Tag Archives: Employment

What do we know about age stereotyping in personnel decisions?

Leave a reply

Dr Lisbeth Drury and Dr Keely Jo Frasca share insights from a new commentary paper published in Work, Aging and Retirement with co-authors Maaike Schellaert and Prof Eva Derous (Ghent University).

Do age stereotypes influence personnel decisions? While there is a wide body of research exploring age stereotyping in the workplace, a recent commentary paper by Murphy & DeNisi (2021) has questioned the validity and usefulness of lab studies in this area. In the commentary paper ‘Age Stereotyping in Resume Screening: Don’t Throw the Baby Out With the Bathwater’, we explore the implications and validity of research in this area and suggest some avenues for future research.

Why stereotypes matter in resume screening

Stereotypes are widely held, over simplified ideas about the characteristics and behaviour of particular social groups. We know from impression formation theory (Fiske & Neuberg, 1990) that we revert to stereotypes when meeting a stranger, but that we consider people on an individual basis when more detailed information is provided, for example through conversation.

Many personnel decisions are made once staff are known on an individual level, for example performance reviews, promotion decisions, or offers of employment following an interview. In these instances, knowing the person on an individual level is more likely to influence decision-makers’ thinking than stereotypes.

However, when it comes to external hires, the process of reviewing resumes can be viewed as a ‘stranger-to-stranger’ interaction, which is more likely to lead to stereotyping because of the lack of wider knowledge about the candidate. While we cannot exclude the impact of bias at interview, we expect age stereotypes to have the greatest influence at resume screening stage. It is, therefore, important to examine the effects of age stereotypes in resume screening separately from other types of personnel decisions.

Issues with lab studies

Lab studies have been criticised because scenarios where participants judge fictitious workers ‘on paper’ are not deemed realistic (Murphy & DeNisi, 2021). This may be true in the case of performance evaluations or promotion decisions, where a written vignette may not feel true to life. However, for job applications, which are in an ‘on paper’ format in real life, such studies may offer greater validity.

Furthermore, there is criticism about the use of student participants to judge resumes, rather than HR personnel or assessors with experience. However, most studies include a combination of both types of participants and decisions are similar across these two groups.

Triangulating the findings of age stereotype research

It is important to note that resume screening research does not always report age bias towards older workers. This could be for several reasons, for example how the study has been designed and whether age cues in the resumes are implicit (e.g. an older sounding name) or explicit (e.g. date of birth). More research is needed to understand the conditions that cause disparities in findings, by decreasing or increasing bias.

Age stereotypes are complex and research in this area uses a wide range of methods and theoretical approaches. While each study alone may not give a full picture, together they provide a wealth of evidence that is greater than the sum of their parts. By combining what we know from different methodologies, disciplines and theories, we can reach greater insight.

Instead of ‘throwing the baby out with the bathwater’ by discounting particular types of research, we should conduct more research in both the field and lab, triangulating the results, to gain a holistic understanding of how and to what extent age stereotypes affect the outcomes of resume screening.

Further Information

 

Share

Promoting Neuro-Inclusion in Bordeaux

Leave a reply

Ben Morris is a PhD candidate at Birkbeck’s Centre for Neurodiversity at Work. He reflects on a presentation given at the 15th European Academy of Occupational Health Psychology Conference, 6-8 July 2022, University of Bordeaux, France.

To what extent does the traditional triad job selection process (CV, interview,
references) hinder job seekers who are neurodiverse or neurotypical to access
employment?

Even though there are a lot of programmes like ‘Autism at Work’ and other
employment initiatives for people with disabilities, the employment gap for
neurodiverse people is still big. One of the things that makes it hard for neurodiverse
people to get and keep regular, paid work is that the world of work is set up for
neurotypical people, including the recruitment process.

At the conference in Bordeaux, I talked about my future research, which will be about
finding the right ‘fit’ and how, when done right, this can help both the neurodiverse
person and the organisation. Finding the right ‘fit’ for an organisation can be good
for the health and well-being of employees. The hiring process can also have an
effect on an applicant’s health. I also talked about the good things and strengths
about hiring a neurodiverse person from an employer’s point of view and used
evidence from the literature to back this up. I told them that my study would be about
the ways that the traditional triad recruitment process chooses people (CV, interview
and reference).

The goal of the study is to answer the question, ‘To what extent does the traditional
triad job selection process (CV, interview, references) hinder job seekers who are
neurodiverse or neurotypical to access employment?’

I went on to say that the methods used to do this will be based on a review of the
literature and conversations with stakeholders, including people who have lived
experience.

Further Information

Share

Ageing Populations and Macroeconomy

Leave a reply

Yunus Aksoy smiling into the camera.Professor Yunus Aksoy shares how ageing populations impact the workforce and discusses possible policy responses.

Ageing populations are a global phenomenon. They are caused by two main trends:

  1. Fertility decline: the number of children per woman in a population has been slowly decreasing since the 1990s.
  2. Declining mortality rates: people are living longer due to medical advances and lifestyle changes.

