Samantha Obery
Judgment and Decision Making
How could the representativeness heuristic become a problem in recruiting and hiring decisions? And what might be an effective remedy? (Be sure to address both parts of the assignment.)

Heuristics are cognitive shortcuts that we use, as they require less mental administration for the purpose of information processing. The representativeness heuristic is a cognitive evaluation of the probability derived from the resemblance between an event A and B. It is the premise of this paper to show that the representative heuristic often proves helpful in our daily decision-making, however we demonstrate that our over reliance on the representative heuristic can lead to the perpetuation of systemic biases. The discussion then proposes pragmatic cognitive process such as the role of attention, consequence evaluation and base rate sourcing for the purpose cognitive self-monitoring. Given that the recruitment process is important, we should examine to what extent the representative heuristic affects this operational process. By nature the recruitment process preempts reliance on heuristics.
A well-poised female candidate is being interviewed. The recruiter already visualizes her favorably within in the office. Although her CV identifies her as being married for 9 years, the interviewer asks the question anyway, expecting an answer along the lines of, “my husband is wonderful, he really is a family man”. Instead, the interviewer hears that they are going through a messy divorce and believes the candidate has been running her family home for well over a year on her own.
The mental framework of a single mother of 2 gets thrown up in the interviewers mind. The rule of thumb that the interviewer relies on is: A single mother will be divided between her commitment to her family and commitment to her job. The recruiter finishes the interview quickly after having already decided that, she wont be hired. In fact, he didn’t see her fitting into the company all that well anyway, as her dress code is little risqué. A heuristic can lead to systemic bias when it decreases a recruiter’s sensitivity to seeking alternative information that contradicts the validity of the initial representation. Leading questions structured for the purpose of confirming initial assumptions contributes to the illusion of validity.

Having identified how heuristic leads to bias, what measures can we adopt to combat this within recruitment? The utility of heuristics is undeniable, however if simplified frames of reference serves to inhibit our ability to assess the validity of our initial assumptions – the heuristic has overstepped its utility. Confirming our initial conclusions requires objective assessment of relevant data.
Seeking out relevant base rates pertaining to performance of senior single mother top executive positions is a starting point. In fact there is scant statistical data pertaining to performance rates of single mother top executives. However, there is plenty of data which correlates business profitability with child-care facilities and initiatives designed to assist working mothers. Paying attention to details, which contradict their original assessment may be easier said then done in interview practice, therefore adopting rotational recruiters for the purpose of giving recruiters feedback on their assessments may be an organisational check to consider in the recruitment process. A recruiter may be more open to this process in recruitment practices, if their manager reminded them of the consequences and potential of a discrimination lawsuit.

--------------------------------------------
[ 1 ]. The mother may not be encumbered by the restraints that the recruiter’s representation associates with single parenthood. For example if she has family support from parents or she can afford the services of a full time nanny.
[ 2 ]. The disadvantage of a heuristic is that it could lead to incorrect conclusions derived from inattentive evaluations of available data, perpetuating systemic biases as identified by Tversky and Kahneman 1974.
[ 3 ]. More often than not, the interviewer may find that the candidate is going to confirm his “sneaking suspicions.” If that is the case, then they are entitled to a proud confirmatory pat on the back, but the confirmation of a representation can only occur once relevant information is assessed. Specifically in the context of recruitment this responsibility cannot be abdicated.
[ 4 ]. http://www.workingmother.com/best-companies.