answering questions well. They are about anticipating how you might be read, and shaping the narrative thoughtfully and deliberately. Bias is rarely intentional, but it is very real. Interview preparation is not only about performance. It is about ensuring the right story is heard. I would be interested to hear where others have encountered visible or unspoken bias in interviews, and how consciously you have prepared for it. And if this resonates with something you are navigating yourself, you are not alone in it. #CareerStrategy #CareerTransition #ExecutiveHiring #HanoverTalentSolutions Hanover City CV

📢 Building Bridges, Not Biases: Interviewer Training at Utkarsh Small Finance Bank Last week, I had the privilege of leading an interviewer coaching session for the HR and business leaders at Utkarsh Small Finance Bank in Varanasi. 💡 The focus? Dismantling bias and conducting truly effective interviews. It was a dynamic exchange, where we explored strategies to ensure fairness and objectivity throughout the hiring process. 🔆 Here's a glimpse of our journey and the insights we gained: ▶ Unmasking Unconscious Bias: We tackled the reality of unconscious bias head-on, using self-awareness exercises and focused techniques to create a genuinely fair interview process. ▶ Crafting Unbiased Questions: We revolutionized our approach with structured, job-related questions, eliminating "gotcha" moments and irrelevant small talk to better assess candidate skills and experience. ▶ Decoding Job Descriptions: We developed precise methods to translate essential job description elements into targeted questions, vital for identifying the right talent for rural sales roles. ▶ Mastering Open-Ended Questions: We explored the depth of open-ended questions, crucial for uncovering a candidate's thought processes, soft skills, and potential to thrive in the unique rural sales environment. ▶ Assessing Cultural Fit: We moved beyond resumes to gauge candidates' cultural fit, their understanding of the rural market, and their growth potential within Utkarsh Bank. ▶ Standardization is Key: We highlighted the importance of a standardized interview format and scoring system to ensure consistency and minimize personal bias. ▶ Focusing on Skills and Achievements: We reinforced the critical practice of basing hiring decisions on skills, experience, and past accomplishments, staying aligned with the job description and avoiding distractions. The dedication of the Utkarsh Bank team to fostering an inclusive workplace was truly inspiring. Their active participation and insightful questions made the session collaborative and impactful. By embracing these practices, Utkarsh Small Finance Bank is making a powerful statement: they're committed to finding the best talent, free from bias. Just brilliant minds ready to contribute! 💪 #unbiasedinterviews #HRdevelopment #UtkarshBank #Varanasi #diversityandinclusion #talentacquisition People Konnect

“Perceived inability to perform.” (67%) That’s the top reason people gave for rejecting a candidate who discloses a disability (or is perceived to have one) Read that again ✅ Not “skills mismatch.” ✅ Not “experience gap.” ✅ Not “role requirements.” A perception. And that single perception can quietly erase someone’s chance at a paycheck, healthcare, stability… dignity. Because here’s what often happens behind the scenes: A disabled candidate walks into an interview with a résumé full of wins… …and still feels the need to do extra work just to be seen as “safe.” They’re not just answering questions. They’re managing assumptions. They’re trying to prevent: ✅ the pause and silence after disclosure ✅ the sudden “concern” tone ✅ the abrupt ending of the interview ✅ the assumption that the candidate is lying or is not confident due to lack of eye contact ✅ the invisible checklist that shifts from “Can they do the job?” to “Will they be a problem?” And that is the human cost of bias: ✅ People learn to mask. ✅People learn to hide. ✅People learn to overperform. ✅ People learn to ask for less than they need—because they’re afraid asking will cost them everything. Meanwhile, companies tell themselves a comforting story: ✅ “We don’t have the resources” (19%) ✅ “It’s just our policy/culture” (9%) ✅ “The hiring manager requested it” (5%) But let’s call it what it is: If your process rejects someone based on disability before you assess their ability with accommodations, that’s not “caution.” That’s discrimination wrapped in corporate language. Here’s what inclusive hiring actually looks like: ✅ Evaluate candidates on essential job functions ✅ Make the interview environment accessible ✅ Ask “What would success look like in 90 days?” ✅ Ask “What accommodations do you need?" without penalty ✅ Provide interview accommodations without penalty ✅ Train interviewers to separate assumptions from evidence Because disability is not the opposite of capability. Bias is. Call to action (pick one and comment): 💬 Disabled/neurodivergent folks: What’s one thing you wish employers understood about accommodations? 💬 Hiring managers/recruiters: What’s one change you’ll make to reduce disability bias in your hiring process? 🔁 Repost if you believe people shouldn’t have to hide their disability to be employed. #DisabilityInclusion #DisabilityRights #InclusiveHiring #Accessibility #Neurodiversity #Hiring #Recruiting #TalentAcquisition #HR #WorkplaceCulture #PsychologicalSafety #Equity #InclusionMatters #Ableism Image description: Horizontal bar chart asking, “When a candidate discloses a disability or apparently has a disability, what’s the biggest reason for rejecting the candidate?” Results show Perceived inability to perform: 67% (long blue bar), Organization lacks resources: 19% (green bar), Organization’s policy/culture: 9% (orange bar), and Hiring manager request: 5% (red bar). Percentages are labeled on each bar on a light background with a 0–100% axis.

