Assignment #2.edited (1)

docx

School

Egerton University *

*We aren’t endorsed by this school

Course

Subject

Management

Date

Nov 24, 2024

Type

docx

Pages

Uploaded by AmbassadorGorillaPerson904

Assignment #2 Student Institution Course Date word count:2314 1

Introduction Implicit biases significantly impact decision-making within organizations, particularly in the realms of recruitment and advancement. These biases, often hidden beneath awareness, present challenges to cultivating diversity and inclusivity in the workplace. They stem from various factors, such as age, gender, and ethnicity, exerting influence on opportunities for individuals. This paper explores implicit biases in diverse scenarios and presents strategies to counteract them, aiming for a more equitable work environment. By examining practical situations and empirical evidence, this paper seeks to reveal the pervasive nature of these biases and provide actionable insights to diminish their effect on decision-making within organizations. Question1 Implicit biases can significantly influence decisions about hiring and promotions, potentially leading to behaviours that undermine efforts to foster diversity and inclusivity within organizations. When considering implicit biases linked to age, managers might unconsciously lean towards favouring younger candidates due to perceived technological prowess, inadvertently neglecting the substantial value experienced individuals can bring by providing stability and profound insights ( Vuletich & Payne, 2019). Conversely, biases favouring seasoned candidates could result in the exclusion of younger, inventive talents. The context of hiring and promotions can magnify gender biases, resulting in stereotyping and allocating specific roles based on gender distinctions. These biases might lead to a disproportionate preference for men in leadership positions, stemming from the perception of their assertiveness. In contrast, women could be confined to roles stereotypically linked with nurturing or administrative responsibilities. A comprehensive study conducted by LeanIn.Org and McKinsey & Company highlighted that often face being bypassed for promotions, contributing to the concern leadership gap ( Redmond, 2020). A parallel phenomenon emerges with racial biases, where decision-makers might 2

unknowingly favour or exclude candidates based on their racial backgrounds. An extensive analysis published in the American Economic Review demonstrated that resumes with names perceived as traditionally white received significantly more callbacks than those with names associated with African American heritage, highlighting the potent influence of racial biases. For a more profound understanding, consider this: implicit biases can have unintended consequences that reverberate through various layers of the organization. Biases relating to age, gender, or race can sometimes, obscure candidates' true potential opportunities based on preconceived notions. A pivotal example lies in the disparity often observed in boardrooms, where the underrepresentation of certain groups is traceable back to implicit biases affecting crucial decisions. Moreover, such biases can lead to a lack of diversity in leadership, hampering innovative thinking and inclusive strategies that drive organizational growth. Question 2 To effectively alleviate implicit prejudices and cultivate a truly comprehensive work environment, enterprises should proactively employ tactics addressing biases tied to age, gender, and ethnicity. Utilizing structured hiring procedures with standardized interview queries to evaluate competencies can mitigate biases. Fisher al. (2022) underscore the effectiveness of structured interviews in substantially reducing biases related to gender and ethnicity, showcasing a marked shift from the limitations of unstructured interviews. Diversifying interview panels constitutes a pivotal strategy in countering implicit biases. Abundant research, including insights from the Harvard Business Review, underscores the worth of diversified panels countering personal biases. This operation disrupts the perpetuation of skewed perspectives, fostering a more holistic evaluation of candidates and enhancing impartiality in decision-making processes. 3

Your preview ends here

Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version

Access to all documents
Unlimited textbook solutions
24/7 expert homework help

Blind recruitment, a practice that eliminates personal identifiers from initial resume reviews, is a powerful tool for curtailing latent biases. A compelling illustration lies in the Australian Public Service Commission's application, leading to a 15% surge in shortlisting women (Woollacott, 2018). This approach underscores the potential of eradicating recognizable attributes, a pragmatic avenue to diminishing biases at the outset of recruitment. The ascent of awareness training manifests as a transformative tactic, empowering individuals to identify their intrinsic biases and subsequently counteract them during decision-making. Embracing inclusive policies stands as a cornerstone in battling implicit biases. Organizations advocating diversity and inclusion through policies, like those promoted by Catalyst, cultivate a culture esteeming individuals for abilities and contributions rather than classifying them solely based on age, gender, or ethnicity. These policies attest to an organization's commitment to cultivating an environment exalting diversity at all organizational levels. In essence, the execution of multifaceted tactics underscores an organization's commitment to confronting implicit biases. Integrating these practices into the organization's core nurtures a culture of equitably harnessed opportunities, fostering a workforce flourishing on distinctive strengths individuals bring, irrespective of historical factors that have been breeding grounds for biases. Section 2: PB Tech Question 3 Confirmation Bias Confirmation bias is a prevalent cognitive bias that significantly impacts decision-making ( Berthet et al., 2021). In the context of PB Technologies' CFO selection, this bias can profoundly impact the senior VP's judgment, leading to a skewed evaluation of the candidates. When a senior VP possesses a favourable perception of Suzanne T. Valdez, grounded in previous interactions or 4

