|
longwayhome -> RE: Blind recruitment trial to boost gender equality making things worse, study reveal (7/5/2017 12:07:35 PM)
|
Do you actually read these articles critically before you share them?
This is based on one trial and the results show a 3% difference from making gender explicit. The article also points out that other trials have shown opposite results. It's hardly what you would call a "slam-dunk".
In fact the advice is generally to use blind recruitment carefully as if you have a disadvantaged group who have been given fewer opportunities there is the risk that going blind only emphasizes the experience advantage of the more privileged group.
Common "blind" approaches in recruitment, as well as gender, include age, religion, disability and ethnicity but these things are hardly blind when other factors such as schooling and the address of your residence give away vital clues.
Where there is inequality of opportunity introducing blind recruitment will generally not make a huge difference to the outcome and may make things worse. Indeed there is some evidence that companies who achieve the greatest diversity do so by being very aware of their candidates identities and taking account of them when offering opportunities rather than being "blind" when they recruit.
Congratulations nonetheless for bringing what you imagine fantasy feminazis might think of this into a complex and nuanced area. Nothing like crowbarring a good old straw man into a argument with multiple shades of grey.
|
|
|
|
