What s in a name A personnel selection experiment on gender bias in applicant assessment
Year: 2012

Organizational practices have been suggested to have an impact on employees' unequal career outcomes. Women's career outcomes may be at a particular risk in highly male dominated fields due to stereotypes and perceived "fit" Decision maker bias in the assessment of applicant's suitability is studied at a university of technology in a personnel selection experiment. Treatments compare results under visibility of gender with a gender blind control condition, and add (varied) information on homophilous ties within the team and on equal opportunity law. Results show women's odds to be ranked for an interview decrease through visibility of gender alone. Women and men face gender stereotypical ascriptions of personal and technical qualities once gender is revealed, putting women at a potential disadvantage for an advertised stereotypically masculine position. Homophily further lessens women's chances; mere reference to the law cannot alter biased outcomes. Findings suggest gender stereotypes and implicit bias in highly male dominated fields need to be addressed to work against unequal selection outcomes for women.  Women remain underrepresented in top positions in management (Oakley 2000) in the public and academic sector alike (Kolpin&Singell 1996, Gilbert 2007) It has been suggested organizations themselves play a key role in perpetuating inequality for their employees' career outcomes (Reskin 1993, Fernandez&Mors 2008) Castilla&Benard (2010) have demonstrated meritocratic organizational culture can paradoxically put female employees at a disadvantage. It has also been suggested 1 christina.keinert@tuwien.ac.at demographic similarity to current members and decision makers means privilege for career advancement (Krefting 2003) Therefore majority minority proportions, perceived team fit and homophily are organizational givens that should be further examined: In group members are suggested to receive more favorable suitability evaluations than out group members (Van der Walt&Ingley 2003) Gendered selection preferences may stem from a need to establish "fit" with current members (Fawcett&Pringle 2000) Theory suggests fit derived performance expectations may cause favorably flawed evaluation processes (Heilman 1997) which could then lead to flawed selection processes in employment (Granleese 2004) In close connection with these considerations, gendered stereotypes/implicit associations regarding the suitability of professions and positions for either gender merit attention. Stereotypical ascriptions attached to gender as a most salient feature (King et al. 2011) can influence assessments of individual performance, capability and qualification. Traits necessary for effective leadership are overwhelmingly ascribed to the male stereotype (Schein 2001) On the functional level, not only management, also academia is sex typed masculine (Gilbert 2007) It has been empirically confirmed women risk to have their evaluation as effective managers or leaders discounted when assessors perceive incongruity between their gender and professional role requirements (Eagly&Karau 2002) In this study, we analyze potential gender bias in personnel selection outcomes in a laboratory experiment. In the following sections we briefly describe theoretical background and hypotheses, experimental design and results. Finally, we discuss implications of findings.  The assessment of employees is a key organizational practice for its direct impact on career outcomes. Through assessment of past performance/future potential and the translation of such assessment into decisive allocation of rewards and posts, employees' careers are determined. For highly demographically homogeneous environments, majority status in salient attributes or features has been suggested to exert disproportionate influence in decision making processes (Van der Walt&Ingley 2003) In a highly male dominated field, it is therefore expected applicant gender will exercise an impact on the assessment of candidate suitability (H1) Aside decisionmaker bias, institutionalized bias in the form of stereotypical associations of who "fits" the existing team are expected to further influence selection decisions (H2) Corporate compliance with anti discrimination laws should ensure effective practices to counter individual/institutionalized bias in applicant selection. It has been added to the discussion existing laws may fail to effectively tackle covert, subtle discrimination (King et al 2011) The ability of the law to counteract such implicit or subtle biases is hence expected to be low (H3) These hypotheses are tested empirically at Vienna University of Technology. VUT lends itself to a study on gendered assessment of applicants' suitability firstly for its pronouncedly low proportion of women overall present in the organization on the student and scientist level. The proportion is decreasing further up the academic hierarchy, suggesting a leaking pipeline phenomenon. Organizational selection practices therefore promise to be interesting from a general majority minority viewpoint as well as from an organizational and professional context perspective.  