familiarity, this preexisting belief acts as a filter through which they perceive the available information. They may actively seek evidence that aligns with their opinion of Valdez, potentially overlooking or giving lesser weight to data that contradicts this perception. This selective attention can lead to an overemphasis on Valdez's accomplishments and qualifications while sidelining or underestimating the strengths of the other candidates, Kristin B. Koljord and Nancy F. Larson. For instance, if the senior VP had previously collaborated closely with Valdez and found her to be an able and competent colleague, they might unconsciously dismiss certain of Koljord's or Larson's equally pertinent profiles. This bias can hinder the senior VP's ability to objectively assess each candidate's diverse skills and experiences (Berthet et al., 2021). Suppose Koljord has a distinct sales background, and Larson has a robust track record in accounting and SEC analysis. In that case, these attributes might receive a different level of consideration than Valdez's achievements, thus creating an imbalance in the assessment process. Status Quo Bias The status quo bias is a psychological tendency that influences individuals to favour the existing state of affairs, even when other options may offer potentially better outcomes. This bias can have notable effects on decision-making, particularly in the case of internal promotions, where familiarity with a candidate might lead to a preference for maintaining the current situation. In the context of PB Technologies' CFO selection, the presence of Suzanne T. Valdez as an internal candidate brings her long history within the company to the forefront. Some senior VPs may perceive Valdez as a safer choice because they are familiar with her performance, skills, and contributions over the years(Hu & Shealy, 2020). This inherent familiarity can create a sense of comfort and reduce perceived risks associated with selecting an external candidate like Kristin B. Koljord. The result of this bias could be a conservative approach, with some senior VPs leaning towards Valdez due to the perceived stability and predictability she represents ( Hu & Shealy, 2020). This inclination to maintain the status quo might unintentionally stifle the exploration of fresh perspectives and innovative talents 5

that an external candidate like Kristin B. Koljord could bring to the organization. Koljord, coming from a different background and having unique experiences, could introduce new ideas, diverse viewpoints, and alternative approaches that could be valuable in addressing PB Technologies' challenges. For instance, if PB Technologies is facing a period of rapid expansion and needs to adapt its financial strategies to accommodate growth, an external candidate like Koljord, with her experience from Technology Solutions, Inc., might bring fresh insights on how to manage such expansion and adapt to the competitive landscape. Anchoring Bias Anchoring bias is a cognitive bias that plays a significant role in decision-making processes (Stralen & Mercer, 2021). In the context of the CFO selection at PB Technologies, this bias can significantly impact how the senior VP group evaluates the candidates. When discussing the qualifications and contributions of the first candidate introduced, in this case, Suzanne T. Valdez, the information presented about her establishes a reference point or "anchor" for subsequent evaluations of the other candidates. This initial anchor can disproportionately influence how the group perceives the qualifications and achievements of the remaining candidates, including Kristin B. Koljord and Nancy F. Larson if ValdeSupposes impressive qualifications and contributions are highlighted at the beginning of the discussion. In that case,ior VP group might inadvertently develop a cognitive bias towards maintaining the attributes presented in that initial anchor. This means they may focus more on Valdez's accomplishments and qualities, possibly neglecting to critically and independently examine the full range of qualifications and experiences of all candidates. This could lead to a situation where the group unconsciously compares the subsequent candidates to the initial benchmark set by Valdez, potentially overshadowing their unique strengths and contributions. For example, suppose Valdez's extensive experience within PB Technologies and her successful track record are the first topics discussed. In that case, the senior VP group might unconsciously use this information as a reference point for evaluating the subsequent candidates(Stralen & Mercer, 2021). This could make it 6

Your preview ends here

Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version

Access to all documents
Unlimited textbook solutions
24/7 expert homework help

challenging for them to give equal weight to Koljord's diverse managerial experience from her time at Technology Solutions, Inc., or Larson's significant role in accounting and SEC analysis. In-group Bias The in-group bias is a cognitive bias that stems from the natural tendency of individuals to favour or have a more positive disposition towards those who share similar traits, experiences, or backgrounds. In the context of the senior VP group tasked with recommending a CFO for PB Technologies, this bias can have a notable impact on the evaluation process, potentially favouring a candidate who resonates with the experiences or preferences of a specific senior VP. If one of the candidates, Suzanne T. Valdez aligns closely with the professional experiences or personal preferences of a particular senior VP within the group, there is a risk that this alignment may lead to that candidate receiving more favourable consideration. This unintentional favouritism can stem from a sense of comfort and perceived shared understanding, where the senior VP might feel a kinship with Valdez due to their common background or shared experiences within PB Technologies or the industry. The in-group bias, while driven by human inclinations, can hinder the ability of the senior VP group to fully appreciate the diverse skillsets, perspectives, and potential contributions that other candidates like Kristin B. Koljord or Nancy F. Larson might bring to the company. Koljord's experience in sales or Larson's background in accounting, for instance, could offer fresh perspectives and complementary abilities crucial for addressing PB Technologies' challenges. However, these unique attributes might receive a different level of consideration if the in-group bias becomes dominant. Halo Effect The halo effect is a cognitive bias that can profoundly impact decision-making, particularly in evaluating candidates for a high-profile position such as the CFO of PB Technologies ( Scheepers & Ellemers, 2019). This bias occurs when a single candidate's remarkable positive trait constantly 7

