Many firms and recruiters insist on including at least one woman in their candidate shortlists to boost diversity. But is one woman enough? The inclusion of more than one woman not only makes the selection process fairer but also promotes gender diversity and equity at work. Here's why.
At Godliman, our Godliman Rule requires at least two women (or diversity) candidates on our shortlists. Initially, we thought one would suffice, especially considering women comprise about 25-30% of the Asset Management industry. However, we've since realised that one is not enough. Why does a shortlist need more than one woman?
In "The Authority Gap", Mary Ann Seighart argues that having only one woman on a shortlist reinforces the notion that men are the default choice for the role and that hiring a woman is a risk. But by adding just one more woman to the shortlist, the odds of hiring a woman increase significantly.
Similarly, a 2016 Harvard Business Review article titled 'If there’s only one woman in your candidate pool, there’s statistically no chance she’ll be hired' echoes this sentiment. It suggests that people's unconscious bias towards preserving the status quo, combined with the majority of the candidate population being men can lead to an unconscious preference to hire more men.
The Harvard Review team conducted three studies. The first study showed that, when most finalists were white (demonstrating the status quo), then participants tended to recommend hiring a white candidate. However, when most finalists were black, participants recommended hiring a black candidate.
The second study focused on gender instead – and found a similar result. When two of the three finalists were men, participants tended to recommend hiring a man; and when two of the three finalists were women, participants tended to recommend hiring a woman.
The third study tested whether having more than one woman in the finalist pool would increase the likelihood of hiring a woman. And, indeed, the odds of hiring a woman were 79.14 times greater if there were at least two women in the finalist pool.
Their studies warned that when there was only one woman in a pool of four finalists, their odds of being hired were statistically zero. But, by adding just one more woman to the shortlist, decision-makers are more likely to consider hiring women.
But it's not just about numbers. Perception plays a crucial role too. When there's only one woman, it could lead to unconscious bias that she's there merely to meet the diversity quota and not a serious contender. If the shortlist has a reasonable gender balance, the focus shifts from gender to qualifications and experience, leveling the playing field.
This doesn't mean that a woman will be hired simply because she's a woman. It means she's considered for the role on an equal footing, with the final decision based on individual merit. That seems fair to us at Godliman.
Comments