For this study of personnel selection practices, a single blind experiment with current and future organizational decision makers was conducted. The controlled laboratory experiment allows for the systematic variation of environmental aspects while keeping others constant (Charness 2010) thereby opening opportunities to develop and test different theories in the organizational context (Flynn&Staw 2004) Past research has already utilized (multi treatment) experiments to understand decisionmaker biases (Burmeister&Schade 2007) Croson&Gachter (2010) suggest experiments be used for the study of corporate governance to gain better understanding of organizational dynamics and contexts which provide decisionmakers with incentives to make decisions contrary to organizational interest. In the continuation of this thought, the impacts of gender, homophily and reference to the law on decision maker bias in applicant assessment was explored in four experimental treatments participants were randomly allocated to: 296 members of 3 faculties with differing gender proportions (Technical Chemistry, Mechanical and Civil Engineering) were presented with six realistic job applications in their field, which they worked on in writing. Based on a model experiment (Petersen&Krings 2009) participants assumed the fictitious identity of specialist 2 In total: Full professors (38) senior scientists (52) advanced students (206) senior scientist at a prestigious private technology research institute. The concrete task had participants support HR with their specialist knowledge by (a) ranking three out of six applicants according to their qualification/suitability for a job interview, and (b) justifying their ranking. Half of the candidates were of excellent, half of good qualification, so the selection of exactly three candidates to be ranked for a job interview in the absence of bias should be unambiguous. Qualification levels were designed in cooperation with specialized senior scientists to ensure sound experimental design and internal validity (Webster&Sell 2007, p 75ff) The first treatment, Basic Neutral scenario, presented six complete curriculum vitae stripped of all information regarding applicants' sex. These candidates were manipulated on two levels: Their qualification level (excellent/good) and stereotypical masculinity/femininity. Stereotypical design manifested itself, inter alia, in covering letter wording and interests (Steffens&Mehl 2003) Curriculum Vitae Stereotypical manipulation Qualification level Alma Mater Label (Visible) 1 Feminine Excellent Vienna AMY 2 Masculine Excellent Randomized Munich/Vienna EVA 3 Masculine Excellent Randomized Munich/Vienna LEO 4 Masculine Good Randomized Graz/Vienna BEN 5 Masculine Good Randomized Graz/Vienna ZOE 6 Feminine Good Graz JAN Table 1: CV design and manipulation across all treatments (Neutral and Visible) unless otherwise indicated (Visible) 3 The abstraction from the university as a form of "disembedment" from the familiar context (Guth&Kliemt 2010) wants to mitigate social desirability bias in responses, the major challenge for experiments on socially frowned upon phenomena (Powell 1987) On each of the two qualification levels, a "perfect pair" of equivalent candidates, designed stereotypically masculine (Eva/Leo; Ben/Zoe) competes directly. For both pairs, their alma mater was randomized "Vienna""other" over the entire sample. To render the task more complex and further reduce the threat of social desirability bias in answers, the remaining two candidates on excellent and good levels were designed stereotypically feminine and entirely internal (Amy) and external (Jan) respectively. The second treatment or Basic Visible scenario added names, randomized photos and gendered information such as military service to otherwise identical curriculum vitae. The third treatment brought in a homophily component in the form of a subtle Incentive to favor male applicants: In the experimental guidelines, the institute's HR officer suggested to give thought to team fit and (stereotypically masculine) qualities like assertiveness in order to uphold excellent cooperation with project funding industrial partners. The fourth treatment added a conflicting piece of information regarding the Law, all other things remaining equal: Institute leadership reminded decision makers equal opportunity law had to be respected in all personnel decisions. Since only three out of six applicants were ranked, the generated quantitative data were evaluated using preference models for partial rankings (Hatzinger/Dittrich/Salzberger 2009) This model class extends the basic BradleyTerry model for paired comparisons to other response formats, such as ratings or ranking