Who among us can genuinely claim to be unbiased? Truthfully, we are all prone to subjective thinking, both as a defense mechanism and a legitimate way of making sense of a frequently challenging, rapidly changing world. What is subjectivity? Simply put, it is how your worldview and decision-making process is shaped by personal opinion. Conversely, objectivity is the ability to view facts on their own merits, unaffected by your particular likes and dislikes. Subjectivity often leads to cognitive bias. Biases in daily life are not necessarily a negative concept, as they serve the purpose of quick categorization of objects and ideas, and greatly improve the efficiency of our daily tasks. Making important decisions on the other hand is best done without any cognitive biases or one-sided perceptions, as this may lead us to not see the full picture, which consequently leads to mistakes which cost us time and money to correct.
While there are certain steps one may take to bring a level of objectivity to interviews; the resume and interview processes are inherently subjective. It is difficult to imagine carrying on a conversation with a potential employee without developing a sense of their personality, ethics and habits. It is likewise difficult to verify the legitimacy of content on a resume; in a worst case scenario it may be a complete fabrication; at best it may be an embellishment of accomplishments, knowledge, skills and experience. While the interview is vital for assessing an employee’s personality fit with the employer and their colleagues, it still has too much room for interpretation on the employer’s part and embellishment on the candidate’s part. It is not unheard of for candidates to take advantage of the hiring manager’s personal leanings, acing the interview but failing to bring the same stellar qualities to their new job. On the flip side, unconscious adherence to stereotypes on the employer’s part can lead to an unfair assessment of the candidate’s abilities, if not downright discriminatory hiring.
In fiscal year 2012, the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) received nearly 100,000 charges of private sector workplace discrimination, no doubt contributing to the EEOC’s choice to update and revise their strategic enforcement plan. The reality remains that bias is practiced in the workplace, and it often occurs not due to any ill will but rather because of the human’s inherent nature. The subjectivity of the traditional hiring process can be a potential stumbling block for even a practiced manager.
Standardized pre-employment testing drastically minimizes any legal repercussions associated with the hiring process because tests contain few (if any) biases, and are a fair, objective, and effective means of predicting candidate performance.
As previously mentioned, interviews do serve a function of assessing personal compatibility, but they are trying for both the person doing the hiring and the numerous candidates hoping to impress. The skills that get a candidate in the room may not necessarily be the skills that allow them to thrive. Certainly a candidate who may not be great at selling themselves across a desk may excel and thrive, but how can they stand out amid countless interviews with more outwardly charismatic individuals?
All this is to say that objective hiring practices should be used widely and frequently. Personality aside, the potential employees’ job-related skills will be gauged far more accurately via an objective screening process. Think of it as a test run for the candidate, an opportunity to demonstrate their abilities and strengths.
Every one of us is inclined to subjective thinking – even the hiring manager!