Evaluating Skills Without Cultural Bias

I worked with a client who was stuck in the "fit" mindset, hiring people who thought and looked like the rest of the team. We made the bold choice to bring in someone with a completely different background. Someone who didn’t check all the usual boxes but had fresh ideas. We hired a candidate from hospitality for a tech role, and their experience in customer service completely changed how the team approached employee engagement. Their ideas boosted morale and retention in ways the organization hadn’t considered before. Shifting to “culture add” means asking questions like: What unique experiences, skills, or perspectives does this candidate bring that our team doesn’t already have? How can this person help us grow, evolve, and better serve our diverse clients, customers, and communities? When shifting to “culture add,” focus on these practical steps: ✅ Revisit job descriptions to eliminate language that reinforces bias and limits who applies. ✅ Redefine what makes a “strong candidate”—prioritize adaptability, curiosity, and values alignment over personal similarities. ✅ Train hiring teams on how to recognize and interrupt bias in the interview process. ✅ Use structured interviews with consistent questions to assess skills and values—not likability or “gut feeling.” Hiring for culture add is about creating a team where diverse perspectives actively contribute to your organization’s growth. What questions or challenges have you faced while rethinking hiring strategies? My comment section is open! I’d love to hear from you.

I used to think the hardest part of hiring was sourcing candidates. Turns out, most firms lose the best talent before interviews even begin, because of subtle bias in job descriptions and unstructured interviews. Here’s what I learned: 1. Unbiased Job Descriptions Matter Gender-neutral language: Replace “he/she” with “they/their,” and swap masculine/feminine-coded words for neutral alternatives like “goal-oriented” or “team-player.” Clear, accessible language: Avoid jargon, acronyms, and long lists of “must-haves” that unintentionally filter out qualified candidates. Inclusive titles: Use “software engineer” instead of “rockstar coder,” “firefighter” instead of “fireman.” 2. Structured Interviews Reduce Bias Standardized questions: Ask every candidate the same questions in the same order to avoid “likability bias.” Scoring rubrics: Grade answers objectively on merit, not gut feeling. Behavioral + situational questions: Focus on skills and past performance, not shared backgrounds. Diverse panels & limited chit-chat: Multiple perspectives + minimal small talk reduce affinity bias. Here’s the kicker: these simple practices don’t just make hiring fairer, they make it smarter. Firms using inclusive, structured approaches attract more qualified, diverse candidates, shorten time-to-hire, and build teams that actually perform. If you’re still relying on old-school job posts and free-flow interviews, you’re leaving talent and revenue on the table.

Three unpopular ways companies can remove bias from their hiring process. 👯 More interviewers Those posts that go viral about hiring someone after a single coffee chat? Or mocking hiring managers that need a panel ? That's all bias - decisions based on gut instincts instead of with objective criteria. Instead, involve multiple interviewers with different perspectives - a peers and key stakeholders may have different interactions with the new team member, and their input can help you make a better decision. 🔎 This is backed up research from Harvard that shows that structured interviews with multiple interviewers are 2x more predictive of success in the role than unstructured ones. 🪧 Assess skills I know skills assessments aren't popular, and many people claim that they won't engage in a process that includes them. But lots of people can talk the talk and make up examples in interviews. It's harder to fake hard skills. If you're hiring a financial analyst, ask them to build a model using dummy data. If you're hiring a social media manager, ask them to create a plan for a campaign for a fake product. Work samples are great as well! And then dig in with questions to fully understand what they did, why they made the choices they made, etc. to ensure they didn't just submit something where someone else did the work. 🔎 And the research backs it up: the Aberdeen Group did a study that showed that those who completed skills assessments had a 36% higher rate of retention in their roles than those who didn't. 💰 Don't negotiate Negotiation increases inequity. When companies are big on negotiation, hiring managers will suggest things like "let's go in at X so when they negotiate we can bump up to Y." Then the candidates who don't ask for more end up underpaid. It promotes playing games and the people who are afraid to push are the ones who will be negatively impacted. Instead, companies should be transparent about their salary ranges and how compensation is determined, and then apply those practices consistently across all hires. Adjusting offers should be reserved for the rare cases where a candidate brings new information to the table around their qualifications or ability to have an impact, or the company realizes they're misaligned to the market. Now, I do know that many companies don't operate this way so it never hurts to ask, but just know that if a company comes up a lot with their offer after you negotiate, that's a signal that they were happy to try to lowball you. 🔎 And again, research backs this up: countless studies from McKinsey to Leanin to Harvard show that there are differences in who negotiates and in how negotiation is perceived, and this hurts people from marginalized groups. Like I said, these aren't necessarily popular ideas - they are more work for companies AND candidates. But they are research-backed ways to make hiring more equitable. And that's something we should all support.

One of the most exciting aspects of writing "Make Work Fair" with my coauthor, Iris Bohnet, has been turning behavioral science insights and research evidence into practical, data-driven organizational design. Today, I want to share a powerful tip for improving hiring processes: structured decision-making. Unstructured interviews are notoriously poor predictors of job performance and rife with bias. But by adding structure to our hiring processes, we can significantly improve both fairness and —importantly—effectiveness. Here's a simple three-step approach you can implement: 📋 Define clear evaluation criteria before reviewing any applications. 🔢 Use a standardized scoring rubric for all candidates. ↔️ Compare candidates’s answers horizontally (all answers to question 1, then all answers to question 2, etc.) rather than vertically (one full candidate at a time). This method helps mitigate the impact of unconscious bias by focusing our attention on relevant qualifications rather than subjective "fit" or first impressions. In my research, I've seen organizations implement similar approaches with promising results. While specific outcomes vary, the trend is clear: structured hiring processes tend to lead to more diverse candidate pools and better alignment between job requirements and new hire performance. Have you tried structured hiring in your organization? What was your experience? #HiringPractices #WorkplaceFairness #DataDrivenHR #MakeWorkFairBook

I’ve worked with enough hiring teams to know that many believe they’re evaluating candidates objectively. What I’ve seen repeatedly is that affinity bias often creeps in unnoticed. We tend to gravitate toward candidates who feel familiar—those who share our background, education, or professional experience. It may feel like a gut instinct, but it can unintentionally limit who gets through the door. In my article for The Future of Talent Acquisition and Recruitment, published by the Intelligent Enterprise Leaders Alliance, I talk about how organizations can manage this bias without overhauling their entire hiring strategy. Here are a few things that help: ✅ Use panel interviews to bring in different perspectives ✅ Stick to structured evaluation rubrics ✅ Compare each candidate to the job description, not to each other Bias can’t be eliminated entirely, but it can be interrupted. Small changes like these lead to better hiring outcomes and more inclusive teams. I’m proud to share this piece alongside other contributors in the report. Download the full study for free—link is in the comments. #InclusiveHiring #DEI #TalentAcquisition #BiasInRecruitment