Alarming research reveals:

Men are hired at a 58% rate even when equally qualified as women.

The bias persists. 

It defies logic.

And it happens despite financial incentives to choose according to actual performance.

The study exposes a deeper problem:

1. When candidates have IDENTICAL qualifications, men are chosen 57% of the time
2. When candidates have DIFFERENT qualifications (but balanced between genders), men still preferred at 58%
3. Participants showed "implicit discrimination" - outwardly supporting equality while favoring men when bias is less obvious
4. Despite being paid to choose the best performer, bias persisted
5. Women and men performed equally in actual tasks

What makes this especially troubling: "Merit redefinition."

Participants justified biases by shifting their values. 

When a man had qualification A, suddenly A became more important. 

When another man had qualification B, suddenly B became more important. 

The qualification deemed "best" conveniently followed the male candidate.

Is your hiring process structured to prevent implicit bias? What safeguards do you have in place?

Reminder: The most dangerous biases operate below our conscious awareness.

*Based on "Explicit and Implicit Belief-Based Gender Discrimination: A Hiring Experiment" by Barron, Ditlmann, Gehrig, and Schweighofer-Kodritsch (2024)