How to be unaffected by the Affect Heuristic
In the months following the 9/11 tragedy, German psychologist, Gerd Gigerenzer conducted an interesting study.
Gigerenzer’s field of research was the use of bounded rationality and heuristics in decision making. In an effort to study the impact of the tragedy on the travel patterns of Americans, he tracked the number of passengers flying by air versus by road.
Gigerenzer hypothesized that people would tend to avoid flying—due to an effect he termed “dread risks”—and instead choose to travel by road. The greater number of road travelers would then lead to a higher number of road accidents as well. ?
By analyzing three months’ data from the U.S. Department of Transportation, he found the hypothesis to be true. Not only were there higher road casualties in the given period, the number was far higher than the total casualties on all the four fatal 9/11 flights put together.[1]
The reality is that the degree of risk is far higher with road travel than flying—even after factoring in the possibility of terror attacks. Studies show that driving is about 1000x more dangerous than flying.[2]
And yet, the people in the study preferred to drive!
There is a name for this seemingly irrational behavior—the Affect Heuristic. And it affects us all!
HR and the Affect Heuristic
The Affect Heuristic drives human beings to make decisions based on ‘gut feelings’ or what we ascribe as ‘goodness’ and ‘badness’ instead of making objective evaluations of a situation. Affect-based decisions are more likely to be made when we are under pressure and when we don’t have time or resources. These decisions tend to be ‘automatic’ as opposed to ‘thinking things through.’
When conducting interviews, this effect is most likely to kick in as interviewers tend to view candidates through their own individual lenses. Another area that is prone to this effect is, needless to say, promotions.
But, how serious is the problem anyway? Consider these statistics.
One may be excused to assume that humans are the problem, and getting a computer-based evaluation would be more ‘objective.’
But on the contrary, AI-based systems are just as prone to bias, and AI algorithms need to be specifically trained to avoid biases in their judgements.
With AI software making a lot of initial screenings today, there is a very clear and present danger of organizations missing out on genuinely valuable candidates, simply because the system was not unbiased.
Hiring is costly. And hiring the wrong candidate is even more costly. So any effort to make sure it’s done right is definitely worthwhile.
How we Hire at Zuci
We take great pains to ensure that our hiring process is transparent and fair to all candidates who apply. Some of the steps we follow are listed below.
领英推荐
As a 100%? non-discriminatory organization, we consciously make sure that we avoid any bias based on gender, race, language, age, or orientation. In fact, over 44% of our employees are women, which also includes several senior positions.
By following a well-defined, step-by-step process, we avoid rushing to hire, eliminate the possibility of most biases, and ensure that all candidates go through the same rigorous and objective selection criteria.
The presence of more than one interviewer ensures that no one view is final, but rather a consensus is reached on all selections. This helps us avoid the effects of subjective judgements and the possibility of personal biases creeping in.
We don’t merely hire a person to fill a post but also as a valuable contributor to the organization’s growth. With this view, it eliminates the possibility of consciously or unconsciously overlooking possible problem areas, simply to fill a position.
We have our own brand of organizational culture as well as our way of viewing problems and solving them. It may not work for everyone, and we respectfully avoid those differences.
Last but certainly not least, we use a system of referrals that ensures that new joiners are already aware of and comfortable with ‘the Zuci way.’
The Affect Heuristic is one that affects us all and can subtly influence our decisions, even crucial and important ones. It is not possible to eliminate biases even by resorting to computer or AI-based systems. It requires a conscious effort from HR teams as well as a systematic, unhurried approach, but the results are always worth it!
Biases are an innate part of human nature and bound to creep into all our activities, including HR functions like selections and promotions—unless we become aware of the issues and keep a conscious eye on them. Using a systematic process can help reduce, if not completely eliminate, biases in our decision making.?
Photo by Nicolas Jossi on Unsplash
References:
1.???? According to National Institutes of Health
2.???? Based on Injury Facts by the National Safety Council
3.???? Per an article in Lattice
4.???? According to a Zippia study
Strategic Advisor, Portfolio Investor, Operations SASTRA, ISB
1 个月Interesting study, Venky, and thanks for sharing. Regarding hiring, one thing I’ve observed is that the challenge often isn't a lack of skill or talent, but rather the individual's attitude and motivation to perform at their best in a new environment. It's crucial for organizations to take responsibility for this and ensure that new hires, especially in their first 90 days, are fully engaged and motivated. There's actually a book on this topic called The First 90 Days by Michael Watkins. While it’s primarily written from the perspective of the new employee, it offers valuable insights for management as well.