1. Reframing the Search & Hiring Process Friday, February 12, 2016 12:30-3:30pm BE3212 Betty Williams Tina Young 1

2. Outcomes Participants will:  increase their understanding of cognitive bias and how it impacts the hiring process  develop skills using Search Advocate and Diversity & Equity in Hiring and Professional Development (DEHPD) resources and apply to job description development  be introduced to the Search Advocate program 2

3.  Diversity, Equity, Equality and Inclusion – Concepts and Practices  Review of terms  Social Identity Category-Rank Matrix  Prompt: Think about a social identity category/rank where you have agent status and how it has informed your work with students and colleagues  Discuss with person next to you  Cognitive Dissonance 3

4. Cognitive bias Structural bias  Cognitive bias – unconscious patterns of thought which have the unintended effect of conferring advantage to some and disadvantage to others (Krieger 1995; Reskin 2000)  Structural bias – institutional patterns and practices that confer advantage to some and disadvantage to others based on identity. (McIntosh 1988; Rosette 2006) © Oregon State University Office of Equity and Inclusion 2013 All Rights Reserved 4

5. How does cognitive bias occur?  In Social Systems Identity is socially constructed We learn social and cultural values May be influenced by past/hidden prejudices  Humans develop cognitive schemas Mental “file-folders” of information about categories of persons, places, things, These serve as mental models/prototypes/expectancies 5

6. How does cognitive bias occur?  As we encounter individuals… All humans use a pre-conscious shortcut called STEREOTYPING We select the schema that most closely matches the individual We use it to interpret/predict their behavior and tell us how to react Predicting individual characteristics based on group membership can lead to unintended discrimination © Oregon State University Office of Equity and Inclusion 2013 All Rights Reserved 6

7. Cognitive Bias Concepts  Categorization  In group/Out group preferences  Stereotypes  Descriptive  Prescriptive  Attribution Bias 7

8. More Cognitive Biases (sample)  Just-world – tendency to believe the world is just and that people “get what they deserve”  Confirmation bias – tendency to interpret information to confirm preconceptions  Essentialism – categorizing people and things according to their “essential nature” regardless of variations  Hostile attribution – tendency to interpret others’ ambiguous behaviors as hostile rather than neutral  Halo effect – tendency for one’s positive or negative traits to “spill over” from one area of personality to another in others’ perceptions 8

9. More Cognitive Biases (sample)  Negativity bias – tendency to pay more attention/give more weight to negative than positive experiences/ information  Selective perception – tendency for expectations to affect  perception  Bias blind spot – tendency to see one’s self as less biased than others  Moral credential effect –tendency for a track record of nonprejudice to increase subsequent prejudice  False consensus – tendency to overestimate how much other people agree with one  Status quo bias – tendency to like things to remain the same © Oregon State University Office of Equity and Inclusion 2013 All Rights Reserved 9

10.  Prompt: Think about a hiring committee experience or an experience you have had as an applicant for a job. Refer back to the Social Identity Category/Rank matrix, How may unconscious bias have been in operation in your experience?  Discuss with person next to you 10

11. Structural Bias is an aspect of privilege in which:  Positions of power tend to be …held by members of a dominant group  Excellence tends to be …identified with that group  Attention tends to be …centered on members of that group (the “norm”) See Privilege, Power, and Difference, Allen Johnson, 2001 (Chapter 8) © Oregon State University Office of Equity and Inclusion 2013 All Rights Reserved 11

12. Privilege EARNED UNEARNED *Accrues to people *Bestowed due to with achieved status ascribed status *Merit based (related *Not merit-based to dominant norms) *Seen by beneficiaries *Often not apparent and community to beneficiaries Everyone has privileged and disadvantaged identities © Oregon State University Office of Equity and Inclusion 2013 All Rights Reserved 12

13. Structural Bias Unexamined norms:  Standards, expectations, assumptions, beliefs  Define key aspects of organizational culture  Mostly based on/invisible to the dominant group Unearned privileges:  Advantages/benefits/rewards not available to all  Degree of similarity to normative/dominant group  Not merit-based  Not within the beneficiary’s control  Related to social context © Oregon State University Office of Equity and Inclusion 2013 All Rights Reserved 13

14. Creating and Maintaining Structural Biases 14

15. Oregon State University Search Advocate Model Overview 15

16. Seattle District Colleges Total: 15,906Total: 319

17. Seattle District Colleges Total: 15,906Total: 710

18. WA State Supported Students Total: 155,480Total: 3,572

19. Seattle Colleges and AFT Seattle MOU Signed January 2015  We are jointly committed to ensure that there are no internal barriers in our collective bargaining agreement, hiring practices and systems, bias or lack of cultural sensitivity by search committees, etc.

