It’s not the names – it's you.

Just a short and sweet one from me today, definitely an incredibly niche one.?

We all know that bias, whether conscious or unconscious is a hot topic, as is diversity and inclusion.??

It seems to me, that the reactionary approach to this has been to switch to ‘blind recruitment’ as the strategy of choice when it comes to eliminating bias and creating more diverse workforces.??

While yes, blind recruitment CAN increase fairness, mitigate unconscious bias related to ethnicity, gender or even cultural background and promote diversity when it comes to the initial hiring stages, what it DOESN'T do is address deeper organisational biases.??

Here are just some of the stats that support the fact that SOME OF YOU need to check yourselves:?

A study by the Harvard Business Review found that candidates with “white-sounding” names were 50% more likely to get a call back compared to those with ethnic-sounding names for the same resume...?

?????

A 2017 study by Applied showed that organisations using blind recruitment saw a 20-30% increase in the diversity of shortlisted candidates.?

?????????

A BBC study in the UK found that blind applications increased the likelihood of women and ethnic minorities being shortlisted by up to 46% in specific roles?

?????????????????????

Blind recruitment removes names, but it doesn't remove the fact that bias is staining the fabric of your company culture. Let’s say applicants do get hired...how long will they stay??

On another note, what I've also seen happening is that by removing names, it’s difficult to identify candidates that could be applying twice, through recruitment partners and direct to companies. But that's a can of worms for another day.?

Peace out, A-town.??

Lukas?