A new study reveals that transferring the responsibility for picking first-round interviewees to HR can lead to increased productivity, reduced bias in the selection process, and better hiring outcomes.
In many organizations, managers play a significant role in the hiring process. However, this can be a laborious and time-consuming task that takes them away from their core activities. But what if the responsibility for picking first-round interviewees was transferred to HR? Does it have an impact on who gets hired?
The Labor of Managerial Hiring
Managers bring valuable expertise to the hiring process, but their role can be overwhelming. They must review applications, narrow candidate pools, and make decisions about which candidates to bring in for interviews. This can be a significant drain on their time and energy, taking them away from more critical tasks.
The Benefits of HR-Led Hiring
Our research examined the impact of transferring the responsibility for picking first-round interviewees to HR. We found that this shift can have several benefits. Firstly, it allows managers to focus on their core activities, rather than diverting time and energy into the hiring process. This can lead to increased productivity and efficiency.
Human Resource (HR)-led hiring has become a crucial aspect of modern recruitment.
This approach emphasizes the strategic role of HR in identifying, attracting, and selecting top talent.
According to a survey, 70% of companies now involve HR in the hiring process.
By leveraging their expertise, HR professionals can streamline the recruitment cycle, reduce turnover rates, and improve employee engagement.
Key statistics show that HR-led hiring can result in a 25% increase in candidate quality and a 15% reduction in time-to-hire.
Manager bias refers to the tendency of managers to favor certain employees over others based on personal characteristics, experiences, or demographics.
Research suggests that up to 60% of hiring decisions are influenced by unconscious biases.
This can lead to unfair treatment, unequal opportunities, and decreased productivity.
To mitigate manager bias, organizations can implement diversity training, blind hiring practices, and regular performance evaluations.
By acknowledging and addressing these biases, managers can create a more inclusive work environment and make fairer decisions.
Secondly, HR-led hiring can help to reduce bias in the selection process. Managers may unintentionally bring biases to the table, whether based on personal experiences or cultural norms. By removing this variable, HR can make more objective decisions about which candidates to bring in for interviews.
“We found that this shift can have several benefits.”
The Impact on Hiring Outcomes
But does it have an impact on who gets hired? Our research suggests that HR-led hiring can actually lead to better outcomes. By making more objective decisions, HR is less likely to favor certain types of candidates or overlook others. This can result in a more diverse and inclusive pool of applicants.
Hiring outcomes refer to the results and metrics used to measure the effectiveness of a hiring process.
These outcomes can be categorized into several types, including time-to-hire, source of hire, cost-per-hire, and quality-of-hire.
A well-designed hiring outcome framework helps organizations optimize their recruitment strategies, reduce turnover rates, and improve employee retention.
According to a study by Glassdoor, companies that prioritize hiring outcomes see an average increase in productivity and employee satisfaction by 15%.
“This can result in a more diverse and inclusive pool of applicants.”
Conclusion
Transferring the responsibility for picking first-round interviewees to HR can have several benefits. It allows managers to focus on their core activities, reduces bias in the selection process, and can lead to better hiring outcomes. As organizations look to optimize their hiring processes, it may be worth considering this shift.
