I recruit engineers for startups and small companies around PA/NY, and I'm likely part of what you would consider the problem. I've worked with companies that h

I recruit engineers for startups and small companies around PA/NY, and I'm likely part of what you would consider the problem. I've worked with companies that had high turnover and horrible process, and some with almost no turnover that continuously refined their process based on various conditions. I think there is some fear of anti-discrimination law, but I don't think that has a significant impact on process (at least within my clients over 15 years). I never got the impression any candidate was hired in order to fill in some sort of diversity hire check box. What other processes would you suggest companies are not brave enough to try? There are undeniable biases in the system, but I think it's not bravery or fear that are the problem. What methods are there to remove all biases? Any examples to perfect the hiring process are likely adding significant cost (time and money) to the process that most companies would deem unnecessary. I think most companies would admit they don't always hire the best candidate, and may have rejected some good ones. Dealing with a finite applicant pool, some of these decisions (regarding best available) are not so difficult.