When it comes to complex problems, the solution is often complex and multifaceted.
Solving inequality and bias in hiring for example
We have seen this recently in coverage of projects around the notion of de-gendering and equalising job advertisements. This is a relevant and important step to be sure - but it's not the end of the process. Even taking at face value the worth of 'de-gendering' job advertisements (and ignoring the potential problems with assigning a gender to certain words in a society that spends much of its time arguing for the opposite), we must still look at the next stage, and the next through to the eventual hire if we are to achieve these results. In other words, it's not helpful to change the makeup of your candidate pool if, having gathered your applicants, you proceed to make the same biased decisions in shortlisting.
But we also see it frequently in situations where clients use multiple different vendors for their shortlisting, assessment and onboarding processes. It's no use having one link in the chain operate with industry leading best practice, if every other link is filled with vulnerabilities of data or process. And put frankly, while Covocate sits largely protected at the beginning of the shortlisting process, the value of our blind hiring technology can at times be compromised to an extent by other vendors later in the process if they do not follow the same standards for equality and data integrity.
Covocate are currently working on a solution to this problem that could revolutionise the way this process works, delivering better results for candidates and clients. Stay tuned for updates in the coming weeks.