Latest news with #WomenandPublicPolicyProgram
Forbes
05-06-2025
- Business
- Forbes
Interview Bias Is Real: How to Name and Overcome It Confidently
There are moments in a career conversation—whether it's a job interview, a pitch for freelance work, or a conversation with a potential client—where everything seems to be going fine. Until something shifts. Maybe it's a flicker in the interviewer's eyes when you walk into the room or turn your camera on. Maybe it's a slight hesitation when you mention your background. Or a question you expected, but it never comes—because legally, it can't. And yet, you know. You know that despite your portfolio, credentials, or stellar track record, something unspoken has entered the conversation. The elephant in the room. It could be your age—too old, too young. Your background—an accent, a name, a story that doesn't match expectations. Or your identity—gender, parenthood, or anything else that makes you 'not what they pictured.' Whatever it is, you can feel the silent questions: Will she be able to keep up with a young team? Will he understand our culture? Will she be too distracted with seven kids at home? These questions often can't be asked. But they're still answered—in the privacy of the interviewer's mind. And that's precisely why they're dangerous. We're entering an era where authenticity is not only accepted—it's expected. Particularly for Gen Z, but increasingly across the workforce, being real has become a professional advantage. According to Stanford research, Gen Z employees expect transparency and are drawn to people whose words and actions align. That push for transparency is transforming more than just workplace culture—it's reshaping how people want to interview, pitch, collaborate, and be perceived. Being guarded no longer feels like strength. Being real does. Most conversations about bias in hiring focus on the structural fixes. As Harvard Business School outlines, we train recruiters to avoid unconscious bias, diversify panels, and define roles more inclusively. These are critical, but they assume the bias is accidental—something to be corrected through awareness. Bias can be unconscious—but sometimes it's not. And even when it is, the effect is the same: assumptions get made in silence. What happens when the person on the other side of the table is asking themselves a very conscious question—one they know they can't say out loud? That's when the real danger begins. Because if they can't ask the question, they'll answer it themselves. And they'll answer it wrong. Behavioral science shows that we don't need to change people's beliefs to change their behavior. As Siri Chilazi, a senior researcher at the Women and Public Policy Program at Harvard Kennedy School and co-author of Make Work Fair, put it in a recent episode of The Future of Less Work: Instead of asking people to unlearn their bias, Siri's work focuses on designing systems that reduce the opportunity for bias to show up at all. That might mean standardizing interview questions so that every candidate is asked the same ones in the same order. Or it might mean evaluating responses one question at a time across all candidates, rather than building a subjective impression of each individual. These small shifts can make a big difference—turning hiring from a judgment call into a fair comparison. But even the smartest systems can't account for every assumption, every hesitation, every flicker in the conversation. And until those systems are the norm, individuals still have to navigate what's left unsaid. That's why when you're the one sitting across the table—and you sense the question they're not asking—you still need to be ready to answer it. Not because it's your responsibility to fix the system. But because it's your best chance to be seen for who you really are. That's why I recommend what might feel like a bold move: bring the elephant into the conversation. Not defensively. Not apologetically. Confidently, directly, and with intent. Let's say you sense age is in play. You're in your 50s, applying for a consulting gig in a tech startup led by 30-somethings. You could say: Or let's say you're a mother of seven. You're being considered for a high-responsibility role, and you can feel the hesitation in the room: Or maybe you're pitching a project and realize the client assumed you'd be local—until they heard your accent or saw your LinkedIn profile: This isn't about defending your identity. It's about owning your story. It's about answering the question they're not allowed to ask—on your terms. We often talk about inclusion as the responsibility of the hiring manager or organization. And yes, they have work to do. But when you're the one sitting in the room, waiting for a decision to be made, your power lies in your ability to name what they can't. Not everyone will be comfortable doing this. It requires emotional intelligence, timing, and a calm kind of courage. But being nice won't get you what you want. And the alternative is to be silently disqualified for the wrong reason—one you never got the chance to address. So the next time you feel the elephant walk into the room, don't ignore it. Invite it in. Name it. And then answer the question the way only you can. Because when you do, you're not just shifting the outcome of that conversation—you're changing the conversation itself.
