UNFAIRNESS IN HIRING PROCESS

Unfairness in Hiring Process

Unfairness in Hiring Process

Chapter I

Problem statement

Research has clearly established the effects of job sex-typing on employee selection decision processes (see Eagly and Karau (2002) for a review) which continue to impact modern work contexts, including the legal (Gorman, 2005), financial (Roth, 2006), and scientific professions (Neithardt, 2007). In a recent meta-analysis, male job candidates were preferred over females for male sex-typed occupations and females over males applying for female sex-typed jobs, although the discrimination was less for female applicants when additional job-relevant information (e.g., education, experience) was provided (Davison and Burke, 2000).

Introduction

Over the years, researchers have investigated different organizational hiring strategies such as shifting standards (Biernat, 2003) and criterion choice (Uhlmann and Cohen, 2005) in an attempt to better understand the persistent nature of job sex-typing. Recent research has differentiated between two types of gender bias--descriptive and prescriptive. Descriptive gender bias in organizations is present to the extent female colleagues are described in stereotypical terms such as nurturing, caring, warm, etc. It is making assumptions about the characteristics of individuals based on their group membership. Recent research has not found evidence of descriptive gender bias in organizations (Gill, 2004; Hardin et al., 2002).

Although recent organizational research has not found evidence of descriptive gender bias, evidence of a more subtle and insidious form called prescriptive bias remains. Prescriptive gender bias is concerned with how females "should or should not act" in various situations. For example, employees with a prescriptive gender bias believe female colleagues should not be agentic (e.g., assertive, forceful, ambitious) but rather should be communal (e.g., affectionate, helpful, interpersonally sensitive) in their work behaviors. In fact, Gill (2004) argued that hiring strategies may involve this type of gender bias. Although job-relevant information may facilitate the elimination of descriptive gender bias, recent evidence indicates such information may be less useful in eliminating prescriptive gender bias (Gill, 2004). Additional research is needed to investigate the impact on hiring decisions of prescriptive gender bias which is thought to be less noticeable and more difficult to detect, but nonetheless may unwittingly affect our hiring perceptions.

The current study combines several research areas by investigating the process of criterion choice for sex-typed jobs utilizing a prescriptive gender bias perspective. The current research enhances our understanding of the persistent nature of job sex-typing, identifies contributing factors that impact criterion choice, and adds to our existing knowledge by operationalizing the presence of prescriptive gender bias in hiring decisions. The practical implications of these findings for organizations can be profound since prescriptive gender bias may prevent the most qualified job candidate from being selected and/or the hiring process may perpetuate a lack of organizational diversity, thus reinforcing gender stereotypes and job sex-typing.

Chapter II

REVIEW OF LITERATURE

Potential for Bias in Organizational Hiring Strategies

One biased strategy for hiring job candidates involves shifting the comparison standards used in the application of hiring criteria depending on the applicant gender (Biernat and Manis, ...