The UK government passed the Equality Act in 2010 to provide some protection against harassment and a more level playing field for some groups less represented in working environments and society.
Since then, many business players have adopted technology to enhance diversity and inclusion (D&I) and reshape the recruitment challenge. Social media and job boards have become indispensable in widening the collective of candidates and permitting broader experience within the scope of candidates for each recruitment exercise.
From withholding personal identification details to smartphone programs that detect words biased against females, business glitches have now developed to include artificial intelligence, which helps reduce bias against individuals.
However, one may reflect on the migration to virtual recruitment, which has War I and post-War II recruiting/spree-type features that have, by the rush of e-hiring, become even more complex and multifaceted.
People are indeed fighting the cause of D&I, as has been observed in almost every organisation since the Employment legislation came into force. However, people still experience several challenges in Britain today.
Perhaps. Technology is a double-edged sword; while it solves many problems, it may also create new biases that encourage systemic discrimination in the place of work that today's employers seek to uproot.
Visualise all the tasks that the candidate may be required to follow within the recruitment strategy, from uploading the CV and cover letter to the online video interview assessment.
It is misleading to think that all of us are ready to accept the transition towards the digital age.
21% of UK adults need to gain basic digital skills necessary for everyday life, and only half of low-income households possess home internet, government statistics from 2021 show the opposite.
Then, what can we do to diminish the impact of unconscious bias in society in the digital world?
The very first step towards fairer recruitment is identifying our prejudices. Most of the time, every normal human being makes decisions without giving them a second thought—and one of these (or sometimes even multiple) may be a government's inclination to recruitment/violence against loads of criticism without any awareness at the time of sourcing, screening, decoding, and compiling a candidate's resume and interviewing process.
To avoid the automatic response to the `unsuitable' candidate, we must self-examine our prejudice and ask ourselves, "When do I have that tendency to be overly supportive towards one person and overly dismissive of another?"
Now picture the quit-smoking program that concentrates on nothing more than the number of cigarettes you smoke in the day – that is all.
Specific measures may be as 'holistic' as asking a candidate if any reasonable adjustments to the application process need to be made. In such a case, employers should offer other options like a different application and interview in an appropriate place rather than an on-screen one. So, it is essential not to organise events as if every participant is the owner or has sophisticated technology.
However, the range of drawbacks is wide, outside of expenses, and unfortunately, no universal cure is available. Nonetheless, rather than maintaining such an absolute position, it may be most beneficial to understand the applicants, predict their challenges, and adjust appropriately to them.
As we defend ourselves in entering the future, let us emphasise that technology should not be seen as the key to improving recruitment.
On the contrary, outside the box, solving the challenges that recruiters currently encounter in the industry should also be imperative. Solutions that embrace employing technology with that kind of human touch that is creative rather than conventional may enable recognising and harnessing the variations of the new age.