Forbes
13-04-2025
- General
- Forbes
Make Work Fair: 3 Strategies to Combat Meritocracy Myths
Curious black girl holding magnifier over grey background, panorama with copy space As humans, we are wired for fairness. We need fairness to survive in groups and build trust and reciprocity as a social species. This is why young children understand the importance of fairness, commonly citing 'this is not fair' in protest for new rules or unpopular demands. In my interview with Siri Chilazi, senior researcher at the Women and Public Policy Program at Harvard Kennedy School and co-author of the new book Make Work Fair, they note, "There's so much research around the world that shows that fairness is a fundamental value. It's an extremely widely shared human value, and kids as young as four or five, six years old develop a very keen sense of what's fair and what's not, and also have very strong reactions to perceived unfairness." Our sense of disgust is ignited when we feel unfairness. There is a real cost to this disgust in the workplace, where people are significantly less likely to stay in deeply unfair organizations. Fairness, or the lack thereof, can present itself in everyday situations like meetings, project team decisions or more substantial business decisions. Workplace fairness has vast differences in perception by identity groups. According to Joan C. Williams' Bias Interruptors data, there is a significant difference (nearly 30%) in people's beliefs that the workplace is fair for white men (the dominant group) versus other historically marginalized groups (women, people of color) across industries. Yet, there is this pervasive undercurrent that the workplace is built on meritocracy, thus fair. Chilazi shares, 'The world is not a meritocracy where the best people rise to the top purely based on their superior capabilities. It turns out that having someone see and recognize your potential, and then having a system in place for nurturing it, is a big piece of the puzzle. The world has never been a meritocracy.' To combat this myth of meritocracy, and to ensure workplace fairness, Chilazi recommends: 'Perceptions of fairness is how we do things around here, what people say and do, what is expected and accepted at the organization. It's not about intentions, as teams rarely live up to virtuous intentions 100% of the time. It is about actual behavior,' Chilazi said. "Our behaviors and our decisions are to a very great extent influenced by the systems that surround us, but we can't sort of fundamentally expect to debias human brains.' Rarely than focusing on individual behavior shifts to be less biased, which has proven to be ineffective, Chilazi's research recommends focusing on debiasing the systems instead to prevent inevitable human bias. For example, she offers the EAST framework for effective performance review processes. If you want performance reviews to be more fair, consider: To debias performance reviews, start by compiling data on the current perceptions of fairness. Leaders can track review length, word frequencies or performance ratings. Chilazi offers up one fairness tweak—ask an open-ended advice question like, 'What is one thing that would make the employee more effective?' to ensure that their performance review is closely tied to observable behaviors rather than potential biases. 'Middle managers have emerged as linchpins in the creation of a healthy organizational culture. They have been found to be up to six times more relevant in predicting employee misconduct than company-wide factors, particularly when managers were further removed from headquarters. Middle managers might be among the most important culture carriers in an organization as employees see them on a regular basis and learn from them about which behaviors are acceptable and which ones are not,' Chilazi found. Their studies showed in different settings, in different industries, and at different times, that people responded to people in positions of power or of greater social influence much more so than everyday people. Fairness is closely tied to the relationship you have with your direct manager. If you do not feel your manager is fair, you are unlikely to rate the workplace culture as fair. While workplace fairness might feel elusive, it is possible. It is about baking fairness into the culture. "This definition of culture is 'how we do things around here,'" said Chilazi. "So it's very behavioral because it's about doing right at the end of the day, people might have any beliefs and values internally. But the thing that you can observe about them is what they say and do externally." Chilazi refers to these as 'cultural artifacts.' This might be the office wall coverings, common language, stories shared, jokes, dress code or the occasions celebrated. According to Chilazi, all of these are manifestations of our shared identity as employees of an organization and can catalyze or inhibit our success at work. When fairness as a behavior is ritualized as a part of the culture, positive peer pressure sets in, and people generally adhere to the virtue of fairness. It starts with ensuring that systems are fair, managers understand their roles and fairness is baked into the culture.
Yahoo
26-01-2025
- Entertainment
- Yahoo
Sundance: Jacinda Ardern On Her Docu ‘Prime Minister;' Feminism, Semi-Automatic Weapons Ban, Covid Border Closing And Women's Rights Including Abortion In Kiwi Country
Rarely does a political leader come through a documentary with such a sense of empathy and an appreciation of accomplishment as Jacinda Ardern does in Prime Minister. The Sundance documentary starts as a homespun tale, where at 37 she steps up to run New Zealand, and soon learns that she and her mate Clark Gayford are pregnant with their first child. The press narrative over whether a new mother can run the land of the Kiwis soon gives way as the movie becomes like a documentary version of 24, where Ardern is suddenly championing a ban of semi-automatic weapons after a devastating massacre, decriminalizing abortion and handling the Covid outbreak by leaning into the saving of lives more than the re-starting of the economy. She then walked away and is now a climate rights activist whose first major book A Different Kind Of Power is coming, and who among other things is a Senior Fellow in the Women and Public Policy Program at Harvard. The docu is for sale, and was backed by Madison Wells' Gigi Pritzker and Rachel Shane, who add this to a roster of films that often touch on female empowerment themes, including The Eyes of Tammy from Deadline 'Atropia' Review: Alia Shawkat & Callum Turner Play War Games In Absurdist Bush-Era Satire - Sundance Film Festival Sundance: Bill Murray Makes Surprise Appearance In Park City 'The Ballad Of Wallis Island' Review: Carey Mulligan Hits Just The Right Note In A Melancholy Musical Rom-Com - Sundance Film Festival GIGI PRITZKER: From our perspective, we were lucky recipients of the opportunity to do the film. Having never done a doc through Madison Wells before, Rachel and I immediately said, if we're ever going to do something, this is the thing. We were beside ourselves and then once we got more