I was sad when I heard this, but agree we know it matters more than it should. I did wonder if she had the interview in person (vs. zoom) would it have gone differently?
good question....in person, she probably would have worn make up (this from what I remember of her commentary, that not wearing make up in this case was not a deliberate choice if I recall correctly)
also: the creator didn't seem too bitter, more genuinely curious as to whether make up / no make up was a genuine signal of interest in role. Maybe it is?
That's sad. Would be curious how many voters are from HR world because that is even sadder! If HR thinks beauty has anything to do with skills then we need a good look in the mirror cause we ain't pretty 😂
I'm one of those who voted 26-50%, and my involvement is arguably worse because I'm in recruitment/executive search. Bold highlight: I try and make it less, bud denying it exists is just hiding from the problem.
This story is shocking and I dare say misogynistic. First step in solving a problem is accepting it exists. I would love to educate myself on how to fight this with my stakeholders.
Other - when you have a capability based model looks should not matter. However there are jobs that require the individual to be groomed/polished (in client facing roles). Make up shouldn’t be important though. Just make sure you don’t wear a crop top and jeans with holes for a client- facing position.
Skill based hiring / Skill Based Organisation might help but I am not sure if that is kicking the can down the road. I also believe that beauty bias fades quickly - as soon as you start interacting with someone, the personality takes over. However....your last two sentences come close to the dilemma here ....what is or is not acceptable is different for different people! In the case of this example, the hiring manager deemed the lack of make up along similar lines to wearing jeans for interview - a signal of unprofessionalism and lack of care!
I have certainly seen a large number of unkept, not in prime physical condition, men in VP roles, but I have only ever seen 1 makeup-less female equivalent. This can be easily verified by a quick scroll through the exec team page of most corporate websites. There is a definite expectation that women have to look attractive, be fit and well dressed. Men can wear ill-fitting cheap suits, have bad haircuts, a beer gut and be considered brilliant, whereas women need to be coiffed at all times just to gain a seat at the table. In interviews and on the job, women are judged first for their appearance and then if they pass that test, maybe their qualifications and expertise will be considered.
Women are expected to have their hair, nails, eyebrows, and makeup done at all times which takes time and a significant financial burden that men do not incur. This time and the expenitures are often overlooked when evaluating the wage differential between men and women as employment can be challenging without it. When the pink tax is layered on all of this as well as the clothing expense, the discrepancy only widens. Heaven forbid, a women shows up in last year's style yet some men haven't ever updated their wardrobe.
Women are generally paid less, have to do more to even be considered eligible in the job market and then if successful, they incur ongoing time and financial expenses that men don't, and still carry the bulk of the burden at home. And a woman would be chastised if she even mentioned any of these issues at the boardroom table. Interestingly, TikTok is doing a better job of increasing awareness of these issues than most DEI initiatives. Maybe it's time to switch up the delivery mechanism to increase awareness and understanding.
I think we would all agree that women and men are held to different standards of presentation!
Totally agree also as to the lack of sartorial sense of even some super high level / high status male execs and leaders, whereas we can sure a woman could never to get to those levels of seniority with a lack of care to appearance.
Your final point on TikTok is super relevant - I agree on this, it is a powerful communication medium, as it gives people an opportunity to communicate to a large audience. In this example, I believe the creator generally was quite low follower count, but her video went viral and is now sparking a conversation on gender norms!
Unfortunately, the Halo effect or the physical attractiveness bias is kind of a deep-rooted/natural tendency in humans. There is a lot of scientific literature that explains why we have this tendency. I think as Recruiters / Talent Partners we have a huge responsibility to build awareness in our companies since is something that you cannot remove it 100%. I have read a lot about this specific cognitive bias since it's one of the most common biases during interviews and from my experience, I have noticed that in most of the cases, interviewers are not even aware that they have this bias. Of course, the culture of a company could either eliminate as much as possible this bias or strengthen it.
yes you're right of course Iva - we are wrestling with your own evolution here. It actually begs further uncomfortable questions. For instance, in this case, if the hiring manager had an aversion to the appearance of the candidate, might she actually be justified in rejecting her because if we accept that we prefer better looking people then this becomes a valid quality to measure on the candidates ability to build relationships / influencer others etc?
I’m ready to be outraged by this but I’m concerned that the candidate has click baited us. From the information in the video, it wasn’t the recruiter who said makeup was the issue, the comment was about her preparation and how she physically presented herself. She drew the conclusion that what she was missing was makeup but the issue could have been posture, focus or other factors that detracted from the substance of her answers. For all we know, she had her feet up on the desk.
