Prior to selecting a candidate and making an offer, it is important to avoid the common shortcuts that can derail the interview process and lead to a biased selection. These are explained below.

Cloning. "Cloning" is replicating oneself by hiring someone with similar attributes or background. It also refers to undervaluing a candidate’s research because it is not familiar, as well as expecting candidates to resemble someone whom the search committee is replacing. Cloning limits the scope and breadth of approaches and perspectives in research, teaching, and service.

Snap Judgments. These are judgments made about the candidate with insufficient evidence. This includes dismissing a candidate for minor reasons or labeling a candidate “the best” and ignoring positive attributes of the other candidates. It can also include a covert agenda furthered by stressing something trivial or focusing on a few negatives rather than the overall qualifications. Snap judgments often occur when the hiring process feels rushed.

Negative Stereotypes. Negative stereotypes are characterized by presumptions of incompetence. The work of women and under-represented minorities is scrutinized much more than the work of majority faculty, at all stages of the academic career.

Positive Stereotypes. Majority group members are automatically presumed to be competent. Such a member receives the benefit of the doubt, negative attributes are glossed over, and success is assumed. This is also called the “original affirmative action” because majority group members are automatically presumed qualified and thereby given an unearned advantage.

Elitist Behavior (also called “Raising-the-Bar”). This means increasing the qualifications necessary for women and minority candidates because their competency doesn’t strike committee members as reliable. The qualifications of women and minorities, based on their accent, dress, and demeanor, are downgraded. In short, uneven expectations are based on a candidate’s social identity.

Wishful Thinking. Insisting racism, sexism, and other forms of prejudice no longer exist.

Euphemized Bias:

Visionary. Members of majority groups are evaluated based on their potential whereas under-represented groups are judged on their accomplishments and their track record only. For example: “He has vision” or “She lacks vision.”

Star. "Star" is used when the speaker is an infatuated fan of the candidate under consideration. When you hear it, ask the speaker to explain their use of the term and support it with evidence. For example: “She’s not a star” or “It’s clear he’s a rock star.”

Committed, single-minded focus, or hard-worker. These terms could be cloaking a bias against care-givers, those faculty members who cannot depend on what Williams (2000) calls a “flow of family work” that allows ideal workers to log long hours in the office while still having their material needs met.

Download the "Common Shortcuts" PDF

(Retrieved from http://www.engr.washington.edu/lead/biasfilm/materials/shortcuts.html on June 15, 2015)