SERVICES MANAGEMENT


Résumé screening heuristic outcomes: an examination of hiring manager evaluation bias


ALEX SUSSKIND PROFESSOR


Peter and Stephanie Nolan School of Hotel Administration


Cornell SC Johnson College of Business Cornell University


Equality, Diversity and Inclusion, February 2023 LINK TO PAPER LINK TO VIDEO


Co-authors • Alex Susskind, Professor, Cornell Peter and Stephanie Nolan School of Hotel


Administration, Cornell SC Johnson College of Business, Cornell University


• Beth Livingston, Tippie College of Business, University of Iowa • Ozias A. Moore, Lehigh University College of Business


Summary Despite ongoing efforts over 50 years, Black–White employment inequality


persists in tandem with opposition to race-based policies in employment. Te observed racial disparities in employment have generated renewed interest in understanding how status quo and group social hierarchies maintain and justify intergroup behavior. Modern résumé formats (e.g. LinkedIn) include not only an applicant’s credentials but also headshot photographs, providing information about an applicant’s race in addition to their experience. Te purpose of this paper is to examine the role of a hiring manager’s perceptions of race-system justification, that is, support for the status quo in relations be- tween Black and White job candidates in reinforcing or mitigating hiring bias related to in-group and out-group membership during résumé screening.


In an experimental study involving 174 human resource managers, the authors tested two boundary conditions of the expected relationship between hiring manager and job candidate race on candidate ratings: (1) a hiring manager’s affirmative action (AA) attitudes and system-justifying attitudes and (2) a job candidate’s manipulated suitability for a position. Tey found that information on a candidate’s objective suitability for a job resulted in opposite-race pos- itive bias among Black evaluators and same-race positive bias among White evaluators in one study, while positive attitudes toward Affirmative Action policies resulted in in-group favoritism and strengthened a positive same-race bias for Black evaluators in both studies.


TO IMPACT CONTENTS


RESEARCH WITH IMPACT: CORNELL SC JOHNSON COLLEGE OF BUSINESS • 2023 EDITION


69


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68  |  Page 69  |  Page 70  |  Page 71  |  Page 72  |  Page 73  |  Page 74  |  Page 75  |  Page 76  |  Page 77  |  Page 78  |  Page 79  |  Page 80  |  Page 81  |  Page 82  |  Page 83  |  Page 84  |  Page 85  |  Page 86  |  Page 87  |  Page 88  |  Page 89  |  Page 90  |  Page 91  |  Page 92  |  Page 93  |  Page 94  |  Page 95  |  Page 96  |  Page 97  |  Page 98  |  Page 99  |  Page 100  |  Page 101  |  Page 102  |  Page 103  |  Page 104  |  Page 105  |  Page 106  |  Page 107  |  Page 108  |  Page 109  |  Page 110  |  Page 111  |  Page 112  |  Page 113