3 ms·
If the goal is to prevent people from being biased, why not anonymize candidate packets? Zoom interviews can also be anonymized easily. If it's the case that eq
by Manuel_D 2y ago
If the goal is to prevent people from being biased, why not anonymize candidate packets? Zoom interviews can also be anonymized easily. If it's the case that equally strong, or stronger, candidates are being passed over anonymization should solve this.
Rather than working to anonymize candidates, every DEI policy I've witnessed sought to incentivize increasing the representation of specific demographics. Bonuses for hitting specific thresholds of X% one gender, Y% one race. Or even outright reserving headcount on the basis of race and gender. This is likely because the target levels of representation are considerably higher than the representation of the workforce. At Dropbox the target was 33% women in software developer roles. Hard to do when ~20% of software developers are women.
- gr3ml1n 2y agoIf you anonymize applications you don't hire the 'right' ratio.
- eapressoandcats 2y agoAnonymization is probably an under tried idea. Various orchestras switched to blind auditions and significantly increased the number of women they hired.
- shreyshnaccount 2y agopeople can cheat in anon interviews?
- Manuel_D 2y agoThey can cheat non-anonymous interviews too. An alternative is to have candidates go in person to an office to interview, but the grading and hiring panel only sees anonymized recordings of the interview.