Page 132 - Discrimination at Work The Psychological and Organizational Bases

5. ORGANIZATIONAL-LEVEL DISCRIMINATION
101
The extent of discrimination that occurs during the recruiting process
depends on the channels that are used to recruit applicants. The U.S.
Department of Labor found that organizations that actively recruit at mi-
nority/female-oriented colleges and universities evidence lower levels of
discrimination (USDOL, 1995). When engaging in such targeted recruit­
ment strategies, organizations might consider showcasing their diversity
efforts in their recruiting materials, consistent with evidence which indi­
cates that candidates with strong ethnic identities are more attracted to
organizations that explicitly make reference to their diversity initiatives
than those that do not (Kim & Gelfand, 2003). In comparison to organiza­
tions that engage in targeted recruiting, organizations that rely on informal
networks to fill open positions (both from internal and external labor mar­
kets) may increase the probability of discriminating against groups who
often do not have equal access to the social networks that are connected to
jobs (Braddock & McPartland, 1987; Ragins & Sundstrom, 1989).
With regard to selection procedures, much is known about the discrim­
inatory impact of various selection instruments. The best way to combat
discrimination in selection is to use measures that tap as many aspects of job
performance as possible, to utilize different media in terms of the ways in
which content is presented and responses are required (oral, video-based,
and behavioral media exhibit lower adverse impact than written ones),
and to use noncognitive measures such as personality and integrity tests
when possible (Campion et al., 2001). In addition, interviews tend to re­
sult in lower group differences, although the structuring of interviews and
interviewer training to reduce cognitive biases are both important for mini­
mizing adverse impact (Conway, Jako, & Goodman, 1995; Hough, Oswald,
& Ployhart, 2001). In sum, research on adverse impact clearly indicates that
the continued use of only paper and pencil measures of cognitive ability
as a basis for access decisions is unwarranted and will likely be perceived
as unfair by applicants, especially when the job relevance of the measure
is not transparent (Ryan & Ployhart, 2000).
Performance Management There are two main issues involving discrim­
ination in performance appraisal systems, namely removing bias in the
evaluation process itself and ensuring that performance evaluation and
reward systems reinforce the goal of managing diversity and eliminating
discrimination in the workplace (Cox, 1994). Performance management
systems that involve explicit performance expectations, clear performance
standards, accurate measures, and reliable performance feedback, and the
consistent application of these standards across ratees, help to reduce the
chances of discriminatory ratings (Bernardin, Hagan, Kane, & Villanova,
1998; Klimoski & Donahue, 1997; Morrison & Von Glinow, 1990). Whereas
clear expectations are important for minimizing subjectivity and the