engaged, we realized that the biggest gift was that Clark Gayford, her husband and a broadcaster, picked up a camera almost as if you were going to just do home movies, as you said. The result was a treasure trove of ARDERN: It's a great question. The first thing that prompted the idea of keeping a record of a time in office, I'm not the first politician to do that, but many politicians will do it through notes. We have in New Zealand something called the Oral History Project, and it's been running for decades where on a semi-regular basis, someone will call you and just record an audio interview with you. I'd already been doing that. Part it was just I wanted to keep a record for myself, for my family. I appreciate and love history, and perhaps my history teacher was ringing in my ears when I thought about just keeping a visual record. But you can see that often I was a reluctant I think that is fair, though it probably built on an existing passion that I had. One of the reasons I got into politics was, as a child I spent a few years living in a town where there was a lot of inequality and poverty, and I eventually associated politics as the place to make change. There's something about thinking about the world through the lens of a child, and certainly having a child and then thinking about what kind of legacy are we going to leave her, it amplified all of the passions that I already had. But she's been a motivator for so many things. She was one of the reasons Clark wanted to keep a record, because it was her story as Yeah, I mean, I wonder whether or not the reason that I often took it in stride was because I was aware that I was in an unusual set of circumstances. And that wasn't to say it justified the assumption that you couldn't do both, but I could understand why I was being asked the question. I didn't always like it. But I could understand when you're only the second leader in the world to have a baby, in office. So rather than being defensive, I just took on the perspective that I just needed to get out and do the job. That was only really the way, and I would not be the first woman who's had to multitask and face those questions or try and hide that there's any impact from caregiving on the work that I do. I am not be the first woman who's experienced that. It was just very, it was Do you know what I appreciated that we were just discussing? The depth of the applause for Clark at the premiere. I think that was acknowledgement not only of the origin of the story, but the role that he played as well. When you are in public office, there's not always a lot of light shone on the people who are supporting you, in the village that's around you. I think we should do more of that, because I didn't do the job alone and I didn't raise my daughter on my own. And so it was great to give an insight to him as well. PRITZKER: I think that's also one of the fallacies that we as a society give to women, which is you can do it all. But you don't do it all alone. No, that's a crazy conceit. Not only were you stepping out as a woman, but that you had this other element that was so universal, not only to women, but to Gosh, they were all hard. But abortion law reform, that was a conscience vote in New Zealand. We have an incredible system, where you vote on certain issues. You don't have to vote on a party line. You vote according to your conscience. And I think the incredible thing about that system, it means that if you have a particular religious perspective or persuasion, or if you happen to be a liberal, but in an otherwise conservative party, you're able to express that. And so abortion law reform, actually, that was about bringing individuals on board and the timing for that was, the New Zealand parliament was ready for that change as it should be. So that was about building consensus and shepherding a piece of law through the other challenges. Those others are the unexpected crises that you sometimes face in leadership. And I wouldn't want to give one more weight over the other because each was devastating in their own ways. I will always carry so many lessons from March 15, most of whom came from New Zealand itself, and the Muslim community. Covid was a global experience, and it was difficult for everyone. New Zealand's experience just happened to be unique in some ways, but it was still hard, particularly the I can only speak to the New Zealand experience because I only really know its history and culture in any depth. And what I can tell you is that in the aftermath of March 15, that there was a public appetite, maybe expectation is a better word, that as politicians, we reflect how New Zealanders felt. And that's why ultimately I believe, and yes, we did move quickly. I'm not going to diminish that. We did move very quickly, but that is why I believe you had a parliament where all but one…so 119 members of parliament all voted in favor of that change because they were reflecting their Well, I mean, one thing I would say is that our political system there is very different. We have something called MMP [Mixed Member Proportional]. It means that we often have multiple parties in government. It means that there's a diversity of views, and it means that you have to can't govern without working with others. And so it's a different system. Mike, you know your system better than I, I'm an observer, but I know that our system is one that I think, no system is perfect, but it is one that really does reflect voters. And maybe it's one of the reasons we have such high turnout, in the 80% mark of New Zealanders enrolled, out voting. Perhaps it's because they know that that vote counts. But again, I'm only speaking to New Zealand It is, yeah. Just as a sidebar, there's some discussion over exemptions and things, but for the most part, that's in Well, I hope you saw in the film that thought process. I think that was one of the goals of the film, from the storytellers' perspective, to just provide an insight into leadership, into decision I hope that the viewer sees that it is just decision making in real time. Often, you see the decision, you don't often see the choices. So I think that's what the film tries to do. It provides the context. You see the choices that are I think it's human nature to always reflect on that, particularly if it's something as significant as leading a country. Though when I left, I remember saying this, and I can't remember if I said it in my departing speech or not, but all of the things that brought me into politics are never things that are going to have necessarily a nice tidy endpoint. I came in because I believed in equality and reducing inequality. I believed in addressing child poverty. I believed in the preservation of our environment and addressing climate change, and they just don't have tidy end points. So the time I was in office, I felt was about trying to make as much progress as I could rather than just job done. Best of Deadline 'Severance' Cast Through Seasons 1 And 2: Innies, Outies, Severed and Unsevered 2025 Awards Season Calendar: Dates For Oscars, Spirits, Grammys, Tonys, Guilds & More Everything We Know About 'Only Murders In The Building' Season 5 So Far