I have been in recruitment for 20 years and this is something that has been happening since the dawn of time. “We will overlook your appearance and just focus on your skills and experience” said no hiring manager ever!! Humans are physical beings and make decisions based on sight without even realising it. This is not something that is gender specific either. I had a male candidate turn up for a senior level interview in a t-shirt and he was dismissed instantly as the hiring manager said that he did not take the role seriously enough! I was hoping that by 2024 we would somehow be able to move past appearance bias, but the truth of the matter is that as long as we possess a physical body, it will always matter. It shouldn’t and to answer her question she asked at the end, not wearing make up has absolutely no relevance whatsoever as to whether she can perform the job or not, but once again PERCEPTIONS matter! We live in a world where we are and always will be judged on our appearance, no matter how uncomfortable that is to acknowledge or admit. Bit of brainfood for thought.
There is a world where we hope that appearance doesn't matter but that is not the world we live in. And in fact, maybe a world we don't want to live in - loads of us really value visual communication - the fashion industry wouldn't be worth trillions if we didn't!
In the end, as a candidate you have to pragmatic; as an employer, I do wonder about the decision of the hiring manager.
Everyone is biased, I once had the situation of hiring a support engineer where the best candidate was covered in tatoos visible in the neck, had one coloured eye, and a haircut/colour that stood out quite a bit. It was a visual explosion to be completely fair.
In all honesty, it was really hard to ignore that bias and purely focus on the skills and experience. Up to a point that I ignored the video (zoom call interview) as much as I could.
Knowing this could become an issue, I did give the team a small heads up as I was sincerely worried about bias coming to play.
To my surprise, they all said ‘wow, she looks very different but she is amazing’, and they did not act on that bias as they saw it.
However, I have seen the beauty bias heavily amd more often in HR teams, up to a point that is was hard to distinguish some new recruiters as they truly looked like eachother.
When confronted the excuse was ‘O we didn’t notice’ only to be followed bu ‘ however, they are the businesscard to the oitside’. While I agree that customer focussed role should be ‘decent’ I heavily disagree with the definition of decent being ‘have to look good’.
Mind is still blown by the VP HR video but I do believe this will be one of the last bias to be eradicated- if we can at all. Is the human race capable of being non-judgemental? In other news, yes the sun is out on this Sunday! Happy Brainfood Day ☀️
so many things to think about on this. I think the creator asked a challenging question at the end, which I think we all know the unpleasant answer to!
I was sad when I heard this, but agree we know it matters more than it should. I did wonder if she had the interview in person (vs. zoom) would it have gone differently?
good question....in person, she probably would have worn make up (this from what I remember of her commentary, that not wearing make up in this case was not a deliberate choice if I recall correctly)
also: the creator didn't seem too bitter, more genuinely curious as to whether make up / no make up was a genuine signal of interest in role. Maybe it is?
Other - physical appearance should never be a contributor factor in hiring decisions, be it a leadership role or not!
I think we would all agree Andrei, but it is also the case we also believe that it IS a contributing factor - look at the early results of our poll!
That's sad. Would be curious how many voters are from HR world because that is even sadder! If HR thinks beauty has anything to do with skills then we need a good look in the mirror cause we ain't pretty 😂
the truth is not sad. Remember the question is what the community thinks is the case, not what they wish the case to be!
I'm one of those who voted 26-50%, and my involvement is arguably worse because I'm in recruitment/executive search. Bold highlight: I try and make it less, bud denying it exists is just hiding from the problem.
Beauty bias is impactful but also intangible. The higher the role the more "culture fit", a good flow is important and that's where beauty bias shines. Say, take a look at this article: https://hbr.org/2019/10/attractive-people-get-unfair-advantages-at-work-ai-can-help
This story is shocking and I dare say misogynistic. First step in solving a problem is accepting it exists. I would love to educate myself on how to fight this with my stakeholders.
Other - when you have a capability based model looks should not matter. However there are jobs that require the individual to be groomed/polished (in client facing roles). Make up shouldn’t be important though. Just make sure you don’t wear a crop top and jeans with holes for a client- facing position.
Skill based hiring / Skill Based Organisation might help but I am not sure if that is kicking the can down the road. I also believe that beauty bias fades quickly - as soon as you start interacting with someone, the personality takes over. However....your last two sentences come close to the dilemma here ....what is or is not acceptable is different for different people! In the case of this example, the hiring manager deemed the lack of make up along similar lines to wearing jeans for interview - a signal of unprofessionalism and lack of care!
I have certainly seen a large number of unkept, not in prime physical condition, men in VP roles, but I have only ever seen 1 makeup-less female equivalent. This can be easily verified by a quick scroll through the exec team page of most corporate websites. There is a definite expectation that women have to look attractive, be fit and well dressed. Men can wear ill-fitting cheap suits, have bad haircuts, a beer gut and be considered brilliant, whereas women need to be coiffed at all times just to gain a seat at the table. In interviews and on the job, women are judged first for their appearance and then if they pass that test, maybe their qualifications and expertise will be considered.
Women are expected to have their hair, nails, eyebrows, and makeup done at all times which takes time and a significant financial burden that men do not incur. This time and the expenitures are often overlooked when evaluating the wage differential between men and women as employment can be challenging without it. When the pink tax is layered on all of this as well as the clothing expense, the discrepancy only widens. Heaven forbid, a women shows up in last year's style yet some men haven't ever updated their wardrobe.
