How unconscious is your bias in reality?
 By Professor Amanda Kirby
The other day I was talking to someone (let’s call him Bob) who was applying for a job. Bob has three diagnoses ADHD, Dyslexia and Dyspraxia. He asked me should he disclose at all, one or all these conditions and what were the consequences for him if he didn’t do so once he was in the job. When you look at him you cannot tell. He has hidden difficulties that only show themselves when specific tasks demands happen or he is in certain environments that show up his challenges. If you ask Bob to write, you will see he has untidy writing. If you ask him to read out aloud, this will be hesitant.
This was an interesting discussion and one I have often had with adults that I support. No disclosure means difficulty in the employer providing support. Some disclosure may ‘tick the box’ and get you an interview. Disclosing the ‘wrong’ label may mean your skills (and challenges) may be misconstrued if the person you are disclosing to doesn’t know much about it or is misinformed. Late disclosure may be viewed with suspicion. Why are you telling me now? Did you lie to me?
Each person in the context of their lives, strengths and challenges will be different. This almost sounds trite as I write it. But the diagnosis or label is a proxy marker to describe some aspects of that person.
Two people with dyslexia, for example, will be very different- one may have difficulties reading aloud, whereas another person may have difficulties with spelling unfamiliar words but will have no specific reading difficulties. One person may have had support since school days and another none and had to find ways to help him or herself.
 Neurodiversity also means that both these people may also have other challenges’ as well that may provide strengths and also different challenges and this may be dependent on the context they are in at the time e.g. the tasks they have to do, work setting, and the attitudes by others. For example someone with Autism Spectrum Disorder may be able to do their job well until they have to move to a new office, with new people to communicate with, a different place to work from, and changing office rules.
What do you think honestly would your response be if someone like Bob put all three conditions (or more conditions) on the application form?
- 'He has loads of problems; I don’t think we can support him'
- ' don’t know anything about ADHD, I wouldn’t know what to do!'
Bob has learnt from experience that telling the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth has led him to not be invited for the interview at all. If he puts one of the diagnoses on the application, probably the dyslexia one, then he has found some people are more accepting. When he didn’t disclose, he got an interview, and got a job but then found he was in trouble because he couldn’t gain the adjustments he needed and then subsequently lost the job.
So do you have a positive or negative bias to specific diagnoses or conditions?
- Do you know more about one condition than another?
- Do you have some fixed views e.g. people with ADHD are totally disorganised and can’t focus at all (not true!)
- Does what is written as a headline in the papers influence your decisions whether to interview that person?
- Are your interview approaches biasing decisions by presenting some people in a better light because of the way the interview is set up?
- Do you base your views on one ‘bad’ experience with someone who had dyspraxia and didn’t turn up for the interview How many ‘others’ have not done so too, but you don’t label them in the same way?
- Do you have a positive bias because your child has ADHD and you realise the difficulties it is to gain employment despite the skills and motivation?
Bob is highly qualified for the job he was applying for. He has experience and is dedicated, focused and hard working. He is rarely unwell. However, if you judge him on his handwriting you could mistake his poor skills for lack of ability which would be a foolish assumption to make.
Do we introduce bias at all stages of the employment process?
For example, is there bias:
- In the way the job is described;
- the way the interview is conducted under time pressure (also judging people on their speed of their response, or how adept their communication skills are, despite this perhaps not being crucial in the actual job).
- Do we look for PLU (People Like Us), even though they will be doing a different job to the one you do.
- If in the job do you provide enough induction time to allow Bob to learn what he needs to do and gain the confidence required or is there an expectation especially as we move up the company ladder you need to get going on day 1?
- Do we limit talent because we don’t ask the person what will make a difference to them? By losing Bob, this may also be costly in terms of recruitment as well.
Do try and question your biases and I bet they are not so unconscious!
Perhaps we just need to own up and discuss this more openly.
By the way- I did tell Bob to disclose- but partially. We decided to work on how to sell himself positively and show what any employer gains by having his skills on board and that the adjustments he required were not huge or costly, but important to his success.
He got the job and has recently been promoted! One day I know he will be a CEO of a FTSE company –he’s not far off. I hope he remembers his biases!
|
Think Global will send you a 
By Drew Wilkins
One of the best questions is one that arose when Dr Leander Neckles was speaking at the IEDP summer seminar about the Immigration Act 2016 – What does fluent mean? For teachers, the question could be phrased, 'Is fluency the same thing at age 6, age 11 and age 16, when resources, tasks and language demands are increasingly complex?'
As usual, here is a brief account of the most recent IEDP board meeting. This was held on 18 October 2016 and was a Skype meeting
