黑洞社区

Diversity and equality at work is a relatively simple concept 鈥� it means that there are no barriers preventing certain groups of people from taking advantage of professional opportunities and that nobody is treated differently because of their personal characteristics.

The Equality Act 2010 has made this a legal requirement, protecting people for their gender, age, race, religion, disability and sexual orientation, among other features. 

In reality, however, these still appear to be a factor in recruitment, promotion and performance related decisions. The gender pay gap that was revealed by the legal requirement introduced in April for larger organisations to publish the difference in average pay between their male and female employees highlighted the fact that more needs to be done in the construction industry to ensure nobody is passed up for a position or a promotion because of their gender.

The benefits to companies in tackling this are documented too: research from consultant McKinsey in 2015 found that companies in the top quartile for gender diversity were 15% more likely to have financial returns that were stronger than their industry average.

Discrimination is not always deliberate 鈥� these decisions are often made subconsciously. The term 鈥渦nconscious bias鈥� describes the tendency for people to make assumptions about others based on cultural context as well as on their personal experiences and background.

For recruiters, who sift through hundreds of CVs and applications to fill roles, this may mean unconsciously making decisions based on the applicants鈥� names or backgrounds. 

Research shows that this type of decision-making does happen. As part of a University of Toronto and Ryerson University study carried out in Canada last year, researchers sent out 13,000 computer-generated CVs in response to more than 3,000 job adverts.

The findings showed that people with Chinese, Indian or Pakistani-sounding names were 28% less likely to be invited for an interview than those with English-sounding names.

Findings showed that people with Chinese, Indian or Pakistani-sounding names were 28% less likely to be invited for an interview than those with English-sounding names

Assumptions work the other way around, too. Textio, a service that uses artificial intelligence to analyse the wording of recruitment material, says that certain words and phrases in job adverts may put particular candidates off.

For example, a job that calls for someone to 鈥渕anage鈥� a team is more likely to attract applications from male candidates, as are words such as 鈥渃ompetitive鈥� and 鈥渓eader鈥�, while 鈥渄eveloping鈥� a team, 鈥渟upport鈥�, and 鈥渋nterpersonal skills鈥� appeal more to women.

Tackling the problem

Other than using more neutral language in job adverts, organisations can use blind recruitment 鈥� a practice of removing certain personal information such as names and gender from CVs. Many big employers, such as the BBC and Deloitte, have adopted this as a way of ensuring candidates are called for interview based only on their experience and skillset.

Employers do not just need to be wary of unconscious bias relating to gender or ethnicity; peole can also be put at a disadvantage by other factors such as their socioeconomic background.

To tackle this, some organisations remove the names of universities from applications, to ensure people are not being selected or rejected based on the perceived prestige of their academic institution.

But there are limits to how far blind recruitment can even out the playing field. Sonia Watson is chief executive of the Stephen Lawrence Charitable Trust, which was set up in memory of the murdered teenager who dreamed of becoming an architect and which advises businesses on how to tackle unconscious bias.

She points to the other factors that can unfairly affect a candidate鈥檚 chances 鈥� for example, the cost of pursuing particular career paths. 鈥淭ake architecture,鈥� she says. 鈥淭he length of the degree is always going to be an issue. Trying to sustain yourself for seven years is a long time, considering the socioeconomic factors at play, particularly in London.鈥�

There are limits to how far blind recruitment can even out the playing field

Some students, she adds, just cannot afford to work on several portfolios of their work to supplement their education. 鈥淰oluntary work, a year out in work experience 鈥� all of these are additional barriers in the recruitment process. You need someone to welcome you in and pay you to do your year out.鈥�

Watson explained that the trust鈥檚 work was born out of a lack of diversity in architecture. She explains: 鈥淲e were trying to understand why there was less opportunity to be a practising architect from a BME background than there was 25 years ago.鈥�

The trust鈥檚 work is demand-led 鈥� partly in response to the built environment asking questions about how to increase diversity in its organisations. This, Watson says, is particularly relevant if you are working on a public sector project, where there might be targets set for diversity. And the trust鈥檚 focus goes beyond recruiters, to also helping candidates boost their CVs.

鈥淲e want to help people get ready to apply for roles and supplement their skills acquired through higher education with some of the more nuanced softer skills that they might not have built up, such as debating, presenting, group work and the like. 

鈥淥nce the applicant has been taken through these steps, they have a degree, a good portfolio, presenting skills, and they鈥檙e well placed in a blind recruitment process.鈥