Women are generally paid less, have to do more to even be considered eligible in the job market and then if successful, they incur ongoing time and financial expenses that men don't, and still carry the bulk of the burden at home. And a woman would be chastised if she even mentioned any of these issues at the boardroom table. Interestingly, TikTok is doing a better job of increasing awareness of these issues than most DEI initiatives. Maybe it's time to switch up the delivery mechanism to increase awareness and understanding.
I think we would all agree that women and men are held to different standards of presentation!
Totally agree also as to the lack of sartorial sense of even some super high level / high status male execs and leaders, whereas we can sure a woman could never to get to those levels of seniority with a lack of care to appearance.
Your final point on TikTok is super relevant - I agree on this, it is a powerful communication medium, as it gives people an opportunity to communicate to a large audience. In this example, I believe the creator generally was quite low follower count, but her video went viral and is now sparking a conversation on gender norms!
Unfortunately, the Halo effect or the physical attractiveness bias is kind of a deep-rooted/natural tendency in humans. There is a lot of scientific literature that explains why we have this tendency. I think as Recruiters / Talent Partners we have a huge responsibility to build awareness in our companies since is something that you cannot remove it 100%. I have read a lot about this specific cognitive bias since it's one of the most common biases during interviews and from my experience, I have noticed that in most of the cases, interviewers are not even aware that they have this bias. Of course, the culture of a company could either eliminate as much as possible this bias or strengthen it.
yes you're right of course Iva - we are wrestling with your own evolution here. It actually begs further uncomfortable questions. For instance, in this case, if the hiring manager had an aversion to the appearance of the candidate, might she actually be justified in rejecting her because if we accept that we prefer better looking people then this becomes a valid quality to measure on the candidates ability to build relationships / influencer others etc?
While it's bullshit, looks and appearances do factor in to how humans evaluate others. Whether it's a social, professional, or interview situation.
I think we all agree on the two points you have made so succinctly Alan!
I’m ready to be outraged by this but I’m concerned that the candidate has click baited us. From the information in the video, it wasn’t the recruiter who said makeup was the issue, the comment was about her preparation and how she physically presented herself. She drew the conclusion that what she was missing was makeup but the issue could have been posture, focus or other factors that detracted from the substance of her answers. For all we know, she had her feet up on the desk.
I have been in recruitment for 20 years and this is something that has been happening since the dawn of time. “We will overlook your appearance and just focus on your skills and experience” said no hiring manager ever!! Humans are physical beings and make decisions based on sight without even realising it. This is not something that is gender specific either. I had a male candidate turn up for a senior level interview in a t-shirt and he was dismissed instantly as the hiring manager said that he did not take the role seriously enough! I was hoping that by 2024 we would somehow be able to move past appearance bias, but the truth of the matter is that as long as we possess a physical body, it will always matter. It shouldn’t and to answer her question she asked at the end, not wearing make up has absolutely no relevance whatsoever as to whether she can perform the job or not, but once again PERCEPTIONS matter! We live in a world where we are and always will be judged on our appearance, no matter how uncomfortable that is to acknowledge or admit. Bit of brainfood for thought.
Yeah I agree with your view.
There is a world where we hope that appearance doesn't matter but that is not the world we live in. And in fact, maybe a world we don't want to live in - loads of us really value visual communication - the fashion industry wouldn't be worth trillions if we didn't!
In the end, as a candidate you have to pragmatic; as an employer, I do wonder about the decision of the hiring manager.
Everyone is biased, I once had the situation of hiring a support engineer where the best candidate was covered in tatoos visible in the neck, had one coloured eye, and a haircut/colour that stood out quite a bit. It was a visual explosion to be completely fair.
In all honesty, it was really hard to ignore that bias and purely focus on the skills and experience. Up to a point that I ignored the video (zoom call interview) as much as I could.
Knowing this could become an issue, I did give the team a small heads up as I was sincerely worried about bias coming to play.
To my surprise, they all said ‘wow, she looks very different but she is amazing’, and they did not act on that bias as they saw it.
However, I have seen the beauty bias heavily amd more often in HR teams, up to a point that is was hard to distinguish some new recruiters as they truly looked like eachother.
When confronted the excuse was ‘O we didn’t notice’ only to be followed bu ‘ however, they are the businesscard to the oitside’. While I agree that customer focussed role should be ‘decent’ I heavily disagree with the definition of decent being ‘have to look good’.
Mind is still blown by the VP HR video but I do believe this will be one of the last bias to be eradicated- if we can at all. Is the human race capable of being non-judgemental? In other news, yes the sun is out on this Sunday! Happy Brainfood Day ☀️
so many things to think about on this. I think the creator asked a challenging question at the end, which I think we all know the unpleasant answer to!