Is busy-ness distracting you from asking questions?
Have you ever stopped to think that an organisation’s focus on ‘busyness’ is a clever way to distract us from questioning the way it might behave? The answer is ‘probably not’ as you don’t have a moment to take a breath!
This thought hadn’t crossed my mind until completing my PhD opened up very different ways to understand how an organisation’s preoccupation with tight deadlines, fast-paced activity and quick-fire decision-making can be a very clever defensive strategy to protect the internal status-quo.
Let’s explore how an organisation’s pre-occupation with short-term thinking impacts on ageist talent recruitment. Whilst recruiters often justify the exclusion of older workers from talent considerations on the basis the future will be so different from the experience base older workers possess, there is a certain irony in the research noting a rise in the use of past success models and the selection of future leaders having the same skills as past leaders.
The impact of work environment on talent decision-making
Ageism is often described as an individual belief structure associated with the existence of a perceived ‘unconscious bias’. The impact of the work environment on people’s belief structures and decision-making is regularly overlooked in exploring issues of diversity within organisations. Exploring as part of my PhD research how HR managers came to understand talent meaning, all confirmed they operated in high-pressure short-term focused operating environments that drove them to make fast recruiting decisions. The emphasis was on quick rather than considered talent recruitment decisions.
Research demonstrates that an outcome of working in high pressure work environments is the tendency of individuals experiencing time and attention pressures to usually revert to using mental ‘short cuts’ to guide their decision-making. These mental ‘short cuts’ are technically understood as a heuristic, which is simply an internal thinking script used to simplify decision-making. Objectivity is replaced by a subjective reliance on ‘rules of thumb’ or ‘educated guesses’ based on past experiences that meet the immediate decision requirements. Unfortunately, the use of ‘mental short cut’ decision-making is often associated with biased and systemically mistaken outcomes. The use of ‘mental short cut’ talent recruitment decision-making often leads to the reinforcement of existing organisation talent norms and protection of the status quo; a back to the future outcome.
Clear examples of subjective ‘mental short cut’ talent decision-making include:
Hiring in the decision-maker’s image in the belief this will ensure performance target achievement and ongoing job security.
Assessing hiring suitability based on whether applicants possess the right age profile deemed consistent with the decision makers’ existing stereotype for a given job.
Using earlier negative experience in managing diversity as a reason not to consider recruiting from a specific diversity group.
Relying on the certainty and security of past practice as a fail-sure method of reducing recruitment risk and decision-making accountability.
How This Organisation Practice May be Harming Your Business
A short-term focus on ‘busyness’ and activity may be seriously contributing to sub-optimal talent recruitment decisions, an overlooking of more diverse talent pools and an inability to adapt recruitment thinking to changes in the labour market. Intense pressure to make quick recruitment decisions sees recruiters seek security in past practice as a guide to hiring for contemporary talent. As our research shows this actually increases the risk of an ineffective hire.
We would encourage adopting a more evidence-based approach to talent recruitment to maximise the opportunities of making great hiring decisions rather than expedient ones. Some questions to ask are:
When was the last time you seriously analysed whether your definition of ‘talent’ remains fit for purpose?
How do you understand your future capability needs in more strategically aligned social and economic terms rather than in shorthand ‘sound bite’ ways?
How have you re-engineered your recruitment processes to increase your “quality of hires” and to be more inclusive? The continuing pressure of organisations on short-term activity and fast-paced recruitment decision-making is a contributing factor to the exclusion of the older worker as a great talent solution.
Do you know how much your existing recruitment practices may be penalising your business?
If the above questions have made you reflect on your workplace dynamics, please contact us and let us help you take practical steps to transform your existing workplace into an inclusive age-neutral one that develops your competitive and performance capability.
References
Cook, A., & Glass, C. (2009). Between a rock and a hard place: managing diversity in a shareholder society. Human Resource Management Journal, 19(4), 393-412.
Gochman, I., & Storfer, P. (2014). Talent for tomorrow: Four secrets for HR agility in an uncertain world. People & Strategy, 37(2), 25-28.
Goldberg, B., C., Perry, L. E., Finkelstein, M., L., & Schull, A. (2013). Antecedents and oucomes of targeting older applicants in recruitment. European Journal of Work and Organisational Psychology, 22(3), 265 - 278.
Hessell, T. (2021). ‘Talent and Age. How Do Human Resource Manager Meanings of Talent Influence Their Perceptions of Older Workers?’. PhD Thesis. University of Newcastle. Australia.
Hiscox, M. J., Oliver, T., Ridgeway, M., Arcos-Holzinger, L., Warren, A., & Willis, A. (2017). Going blind to see more clearly: unconscious bias in Australian Public Service shortlisting processes. Retrieved from https://www.pmc.gov.au/news-centre/domestic-policy/beta-report-going-blind-see-more-clearly
Karaevli, A., & Hall, D. T. (2002). Growing leaders in turbulent times: Is succession planning up to the challenge? Organizational Dynamics, 32(1), 62-79.
Potts, J. (2010). Can behavioural biases in choice under novelty explain innovation failures? Prometheus: Critical Studies in Innovation, 28(2), 133-148.
Zheltoukhova, K., & Baczor, L. (2016). Attitudes to employability and talent. Retrieved from https://www.cipd.co.uk/Images/attitudes-to-employability-and-talent_2016_tcm18-14261.pdf