These demographic structure changes have wide-reaching impacts in the short and medium/long term. However, the fact that their impact is not visible day-to-day means that they are relatively less discussed in everyday policymaking. My work with my colleagues Professor Ron Smith at Birkbeck, Dr Henrique Basso at the Bank of Spain and Dr Toby Grasl investigates the impact of ageing populations on macroeconomy in general and brings it to the table in policy circles. I am very pleased to see that the issue has started to be taken seriously by many international organisations like the IMF, ECB, World Bank, BIS and numerous central banks. Our research has had significant impact on the debate.

Economists tend to concentrate on growth, inflation and unemployment rates, and what Central Banks and Finance Ministries can do to stabilise the economy over the short term. However, there are other deep and slowly changing forces affecting the economy about which policymakers can do little. The weak recovery after the global financial crisis has sparked renewed interest in these longer term forces, including demographics, which had often been ignored. As individuals, we are often aware of the adverse effects of ageing, as the years go by. Societies can suffer similar adverse effects from ageing, and most developed economies are ageing.

According to the UN Population Division, almost every developed economy has seen a decline in fertility rates and an increase in life expectancy. As a result, the average proportion of the population aged 60+ is projected to increase from 16% in 1970 to 29% in 2030, with most of the corresponding decline experienced in the 0-19 age group in 21 OECD economies.

In the 1960s, Simon Kuznets suggested that a society consisting of consumers, savers and producers can grow in a sustainable way if the demographic structure was a rough pyramid. Larger at the bottom, where there are the youngest – up to the age of twenty or so – the working age next – then at the top a smaller group of older people. The pyramid is now turning upside down, with the bulge at the top.

Why is the demographic structure relevant?

Our research has examined the impact of demographic structure on economic activity, productivity, and innovation. Demographic structure may affect long and short-term economic conditions in several ways. Different age groups have different savings behaviour; have different productivity levels; work different amounts (as the very young and very old tend not to work); contribute differently to the innovation process; and have different needs. Therefore, changes to the demographic structure of a society can be expected to influence interest rates and output in both the long and short-term.

Our analysis shows that the changing age profile across OECD countries has economically and statistically significant impacts and that it roughly follows a life-cycle pattern; that is, people who are likely to be dependent on state or other forms of support – generally the very young and the old populations – seem to reduce economic growth, investment and real returns in the long-run.

Demographic structure also affects innovation; the economy is less likely to develop and/or patent new innovations/inventions. Similarly, productivity, which is driven by innovation, is positively affected by young and middle aged cohorts and negatively by the dependant young and retirees.

Demographics, innovation and medium-run economic performance

When people expect to live longer, they save more for their retirement and consume less, increasing demand for investment products and causing a decline in their returns. This provides one explanation in the steady decline in real interest rates in OECD countries since the 1980s. But it leaves us with a puzzle. A decrease in long-term interest rates should increase investment, but that is not what we observe. Our estimates show that long-term investment is declining. Our solution to the puzzle is that aging has also lowered the productivity of investment, reducing the incentive to invest, because the rate of ideas production and innovation, mainly done by the young, has reduced.

With fewer younger people in the population, there will be less creativity and ideas. Thus, while the cost of investment finance may be lower due to higher savings of the aging population, there are not enough ideas worth capitalising on and so long-term investment and real output declines. An ageing population also throws up social challenges, such as the provision of care for the elderly and how this can be supported.

Are there solutions?

While immigration may address the shortage of workers in the middle of the age categories, the political problems it raises are such that governments are usually unwilling to develop immigration policies that would truly address the issue. Furthermore, as populations are aging globally, this is not an adequate long-term solution. Giving more childcare support for young parents could help increase fertility rates and this is also related to building human capital starting from a very young age.

Increases in productivity by investing in human capital, education and skills is of crucial importance, as is increased funding for research and development that could bolster a  generation of new ideas and create new innovations and investment opportunities.  At Birkbeck, we have long understood the importance of lifelong learning that is directly associated with productivity gains for the economy, which in the current climate could help to compensate for a reduced workforce and staggered productivity. Robots and AI could also address the productivity/labour supply challenges, especially if we reach a point where machines can generate innovations and robots might be used more to fill gaps in the work force and provide care for the elderly, but it might make more people unemployed.

A typical challenge is that politicians are often short sighted. Long-term investment in order to boost human capital and productivity would not be a top priority for an incumbent politician in the short term, despite the transformative effects they could have for the generations to come.  Often, what we think is happening now is the slow moving changes that started a long time back, so a long-term view is essential to tackle the economic impact of ageing populations to address the future.

Further Information

Further Reading

Share

Introducing the Centre for Neurodiversity at Work

6 Replies

Accessible Summary

The Centre researchers are Almuth McDowall and Nancy Doyle. They found that science has ignored lots of important questions about neurodifferences. The found most research looked at children not adults or work. It didn’t think about race or gender or sexuality. They wanted to help.

