Have you ever thought about how your in-house recruiter is creating bias in the workplace? Sure, you need employees and new hires to fit-in with company culture….or do you?
Think about it. Your recruiters screen tens of thousands of applicants every year and speaks to hundreds of candidates. And this could be your AI recruiting tool or a person. We all know that Amazon had to shut-down their AI recruiting tool because it was discriminating against women. Check-out the story here. So, if your recruiter and the qualified candidates do not mesh, do you think those folks are passed along to the hiring manager? That’s a big fat NO. By the way, (hopefully) it is an unconscious bias.
In today’s ever-changing world, companies have to start looking at Diversity & Inclusion as an innovative benefit. All companies, no matter their size, have the ability to implement Diversity & Inclusion in their workplace. The process begins by getting buy-in from the top-down. The executive level folks need to have your back because when we begin to hire differently, the complaints will roll in.
In order to get buy-in from your executives, you are going to have to explain how this will impact the company from a financial and branding standpoint. I suggest to start this process by doing your research on the benefits of an external versus internal recruiter. This may be difficult because your executives may not want to reduce headcount, but hear me out.
If you have a recruiter from an external agency, that solely works for your company, that person’s number one goal is finding the most qualified applicants for your positions; an internal recruiter will have unconscious bias and will focus their attention on which candidates will best fit in with our culture. The internal recruiter will look at qualifications on the resume, however, that’s where it stops…so if you have a stinky resume, your chances of getting a phone interview are next to none. Even if you are the most qualified applicant.
Secondly, an external recruiter does not require liability insurance, workers compensation coverage, benefits, office space (at your company), etc. Next time you have a follow-up meeting with hiring managers and recruiters about the candidates who were interviewed, consciously think about how you all are discussing the candidates. I bet the discussion is revolved around your overvalued foolish beliefs rather than the facts, which are being ignored.
If you need more proof, go back and look at your company’s retention rate since your recruiter was hired. Yes, employees normally leave managers, not companies, BUT if your recruiter did not have bias throughout the recruiting process then maybe their focus would have been more on which candidates will help the company reach its goals and grow versus which candidates do I get along with best and selling those candidates to the hiring manager.