2 ms·
"Merit" as defined by whom, and measured how? I doubt that many companies disregard the idea of hiring based on merit. They all try to do that, they were trying
by notacoward 9y ago
"Merit" as defined by whom, and measured how? I doubt that many companies disregard the idea of hiring based on merit. They all try to do that, they were trying to do that all along, but that only got them to your step 2. So what do you when even your best effort to create a purely merit-based system has empirically failed to overcome unconscious or structural bias? What's your magic prescription?
- elihu 9y agoOne way to be more meritocratic is to not allow certain kinds of information to influence the hiring decision. For instance, suppose the ones making the decision are allowed to know what the candidate's skills are and what they've done, but not allowed to know where (or if) they went to school, and they're not allowed to know if their previous experience came from an employer or if it was something they did on their own, or how many years they spent doing those things. Making the hiring decision would be harder because there's not as much information to go on, and it's not too hard to fake a superficial understanding of some technology. Presumably one would rely more heavily on rigorous aptitude testing (i.e. more of those whiteboard exercises everyone seems to hate and probably have bias problems of their own).