Skip to Main Content
HBS Home
  • About
  • Academic Programs
  • Alumni
  • Faculty & Research
  • Baker Library
  • Giving
  • Harvard Business Review
  • Initiatives
  • News
  • Recruit
  • Map / Directions
Working Knowledge
Business Research for Business Leaders
  • Browse All Articles
  • Popular Articles
  • Cold Call Podcast
  • Managing the Future of Work Podcast
  • About Us
  • Book
  • Leadership
  • Marketing
  • Finance
  • Management
  • Entrepreneurship
  • All Topics...
  • Topics
    • COVID-19
    • Entrepreneurship
    • Finance
    • Gender
    • Globalization
    • Leadership
    • Management
    • Negotiation
    • Social Enterprise
    • Strategy
  • Sections
    • Book
    • Podcasts
    • Managing the Future of Work Podcast
    • HBS Case
    • In Practice
    • Lessons from the Classroom
    • Op-Ed
    • Research & Ideas
    • Research Event
    • Sharpening Your Skills
    • What Do You Think?
    • Working Paper Summaries
  • Browse All
    When Performance Trumps Gender Bias: Joint versus Separate Evaluation
    28 Mar 2012Working Paper Summaries

    When Performance Trumps Gender Bias: Joint versus Separate Evaluation

    by Iris Bohnet, Alexandra van Geen and Max H. Bazerman
    Gender-based discrimination in hiring, promotion, and job assignments is difficult to overcome. This paper suggests a new intervention aimed at avoiding biased assessments: an "evaluation nudge," in which employees are evaluated jointly rather than separately regarding their future performance. While joint evaluation is common for most hiring decisions, especially at the lower levels, it is rarely used when job assignments and promotions are being considered. The research shows that a joint-evaluation mode succeeds in helping employers choose based on past performance, irrespective of an employee's gender and the implicit stereotypes the employer may hold. While it is not always feasible to bundle promotion decisions and explicitly compare candidates, the research suggests that, whenever possible, joint evaluation would increase both efficiency and equality. Findings have implications for organizations that want to decrease the likelihood that hiring, promotion, and job-assignment decisions will be based on irrelevant criteria triggered by stereotypes. Key concepts include:
    • In addition to being a profit-maximizing decision procedure, joint evaluation is also a fair mechanism, as it encourages judgments based on people's performance rather than their demographic characteristics.
    • In experiments, employers tasked to choose an employee for future performance were influenced by the candidate's gender in cases where candidates were evaluated separately. In contrast, in joint evaluation, gender was irrelevant. Employers were significantly more likely to choose the higher- rather than the lower-performing employee.
    • Companies concerned about discrimination in these phases of employment might choose to review how, for example, career-relevant jobs are assigned and how promotion decisions are made.
    LinkedIn
    Email

    Author Abstract

    We examine a new intervention to overcome gender biases in hiring, promotion, and job assignments: an "evaluation nudge," in which people are evaluated jointly rather than separately regarding their future performance. Evaluators are more likely to focus on individual performance in joint than in separate evaluation and on group stereotypes in separate than in joint evaluation, making joint evaluation the money-maximizing evaluation procedure. Our findings are compatible with a behavioral model of information processing and with the System 1/System 2 distinction in behavioral decision research where people have two distinct modes of thinking that are activated under certain conditions.

    Paper Information

    • Full Working Paper Text
    • Working Paper Publication Date: March 2012
    • HBS Working Paper Number: 12-083
    • Faculty Unit(s): Negotiation, Organizations & Markets
      Trending
        • 13 May 2022
        • Research & Ideas

        Company Reviews on Glassdoor: Petty Complaints or Signs of Potential Misconduct?

        • 13 Aug 2021
        • Research & Ideas

        Managers, Here’s How to Bond with New Hires Remotely

        • 12 May 2022
        • Book

        Why Digital Is a State of Mind, Not Just a Skill Set

        • 09 Dec 2019
        • Research & Ideas

        Identify Great Customers from Their First Purchase

        • 24 Mar 2022
        • Research & Ideas

        Rituals at Work: Teams That Play Together Stay Together

    Max H. Bazerman
    Max H. Bazerman
    Jesse Isidor Straus Professor of Business Administration
    Contact
    Send an email
    → More Articles
    Find Related Articles
    • Gender
    • Decision Making
    • Problems and Challenges
    • Leadership
    • Negotiation

    Sign up for our weekly newsletter

    Interested in improving your business? Learn about fresh research and ideas from Harvard Business School faculty.
    ǁ
    Campus Map
    Harvard Business School Working Knowledge
    Baker Library | Bloomberg Center
    Soldiers Field
    Boston, MA 02163
    Email: Editor-in-Chief
    →Map & Directions
    →More Contact Information
    • Make a Gift
    • Site Map
    • Jobs
    • Harvard University
    • Trademarks
    • Policies
    • Digital Accessibility
    Copyright © President & Fellows of Harvard College