Talent News Round-Up: Seductive Language, Broken Hiring, and Bias Interrupters
Staying updated on the latest workforce trends is crucial for TA leaders and HR professionals. This week, we delve into three significant developments shaping the talent landscape and get SocialTalent Director of Content, Holly Fawcett’s first-hand takes on these pieces.
- Our first article is from Fortune and looks into how certain words in job descriptions can lead to a influx of narcissistic candidates. An intriguing topic that highlights the power that particular phrasing can have in the hiring process.
- Next, we explore a Fast Company article that digs into the rise of ‘bot wars’ in the recruiting space. Is AI innovation leading to a culture of broken hiring?
- And finally, HR Brew are talking about bias interrupters this week and how these can help reduce workplace bias and discrimination.
Join us as we explore these pivotal insights and their implications for the future of work.
1. Recruiters, Beware: Narcissistic Applicants are Drawn to this Kind of ‘Seductive’ Language
Source: Fortune
A new study warns recruiters that using enticing phrases like “ambitious” and “thinks outside the box” in job postings can attract narcissistic candidates. These individuals are often drawn to “rule-bender” language and are more likely to engage in unethical behavior, especially in accounting roles. Researchers from the universities of Maryland, Mississippi, and South Carolina suggest that companies should rethink their wording to avoid hiring candidates prone to fraud and misconduct.
Holly Fawcett’s take on this:
“This study is fascinating… but is there much that we can do in recruiting to filter out narcissistic candidates? Considering that about 2% of people in the world have traits associated with Narcissistic Personality Disorder (NPD), and CEO’s are three times more likely to have NPD than the general population, is it our place to analyze and diagnose people’s psychological wellbeing? Absolutely not. However, I agree with the tactical premise behind the study: change up your job post wording. There is a ream of interesting research along this line, starting with Gaucher, Friesen and Kay (2011) that indicates “masculine” coded words repel female candidates, but that “feminine” coded words attract both female and male candidates, especially those from marginalized backgrounds.“
2. AI Broke Hiring. Can Generative AI Fix it?
Source: Fast Company
The current hiring process has turned into a battle of bots, with AI automating both job applications and candidate screening, leading to a flawed and inefficient system. As AI-generated applications flood recruiters, the process becomes a “bot war” that fails to genuinely assess talent. Raphael Ouzan suggests a solution: a new AI platform that goes beyond keyword matching, focusing on deep analysis of skills and experience to assemble teams efficiently, potentially ending this dystopian cycle and creating a more human-centered hiring process.
Holly Fawcett’s take on this:
“I suppose it was only a matter of time before job applications became a perpetual bot-to-bot conversation loop, and yes this is a bad thing. There’s no putting the toothpaste back in the tube so it is best that we find a way forward that includes the use of AI rather than try desperately to prove someone is a human. What Ouzan is proposing is an innovative potential solution, as is (dare I suggest it) meeting people in person. Ever since the deep fake Zoom call incident that cost Arup $25m scared us all, it’s time for yet more doom: real time deep-fakes have started to hit the internet. Real human interaction in hiring is proving its weight in gold right now!“
3. Bias Interrupters are Key to Reducing Workplace Discrimination
Source: HR Brew
A recent report by the Equality Action Center (EAC) and the Conference Board highlights the effectiveness of “bias interrupters” in reducing workplace discrimination. These strategies, which help identify and mitigate unconscious bias, led to significant improvements in hiring and performance reviews for underrepresented groups. For instance, a manufacturing firm saw a rise in job applications from people of color, and a tech company improved job offer rates for women. The report emphasizes the need for clear, standardized criteria and C-suite support to sustain diversity, equity, and inclusion (DE&I) efforts.
Holly Fawcett’s take on this:
“Bias Interrupters are absolutely necessary for any strategy to improve the fairness of hiring, promotions and performance evaluations because they are the structural configuration our brains need to remain fair across the board, and to raise our awareness in real time of where we fail in that endeavour. It’s really promising to see such dramatic improvements in representation when bias interrupters are put in place, but we can’t rely wholly on this as a panacea: cognitive dissonance will still kick in and we might justify our actions with other reasons when it’s pointed out to us that we’ve made an unfair judgement. Tools like Textio have been on the market for years and are really effective for both job ad language and performance feedback. Ultimately, it’s the tone from the top that matters whether managers throughout the company make real changes.“