I had the chance to go over Information Memorandums, or “Teasers” as some people call this kind of documents sometimes, quite a few times throughout my professional career as a corporate financier.
For those who may not be aware, these are sort of “advertising flyers” that companies prepare and distribute to potential investors, when they seek external funding.
A teaser that has stuck in my memory, even after a long time, is that of a software development company, which produced HR-related code.
The company produced a multitude of candidate assessment programs, ranging from online questionnaires, to other, more “exotic” solutions that I cannot disclose due to confidentiality concerns.
Perhaps the most basic question that a company must answer in such a teaser, is “Why me?” In other words, why would an investor commit their (limited) capital to this company and not another one? And why would a customer prefer this company over a competitor, or even a substitute? In other words, what are the key differentiating factors of the firm?
Well, that particular company claimed that by using a combination of its proprietary software during the assessment process, a recruiter could eliminate “Preparation bias” and “Likeliness bias.” In other words, the software developed by this company, aimed at negating any advantage that a candidate could get by preparing better than others and/or by being more “likeable” than others.
Well, I, for one, hope that this company didn’t find an investor and had thus to somehow reinvent itself. And that is because I refuse to believe that such brain-dead products will someday end up determining whether someone gets a job or not.
Preparation bias? Why on Earth would I want to eliminate that? If a candidate goes the extra mile and puts in the extra effort in preparing for an interview, that shows interest. Of course I would want to be biased (and I don’t even consider this a form of bias per se, I am just using the word as it was used in the teaser, for text consistency purposes) in their favor. We all have limited time on this planet. Anyone who can dedicate some of it to show me they are interested, should, rightfully, get a “bonus” in my list of preferred candidates, right?
And what about the “likeliness bias?” I know, most of you will immediately think of physical appearance (which certainly plays a role, even unconsciously, whether we admit it, or not – we are all human after all) but that’s not just it. Use of language, posture, tidy clothing, use of body language, and a myriad of other more “subtle” factors play a role in how well we perceive to like someone. These are skills that have nothing to do with genetics, can be developed by anyone and should play a role in the selection process. They don’t *gasp!* constitute bias!
I understand that recruiters undergo a lot of stress when trying to figure out who the best candidates are for a position. I am also aware that people turnover has tremendous cost for businesses, not just in terms of time and money dedicated to finding a recruit, but also in terms of reduced productivity as the new hire catches up in the new environment. But I still believe that recruitment can’t (and shouldn’t) be automated. When you are trying to evaluate something as complex as a human, using predetermined standards (box ticking), you are not eliminating bias – you are creating it.