A groundbreaking new study by economists Kline, Rose, and Walters reveals what many have known for decades—name bias is still a pervasive issue in the hiring process. The researchers sent out a series of identical resumes to analyze whether race and gender impacted callback rates of job applications at 97 U.S. employers. The study analyzed distinctly “Black” names and “white” names as well as male and female names, among other demographic differences. The results revealed that white and female names received the most callbacks followed by white male names. Black male names and Black female names were called back the least, respectively.
When assessing gender differences, the researchers did not find prominent differences in callback rates between male and female applicants overall—racial differences were more pronounced. Results did vary by industry and firm, with the automobile industry having more pronounced racial differences in callback rates than other industries. The research also revealed that the smallest estimated racial bias was within food stores. The study mirrored many of the same findings of previous studies on name bias and discrimination in hiring.
In a study from over two decades ago, researchers Bertrand and Mullainathan analyzed the callback rates for identical resumes sent out with either Black names or white names in Boston and Chicago. The results of their study provided evidence of pervasive racial discrimination against Black-sounding names during the hiring process. Name bias isn’t just a United States phenomenon. A Swedish study from 2007 found that job applicants with Swedish-sounding names received more callbacks than job applications with Arabic or African-sounding names across different occupations
It is imperative for hiring professionals to not only be aware of these trends but to actively integrate safeguards to mitigate bias in the hiring process. Currently, there is a movement to defund and dismantle DEI, with DEI detractors getting louder and louder each day. DEI propaganda propels the myth that DEI is used primarily as a means to grant unearned privileges to marginalized groups. The aforementioned studies provide evidence to the contrary; despite the DEI disdain, biases in the workplace persist. DEI can be an effective tool to address these disparities.
What specific DEI strategies can be utilized to address name bias in hiring, particularly when it comes to Black-sounding names, which experience some of the most severe penalties during the hiring process? The first step is awareness. As mentioned, hiring professionals must be educated about name bias to create systems to overcome this type of bias. Offering DEI training and education specifically for hiring professionals, and continuing to share research, articles, and anecdotes about name bias in the hiring process can be helpful. We should be less worried about completely eradicating our unconscious biases (which is not realistic) and instead, focus on developing systems to make our hiring process more equitable.
There is some evidence that suggests that in some circumstances, anonymizing the resume by removing demographic information like a name, college graduation year or hobbies can address some of these initial biases in hiring. Organizations and institutions should consider integrating this strategy into their hiring process, especially within industries more susceptible to racial and other types of biases. In addition to anonymizing resumes, ensuring that there is an objective process to evaluate job candidates is vital. Utilizing a scorecard or a rubric and also interrogating and operationally defining your criteria for job candidate culture fit can be effective methods to ensure that equity is baked into the hiring process.