Step 4: Equitably Evaluating Candidates
The purpose of this step is to establish clear and consistent criteria for the assessmentÌýof candidates' applications and interview responsesÌýso as toÌýmitigate implicit and explicitÌýbiases in the evaluation process.
It is important to noteÌýthat Step 4 (Equitably Evaluating Candidates) and Step 5 (Conducting Interviews Inclusively)Ìýoverlap in the broader faculty-hiringÌýprocess. Members of the hiring committeeÌýandÌýprogram affiliates who weigh in on faculty-hiring decisionsÌýshould reviewÌýStep 4Ìýwhen assessing candidatesÌýat any/everyÌýstage of the job search.ÌýÌý
In other words, to optimally utilizeÌýtheÌýStep-by-Step Guide to Inclusive Faculty Hiring, it will be necessary to pan back and forth betweenÌýStep 4ÌýandÌýStep 5. After all,Ìýeach stageÌýin the interview phaseÌýof the faculty-search process will require strong skills in inclusive and equitable evaluation.Ìý
For a detailedÌýbreakdown of inclusive evaluative techniques, please consult theÌýfour-partÌýguide (Ensuring Equitable Evaluation of Candidates) onÌýthe right-hand margin of this page.
Evaluating the Effectiveness of Steps 1-3
Before the hiring committee can begin to evaluate applications, its members must assess whether steps 1-3 of theÌýStep-by-Step Guide to Inclusive Faculty HiringÌýhave indeed generated a broadly representative applicantÌýpool.Ìý
As discussed inÌýStep 3 (Advertising the Position to Attract a Diverse Applicant Pool), after the application deadline has passed, the hiring committee mustÌýmeet with theÌýAffirmative Action OfficerÌýin Human Resources to broadly evaluate theÌýdemographic composition of the applicant pool and toÌýdetermine whetherÌýbenchmarks for specificÌýfields haveÌýbeenÌýmet.
If the Affirmative Action Officer'sÌýmeasurementÌýof theÌýapplicant pool's diversity does not reflect the unit's commitment to inclusive excellence, the hiring committee mustÌýwork closely with theÌýDiversity and Inclusive Excellence UnitÌýinÌýHuman Resources toÌýreevaluate the strategies it implemented in steps 1 andÌý3, make adjustments, and extend the application deadline. Ìý
When theÌýAffirmative Action Officer'sÌýmeasurement of theÌýapplicant pool's diversity meets university standards, the hiring committee shouldÌýreview diversity statements to further assess whether the applicant poolÌýreflectsÌýthe unit's commitment to inclusive excellence. When theÌýhiring committee is confident in this second measurement of the applicant pool's diversity, its membersÌýmayÌýbegin evaluating applications. It is during the evaluation stage of the hiring process that the committee must take particular care to recognize and counteract structural inequity as well asÌýimplicit and explicit biases. Ìý
Three Phases ofÌýEvaluation
Ìý 1. ÌýSelecting long-list candidates from the entireÌýapplicant pool:Ìý
The hiring committee alone will select long-list candidates from the initial applicant pool.
Candidates who advance from the initial applicant pool toÌýthe long-list pool will proceed to the first round of interviews. Long-list interviews will be conducted through a virtual medium such as an online meetingÌýplatform (see Step 5).
Ìý 2. ÌýSelecting short-list candidates from the long-list applicant pool:
The hiring committee will present an abbreviated summary of the long-list pool to the entire faculty. In addition, the hiring committee will presentÌýa more detailed profile of each candidate that the hiring committee recommends for the short-list pool. The hiring committee shouldÌýconsider blinding these profilesÌý(please see A Note on BlindingÌýon the right-hand margin of this page) before presenting them to the broader faculty.
Whether or not committee members choose to blind information such as candidates' names whenÌýpresenting short-list recommendations to their colleagues, the hiring committee should not include photographs or any other information not directly relevant to applicants' qualifications. The hiring committee shouldÌýalso consider blinding for institution (the university from which each potential short-list candidateÌýhas graduated)Ìýat this phase in the hiring process.ÌýThe hiring committee will then solicit feedback from the broader faculty before finalizing the short-list candidates.Ìý
Candidates who advance from the long-list pool to the short-list pool will participate in site visits (see Step 6), during which time the hiring committee will meet with each candidate for an in-person interview (seeÌýStep 5).
ÌýÌý3. ÌýSelecting the new faculty member from the short-list pool:
FollowingÌýsite visits, the program's entire faculty will select the new hire. Because this stage of evaluation involves program affiliates who are not members of the hiring committee—and because blinding to concealÌýmany aspects of identity and/or group membership is no longer possible—it is imperative that program culture supports the workÌýof diversifying faculty representation. All decisionmakersÌýwho have not already done so mustÌýread the content in StepÌý2—paying particular attention to action items 4, 5, and 6—before they can weigh in of hiring decisions.
For more on the importanceÌýof equitably evaluating candidates, see theseÌýexternal resources.
Ìý
Ensuring Equitable Evaluation of Candidates
A Note on Blinding
A Difficult Decision
One way employers have addressed the problem of implicit bias is to implement blinding during evaluation. Blinding entails removing identifying information from an application prior to review. Applicants are then assessed solely on their documented achievements. When hiring bodies are not trained and composed to recognize and mitigate implicit bias, blinding can protect applicants from discrimination. Likewise, when hiring authorities do not have a nuanced understanding of structural inequity, blinding can also prevent tokenization. It is a tool that faculty-hiring committees in the Environmental Studies Program can consider utilizing. But members should be aware of potential pitfalls. If blinding is implemented at the beginning of the search process (e.g. if the hiring committee is blinded), someone who is not on the committee will have to systematically remove identifying information from all applications. This can be time consuming if not impossible. For example, if the hiring committee solicits diversity statements, many applicants will choose to discuss personal information. And, as was mentioned in Step 3, a strong and inclusive hiring committee can use such information—especially that which pertains to adversity—to contextualize applications in which CVs might not adequately reflect applicants' qualifications. In other words, a well-trained and inclusive hiring body can be better equipped to equitably evaluate applications than one that is blinded. The key is in the hiring body's composition and preparation.