influences the overall impression, potentially overshadowing other essential factors that should be considered. In the case of the senior VP group evaluating the CFO finalists, if Kristin B. Koljord is presented as an excellent public speaker, this standout trait might capture the group's attention. The appeal of a strong public speaker can be compelling, as effective communication is vital for leadership roles. However, the danger lies in this single attribute dominating the evaluation process, diverting focus away from other critical qualifications that a CFO should possess. For instance, while public speaking is undoubtedly important, it is just one aspect of the multi-CFO's multifaceted responsibilitiesO's role involves financial acumen, strategic decision-making, risk assessment, operational oversight, and alignment with the company's overall business objectives. If the group disproportionately fixates on Koljord's public speaking skills, they might not adequately assess her fit for these broader responsibilities. This imbalance in evaluation could lead to a skewed assessment, where the group fails to consider other essential qualifications and attributes needed for the CFO role. Groupthink Groupthink, a multifaceted cognitive phenomenon, wields substantial influence on decision- making within a collaborative context, including the senior VP group entrusted with formulating the CFO recommendation for PB Technologies. This phenomenon surfaces when a robust craving for consensus permeates the group, leading to uniformity in thought and action. This inclination towards alignment can reshape the trajectory of CFO selection, steering the group towards a manufactured cohesion rather than a sincere embrace of the diverse spectrum of viewpoints and discerning evaluations requisite for a truly enlightened proposition. This disposition inadvertently curbs the audacity to articulate dissenting perspectives and novel propositions, constructing a veneer of harmony that masks the absence of rigorous scrutiny. Visualize a scenario where this longing for univocal accord subtly silences the voices that deviate from the prevailing disposition. The apprehension of unsettling an ostensible unity engenders 8

hesitancy towards dissenting opinions, potentially inducing discomfort or discord ( Scheepers & Ellemers, 2019). Consequently, the medley of alternate viewpoints, imaginative insights, and constructive appraisals might recede, constraining the thorough exploration of each candidate's capabilities, potential constraints, and singular contributions. To illustrate, imagine a senior VP harbouring an innate affinity for Suzanne T. Valdez, possibly rooted in prior instances of fruitful collaboration. In pursuing an outwardly seamless outcome, other voices may unconsciously falter in articulating concerns or proffering viewpoints that counter this inclination (Scheepers & Ellemers, 2019). Such a scenario could inadvertently narrow the senior VP group's focus, blunting the depth of their deliberations concerning the distinct qualifications and potentials of candidates like Kristin B. Koljord or Nancy F. Larson. Conclusion In conclusion, addressing implicit biases is essential to foster inclusivity and fairness in organizations. Recognizing biases related to age, gender, and ethnicity is crucial. Proactive approaches encompass structured recruitment, varied interview panels, anonymous application reviews, consciousness-raising training, and embracing comprehensive policies. These strategies counter biases, uphold fairness, and tap into diverse viewpoints. Incorporating these practices signals a dedication to bias reduction, cultivating a workforce enriched by various strengths. Overcoming biases promotes innovation, cohesion, and resilience. Organizations can achieve their objectives while championing diversity and inclusiveness. 9

Your preview ends here

Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version

Access to all documents
Unlimited textbook solutions
24/7 expert homework help

References Berthet, V., Teovanovic, P., & de Gardelle, V. (2022). Confirmation bias in hypothesis testing: A unitary phenomenon? Fisher, P. A., Robie, C., Hedricks, C. A., Rupayana, D. D., & Puchalski, L. (2022). Little cause for concern: analysis of gender effects in structured employment references. International Journal of Selection and Assessment , 30 (3), 361-377. Hu, M., & Shealy, T. (2020). Overcoming status quo bias for resilient stormwater infrastructure: Empirical evidence in neurocognition and decision-making. Journal of Management in Engineering , 36 (4), 04020017. Redmond, A. (2020). Together We Can An Analysis of Barriers to Women in Leadership and the Unique Challenges Facing Women of Color (Doctoral dissertation). Scheepers, D., & Ellemers, N. (2019). Social identity theory. Social psychology in action: Evidence- based interventions from theory to practice , 129-143. van Stralen, D., & Mercer, T. A. (2021). Inductive Processes, Heuristics, and Biases Modulated by High-Reliability Organizing (HRO) for COVID-19 and Disasters. Neonatology Today , 16 (9). Vuletich, H. A., & Payne, B. K. (2019). Stability and change in implicit bias. Psychological science , 30 (6), 854–862. Woollacott, A. (2018). Being a Women’s Adviser at the State Level: Deborah McCulloch and Don Dunstan in 1970s South Australia. Australian Feminist Studies , 33 (95), 97–113. 11

Appendix: Figure 1: Age IAT result Figure 2: Gender – Career IAT result

Your preview ends here

Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version

Access to all documents
Unlimited textbook solutions
24/7 expert homework help

13 Figure 3: Asian IAT result

Assignment #2.edited (1)

Related Documents