3 ms·
I think the issue was closer to one where the interviewer (all but) hires the "non-diverse" candidate and then as an afterthought interviews the "diverse" candi
by takinola 2y ago
I think the issue was closer to one where the interviewer (all but) hires the "non-diverse" candidate and then as an afterthought interviews the "diverse" candidate. This clearly defeats the spirit of the plan.
As for your specific hypothetical, it still seems to be contrary to the stated goals. My guess is you'd want to cast your net wide to get a cross-section of qualified candidates and maybe not just hire from the same sources that produce homogenous candidates
- jmpman 2y agoI’ve had job opening where I’ve had maybe 5 applicants. They were all subject to the same screening questions, all well documented and interviewed by multiple people. Usually within the first 2 questions you could tell if the person had even the slightest chance of being a good fit. Yet, we would have to continue the interview in order to be fair to all candidates. With our company’s salary (low), hiring in a competitive field, we were lucky to get any applicants. Yet we had to wait for a diverse candidate to apply. We had already interviewed the previous 5, already has them stack ranked, and as soon as a diverse candidate applied, and was dutifully interviewed, the job was offered to the most qualified. I don’t see how this is any different than what is being raised as a concern.