The Effects of Cognitive Bias and Employment Equity Policy Interventions in the Hiring Process

There has been considerable debate in Canada over whether or not the Employment Equity Act has been successful in achieving its objective – to achieve a more equitable labour market by removing systemic discrimination against Aboriginal people, people with disabilities, women, and visible minorities. Over 30 years since its inception, employment outcomes have improved for some groups but not all – most notably First Nations people. This research draws upon cognitive bias theories and an online decision experiment to examine Canadian recruiters’ decision-making in the early stages of an applicant screening process. The study investigates the potential for subconscious biases in recruiter decision-making, and whether or not different employment equity priming interventions influence recruiter decisions. Results suggest evidence of preferential hiring for minority applicants when participants were primed to focus on employment equity and/or diversity. Implications for Canadian policy makers, researchers, and organizations are discussed

How school governing bodies manage new legislation in South Africa?

Thesis (M.Ed.)-University of Durban-Westville, 1999.Despite the commendable qualities of the new staff selection and appointment process such as stakeholder participation it seemed to have generated a host of problems such as nepotism, subjectivity and personal preferences. Although selectors were involved in the selection process for the very first time they were quite confident in their choices of candidates. Selectors believed that the short training programme did not prepare them adequately for the selection of school leaders. In spite of severe difficulties, such as little knowledge acquired, members dropping off during the process and time constraints, 80% of the parents were quite confident in their choice of candidates for their schools. It was found that 52% of the selectors indicated that the selection was not vulnerable to nepotism, subjectivity and personal preferences. However, a relatively high percentage (42%) indicated that the process was not carried out fairly. Selectors believed that the selection process required their time as well as money. Making personal sacrifices affected their commitment to the process. Selectors were not remunerated for the execution of this mammoth task. Although there was severe time constraints 73% of the parents indicated that all CV's were allocated equal time for evaluation. It was noticed that 60% of the parent selectors and 64% of the senior managers as selectors found it extremely difficult to differentiate whether the CV's were original or professionally written. However, it was interesting to note that 70% of the selectors believed that applicants were not given preferences such Heads of Department and those from their own schools. An extremely important point is that there was consensus among the various stakeholders in reaching their final choices. This is confirmed by the fact that 87% parents, 82% principals and 82% deputy principals, indicated that decisions were reached through consensus rather than a vote. This is a positive sign because all selectors took ownership of these appointments. Clearly, there were several shortcomings of the new staff selection and appointment process. However, parents felt really empowered since they were afforded the opportunity of choosing a senior manager who would lead their children to greater heights