They are working with a board who have different backgrounds. The board are neurodiverse. The Centre wants to make sure that people who are being studied are part of decisions. The Centre wants to help employers get better at including. The Centre wants to help neurodifferent people reach their potential.

Visual Summary

Infographic showing some of the key statistics shared in this blog.

What is the Centre for?

The Centre for Neurodiversity Research at Work (C4NRAW) is spearheaded by the Department of Organizational Psychology in the School of Business, Economics and Informatics at Birkbeck, University of London and Genius Within, a social enterprise focusing on HR and inclusion services. We’d like to introduce ourselves and our research priorities.

How it started

The Centre is Co-Directed by founders Professor Almuth McDowall and Dr Nancy Doyle, both Organizational Psychologists known widely for their expertise in Neurodiversity and organizational psychology. This brings a holistic perspective for this important topic. They met when Almuth supervised Nancy’s PhD, which was an evaluation of coaching as a disability intervention for Dyslexic adults. The PhD included a review of neurodiversity research, in which we discovered that hardly any research is focused on adults. The small amount of funding and publications is not in balance with how many adults there are with different neurotypes. For example:

  • Even though there are almost as many people with Tourette Syndrome as Autistic people, there is almost 50 times as much research about Autistic people as Tourettes.
  • There is also 50 times more Autism research than Dyspraxia research, even though there are 5 times as many Dyspraxic people as Autistic people.
  • Around 63% of ADHD research is aimed at children.
  • 94% of Dyslexia research is aimed at children and literacy.
  • Adults have different concerns compared to children, like memory, organization, and time management skills.

We also noticed that there were very few studies looking at intersectional exclusion, by that we mean the added layers of bias and discrimination faced by those who are female, belong to the Global Ethnic Majority or LGBTQ+ communities. Autism research tended towards white cishet[1] males, frequently from privileged backgrounds. Most of the dyslexia research (60%) involved scanning the brains of kids to find the bits that are “broken!”

There were only a handful of papers related to ND[2] strengths, though we quickly summarized these and set about publishing them. We started evaluating what “works” so that we could inspire employers to provide the right support.

Our Mission

Our ongoing mission is to focus on addressing the missing research and linking it into employment practice. We want more employers to feel confident in operating neuroinclusive practices so that we can bust through the disability employment gap for invisible disability. Employers often have misconceptions about what neurodiversity means. For example, it is often assumed that dyslexia is difficulty with reading and writing, whereas it can manifest as difficulty with memory, time management, organisation and wellbeing.

Around 22% of the entire population are neurodivergent, but in the UK, just 53.6% of disabled people are currently in work, compared to 81.7% of those who are not disabled. Many more disabled people could succeed in the workplace if they were given access to reasonable adjustments.

Neurodiverse people bring unique qualities to the workplace, including creativity, focus, strategic thinking, innovation and problem-solving. We want neurodivergent adults to work at their best, more of the time. We want to reduce unnecessary barriers to work, and in work see more neurodiverse career progression.

We recently published a paper called “Diamond in the Rough” in which we set out all these research priorities and how we would like to tackle them. Please feel free to click through to our research page if you would like to learn more about what we’ve already achieved.

Centre Membership

Our ambition is for the Centre to be staffed and led by a neurodiverse team: that is a balance of generalists and specialists complementing each other. Nancy is an ADHDer, and we have an Advisory Board which is comprised of researchers, practitioners and those with lived experience. We are currently seeking representation from the LGBTQ+ community, do feel free to reach out, the Board meet twice a year to review research priorities and advise the Directors on ethics and sharing results.

We have several ND PhD and professional doctorate students who are part of the Centre by virtue of studying a Neurodiversity or Disability (including neurodiversity) focused PhD at Birkbeck[3]. They are Uzma Waseem, Charlie Ekton, Jessica Dark, Greg Swaysland and Ben Morris.

We’ll be using this blog to communicate our research findings in an accessible format and start conversations with our wider community. We’ll post calls for research participants and would like to work with our donor team on corporate funding for specific projects. Do feel free to reach out and to join our mailing list if you haven’t already!

We are working towards a world where neurominorities equal specialism rather than exclusion and work is neuroinclusive. We are pioneering the design, evaluation, and practical implementation of Universal Design for Human Resources. We are walking our own talk and making sure that there is “nothing about us without us” in ND research at work. And we are super excited to only just be getting started!

Further Information

[1] “Cis” meaning not transgender and “het” meaning heterosexual.

[2] We’re going to use ND as an abbreviation for neurodifferent / neurodivergent / neurodiverse as we know all three of these can be preferred. We also use Neurominorities as an umbrella term for ADHD, Autism, Dyslexia, Dyspraxia, Dyscalculia, Tourettes and more.

[3] Birkbeck was established with the sole purpose of educating working people through flexible education scheduled so that people who are in work can take part. Therefore social justice has always been at the heart of Birkbeck’s mission.

Share