One of the most exciting aspects of writing "Make Work Fair" with my coauthor, Iris Bohnet, has been turning behavioral science insights and research evidence into practical, data-driven organizational design. Today, I want to share a powerful tip for improving hiring processes: structured decision-making. Unstructured interviews are notoriously poor predictors of job performance and rife with bias. But by adding structure to our hiring processes, we can significantly improve both fairness and —importantly—effectiveness. Here's a simple three-step approach you can implement: 📋 Define clear evaluation criteria before reviewing any applications. 🔢 Use a standardized scoring rubric for all candidates. ↔️ Compare candidates’s answers horizontally (all answers to question 1, then all answers to question 2, etc.) rather than vertically (one full candidate at a time). This method helps mitigate the impact of unconscious bias by focusing our attention on relevant qualifications rather than subjective "fit" or first impressions. In my research, I've seen organizations implement similar approaches with promising results. While specific outcomes vary, the trend is clear: structured hiring processes tend to lead to more diverse candidate pools and better alignment between job requirements and new hire performance. Have you tried structured hiring in your organization? What was your experience? #HiringPractices #WorkplaceFairness #DataDrivenHR #MakeWorkFairBook

Interview without pre-reading resumes One of my biggest learnings in recent years isn’t Gen AI — it’s a simple interviewing habit that changed everything: I stopped reading candidates’ resumes before the interview. I’m still trying to craft the best version of my own resume to convey who I really am, so I know how misleading a piece of paper can be. Now I use the interview time for an unbiased, human conversation to find out whether I’d actually want to work with this person — not to validate a document. This practice has felt like magic. Candidates relax, stories surface naturally, and I get a clearer sense of mindset, curiosity, collaboration style, and learning agility — signals a resume often misses. It’s better for candidates, better for me, and better for the organization. Why it works • Reduces confirmation bias — first impressions don’t anchor the conversation. • Encourages authenticity — candidates are more comfortable and candid. • Surfaces potential — transferable skills and growth mindset show up in stories, not bullet points. • Focuses on fit — you assess how someone shows up, not just what they’ve done. How I run a resume‑free interview • Set the intention at the start: explain why you’re skipping the resume and what you want to learn. • Use open, behavioral prompts that invite stories rather than rehearsed answers. • Take structured notes tied to the role’s core competencies so comparisons stay fair. • Review the resume later only to verify specifics, not to re-evaluate your gut impressions. Sample opening (30–45s) “I’m intentionally here without reading your resume so we can use this time for an open conversation without bias. My goal is to learn how you think, collaborate, and grow — and whether we’d enjoy working together.” Pitfalls and fixes • Regulated roles: verify credentials later as needed. • Calibration: ensure all interviewers understand the approach. • Charisma bias: use consistent criteria and evidence-based notes. • Resume reveal bias: capture impressions before looking at the resume. If you’re hiring, try one resume‑free interview and compare the outcomes. You might be surprised how much more human, fair, and effective your process becomes. #Hiring #Interviewing #BiasReduction #TalentAcquisition #Leadership #DiversityAndInclusion #HiringTips

Sure, many organizations are stepping back from workforce diversity targets, but they still want to hire the best talent. One key approach for doing so is to overcome unconscious biases that can block great candidates. New research from Harvard’s Siri Chilazi and colleagues shows a simple, evidence-based tweak that works: a short, targeted video for hiring managers just before they review resumes. (https://lnkd.in/gV6QibTd) The 7-minute video encouraged them to focus on skills and consider what perspectives were missing from their teams: “If you hire everyone with similar characteristics and experiences, your group thinking and decision-making will be weaker as you will be missing out on some important perspectives. Diversity of thought is a strength. Hire someone who will make a unique contribution to your team and our company.”  That small nudge made a big difference. Across two large global companies, managers who saw the video were 12–41% more likely to shortlist and hire underrepresented candidates. If you’re involved in hiring—or want your company to do better—consider advocating for behavioral “just-in-time” nudges like this one. Encourage HR to send short, evidence-based reminders about inclusive decision-making right before hiring or promotion decisions. Sometimes the smallest interventions lead to better outcomes. — This is an excerpt from my upcoming “5 Ally Actions” newsletter. Subscribe and read the full edition at betterallies.com/subscribe #BetterAllies #BetterWorkplaces 🙏