Does anonymising job applications reduce gender bias
Understanding managers’ perspectives
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 12920770 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Meraiah Foley (0000-0003-1368-9049, Australian Defence Force Academy, corresponding author), Sue Williamson (0000-0001-9061-7466, Australian Defence Force Academy) |
| Year | 2018 |
| Volume | 33 |
| Issue | 8 |
| Pages | 623-635 |
| Publication date | 2018-10-25 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Gender in Management An International Journal (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 1754-2413 • E-ISSN: 1754-2421 |
| Publisher | Emerald Publishing Limited (PUBLISHER • GB) |
| DOI | 10.1108/gm-03-2018-0037 |
| OpenAlex | W2952701496 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 5 |
| References cited | 36 |
Purpose Anonymous recruitment seeks to limit managers’ reliance on stereotypes in employment decisions, thereby reducing discrimination. This paper aims to explore how managers interpret the information embedded in anonymised job applications and how they interpret the organisational priorities driving the adoption of anonymous recruitment. Design/methodology/approach Semi-structured interviews with 30 managers in two Australian public sector organisations were analysed. Findings The results showed that managers used implicit signals and cues to infer the gender identities of applicants in anonymised applications, reintroducing the possibility of bias. Managers perceived that anonymous recruitment sent positive external signals to prospective employees but were sceptical about its effectiveness. Research limitations/implications The results showed that removing applicants’ names and identifying information from applications may not be sufficient to reduce bias. In organisations where managers are sympathetic to equity and diversity issues, use of anonymous recruitment may provoke resentment if managers perceive organisational distrust or inconsistent objectives. Limitations regarding the size and nature of the sample are acknowledged. Practical implications Organisations seeking to reduce gender discrimination in recruitment may consider adopting standardised application procedures or training managers to understand how stereotypes affect evaluations. Organisations should also assess managerial support for, and understanding of, anonymous recruitment prior to implementation. Originality/value The findings add to existing knowledge regarding the effects of implicit gender signals in managers’ assessments and the effectiveness of anonymous recruitment in reducing gender bias. It also contributes to signalling theory by examining how managers interpret the signals conveyed in organisational policies
Business · Distrust · Gender diversity · Originality · Political science · Public relations · Value (mathematics · Employer Branding and e-HRM · Gender Diversity and Inequality · Gender Politics and Representation · Psychology · Social Psychology
Debiasing Interventions for the Age of AI
Educating Engineering Students to Address Bias and Discrimination Within Their Project Teams
Engineering Equity
Change agents or defending the status quo? How senior leaders frame workplace gender equality
What Can Public Health Administration Learn from the Decision-Making Processes during Covid-19
Sex Discrimination in Restaurant Hiring
Detecting Discrimination in Audit and Correspondence Studies
Signaling Theory
Implicit social cognition
Self-Reports in Organizational Research
Description and Prescription
Are Emily and Greg More Employable Than Lakisha and Jamal? A Field Experiment on Labor Market Discrimination
Unintended Effects of Anonymous Resumes
Improving College Access and Success for Low-Income Students
Gender role stereotypes and requisite management characteristics
Untangling the relationship between gender and leadership
Assessing gender biases
Unconscious Bias Training
Developing the Research Basis for Controlling Bias in Hiring
Using thematic analysis in psychology
Job Market Signaling
Managerial Perspectives on Implicit Bias, Affirmative Action, and Merit
Do Anonymous Job Application Procedures Level the Playing Field
Getting a Job
| Unique citing works | 5 |
|---|---|
| Citations per year | 1 |
| Citation span | 2021 - 2026 (6) |
| Citation velocity | current |
| Highly cited | No |
| Citation types | Neutral: 5 |