20. Relevant provision in the Collective Bargaining Agreement will be updated to include expectations that committee members reflect the diversity of our community including race/ethnicity and other protected categories; cultural competency will also be a factor in putting together search committees

21. Additional Goals of the MOU:  Cultural competency/systemic bias training for all faculty on a continuing basis  Search Advocacy training for faculty wishing to serve on committees  Outreach and recruitment strategies aimed at increasing diverse candidate pools  Provide necessary resources to support process changes, including stipends and other compensation considerations  Collaboration with the respective campus Diversity Directors in support of positive onboarding and retention initiatives for newly hired faculty, with a focus on faculty of color

22. Search Advocacy – based on OSU Model Creating effective search committees  Membership of committee includes intentional diversity of group, with expectation of race/ethnicity diversity, cultural competency skills of members, and inclusion of other aspects of protected classes as is possible  Training and resources provided to the committee to create a process of reflection regarding the impact of unconscious bias in the hiring process  Tools and resources to create more effective job announcements, advertising outreach, evaluation of candidates and the interview process  Include a well trained Search Advocate to participate in the committee to encourage reflection about unconscious biases throughout the search

23. Search Advocate Role - OSU  Search advocates participate throughout the search and selection process, beginning with development of the position description, and continuing through integration of the new hire.  At every stage, their role is to advocate for the search process itself, and to assist committees in efforts to avoid unconscious, unintentional biases. They actively promote diversity and affirmative action principles by sharing information, recommending inclusive/affirmative strategies, supporting full committee and stakeholder participation, and consulting with the Office of Equity and Inclusion as needed.  In collaboration with search chairs, search committees, and hiring officials, they affirm OSU’s high standard for excellent and inclusive search/selection practices.

24. Job Descriptions Small group discussion: Reference the old job description for a current position that will be hired this academic year Refer back to the definitions of Diversity Consider DEHPD Needs Assessment questions  How are the needs for new and replacement positions assessed? Who has input on that assessment?  How are diversity and equity with regard to students and communities in the service area factored into the assessment of needs for a position?  How are gaps in the existing diversity, cultural competencies, and student relations represented by the staff of a particular department factored into the assessment of needs for a new or replacement position? 24

25. Job Descriptions In your small group, respond to the following questions:  What are anticipated, emerging, or unmet needs which the new person in this position might address?  Who will see themselves in this position as it is presently described?  How can the description or even the position be changed or broadened to engage the interest of a more diverse group of qualified people?  Come up with language for the job description with an example of one qualification identifying relevant performance skills related to question above. 25

26. Qualifications Same small group, consider the position’s:  BASIC QUALIFICATIONS  OTHER REQUIRED QUALIFICATIONS  Avoid or limit arbitrary numeric measures such as a specific number of years  Use words like “should” instead of “must”  Keep basic and other required qualifications as open as possible  Treat basic and other required qualifications as the first steps in screening, not the last…limiting these qualifications does not lessen the quality or rigor of the search 26

27. Qualifications  PREFERRED/SPECIAL QUALIFICATIONS  Identify both key “technical” skills—what they must do— and crucial “performance” skills—how they will do it. Performance skills consist of characteristics such as teamwork, perception, persistence, organization, creativity, versatility, problem-solving, conflict management, consensus-building, leadership, understanding formal and informal systems, multi-tasking, inter-cultural communications, navigating complex organizations, and others.  Ensure that each qualification relates to essential job functions  Open the door to non-traditional career paths and transferable skill sets as you design the qualifications;  Feature qualifications related to the diversity responsibilities and needs of the position. 27

28. Next Steps and North Seattle College’s Experience  North Seattle College had OSU’s Office of Equity and Inclusion Affirmative Action Associate Anne Gillies provide a one day training for their 2013 Presidential Search Committee  AFT Seattle (Faculty Union) and the Seattle Colleges District signed the MOU in January 2015 with a goal of implementing this Search Advocate Process for faculty searches within the district; among other goals to improve equity and inclusion in hiring, retention & professional development practices  The implementation team is working to bring Anne back to the district to provide a “Train the Trainer” workshop so we can adopt our own Search Advocate process for the district. The “Train the Trainer” series will likely involve 3 full days of training.

29. DEHPD 14 Steps and Search Advocate Resources  DEHPD (Diversity and Equity in Hiring and Professional Development) 14 Steps  OSU Search Advocate resources regarding developing the position description and qualifications  Additional materials to use during your search process, i.e., UW Staff Diversity Hiring Toolkit http://www.washington.edu/diversity/staffdiv/ hiring-toolkit/ http://www.washington.edu/diversity/staffdiv/ hiring-toolkit/ 29

30. Thanks for coming! We encourage you to build a team that will work together and continuously apply these and other resources and principals, maintaining a critical evaluator lens throughout the search/hiring process.  Contact Information:  Tina Young, Seattle Central Diversity, Equity and Inclusion Interim Director – tina.young@seattlecolleges.edutina.young@seattlecolleges.edu  Betty Williams, North Seattle College Faculty – betty.williams@seattlecolleges.edu betty.williams@seattlecolleges.edu 30