was that people construct the criteria of merit to fit their biases as they make hiring decisions. And they will change the criteria to fit the decision that is ultimately made. That's weird. And certainly biased. You can see how unconscious bias leads to a decision and then post-hoc justification kicks in to validate the choice made.
So now you may be thinking, “We would probably never fall prey to that. Our company is pretty objective about hiring and key decision-making.” Well, perhaps.
But consider this: The same study by Yale researchers found that perceiving yourself as objective is actually correlated with showing more bias. Participants who felt most strongly that they were objective proved to be the most biased. So weird! But that's exactly the kind of blind spot that bias can create.
To cut to the chase, the study's conclusion is that our mere desire to see ourselves as unbiased is not enough to overcome decades of cultural conditioning. That desire can lead to even more post-hoc justifications. We want to think of ourselves as unbiased, so we do think of ourselves that way. But that doesn't mean we are.
Most people are good people. Acknowledging that you have biases that conflict with your values does not make you a bad person. It makes you normal. It's a natural result of our culture and our very basic survival trait as human beings. Remember, even babies are biased! The important thing is to find ways to get around those biases and eliminate them wherever you can. Blindly believing that your company or your team is a meritocracy, where everyone is evaluated solely on merit, does not make it so. In fact, it'll make it that much harder to address implicit bias because no one will admit it's there in the first place.
The best companies and leaders are not afraid to admit that unconscious bias exists within their ranks. In fact, they search for and identify the biases and blind spots so they can address and correct them.
NOTE
1 1 Eric Luis Uhlmann and Geoffrey L. Cohen, “Constructed Criteria—Redefining Merit to Justify Discrimination,” Psychological Science 16, no. 6 (2005): pp. 474–480.
CHAPTER 3 The High Cost of Bias: Why All-White or Mostly White Businesses Make Less Money
If your business or team is all-White, or mostly White, you may not think that's a problem, especially if you're successful and profitable. If business is good, it's easy to keep doing what you've been doing and not question whether there is a need to change your strategies and tactics. Why would you? You're successful and making money! Why would you change a thing?
But despite your success, you may be missing out on something. And you may not be able to see what you're missing because you and your team are pretty much the same and have only “one lens”—the way that you and your team view the business world is likely very similar. You don't have other perspectives or views that might challenge your thinking, create better solutions, or offer new ideas.
Here is an example of how a lack of different perspectives can cost you. Downhill skiing is a big deal. It's a multi-billion-dollar industry and employs thousands of workers. From the equipment manufacturers and retailers to the resorts and instructors, skiing is big business. Or it was, until the 1990s. In the 1990s, the ski industry started seeing an alarming trend: fewer skiers overall, fewer ski trips booked, fewer ski passes sold, and stagnant equipment and gear sales because skiers themselves were spending less time on the slopes. Why was this happening? Two big demographic issues were responsible:
1 The skiers themselves were aging. The core ski enthusiasts were getting older and that meant increased aches and pains and risk of injury. If you're 65 years old and just had a knee replacement, skiing probably isn't a sport that's high on your list.
2 The sport of skiing had continued to be one of the least diverse: 85 percent of skiers are White. Blacks comprise 14 percent of the U.S. population, but fewer than 2 percent of skiers. The sport is so overwhelmingly White that comedian Kevin Hart, who is Black, has an entire routine built around telling the story of when he took his family to Aspen to ski and what it was like. It's a hilarious routine because he makes it so, but the stark truth of what it is like to be the only Black family on the ski slopes makes a clear and uncomfortable point.
So what did the ski industry do? Let's take these two different demographic issues one at a time.
ADDRESSING THE AGING SKIER PROBLEM
It was imperative that the ski industry find new skiers. The industry poured a great deal of money into research to learn what was keeping people from trying the sport and to identify new opportunities and customer segments. What they learned was that young people didn't really want to ski. The key reason given: “It's not for me. Skiing is what old people do—that's my parents' sport.” Younger people wanted their own sport. They wanted to do things with their friends that were different than what older people do. Enter snowboarding.
Snowboarding was growing in popularity, but many ski resorts did not allow snowboarding on their public slopes! Wow—that was a big eye-opener and the biggest, most-obvious problem to solve. But that wasn't the only barrier. The research also showed that younger winter sports enthusiasts had their own ideas about the sport:
Ski passes/lift tickets were too expensive.
The gear and equipment were too expensive.
The sport was too time-consuming because snowboarders had to hike up to the backcountry as they weren't permitted on the slopes.
With these consumer insights, the ski industry attacked the issues and changed everything: rules were changed to allow snowboarding on the slopes and at resorts. Ski passes and lift tickets became more flexible and a better price value. The ski industry worked with retailers and outfitters on extensive and creative equipment rental programs and significant price discounts to make the gear as affordable and accessible as possible.
It worked! By the mid-1990s, snowboarding had become the fastest-growing winter sport in the world. Snowboarding is now the focus of most young people learning an alpine sport; in fact, more than 80 percent of kids participating in alpine sports today choose snowboarding. This is significant, because it reflects the reality that the survival of any sport or industry is dependent on new users, new customers, or new participants.
But if the ski industry hadn't identified why new participants weren't being drawn to the sport, they'd have never known what the problem was and how to fix it. They knew they weren't attracting young skiers, but they didn't know why. It never occurred to them that young people viewed skiing as a sport for “old people” or that the equipment was too expensive. The only perspective they had was that of their core customers, who were pretty much all the same (old). It was only when they invited the opinions and thoughts of young people that they got an entirely different perspective.
Here is another key thing to note about this example: The ski industry sought the input, insights, and opinions of young people. They asked for their thoughts. It's not as if young people were contacting the ski industry and volunteering their perspectives. The ski industry “put the welcome mat out” for fresh perspectives and new ideas. And they got them. They listened, responded, and made changes. The new perspective saved the ski industry.
ADDRESSING THE LACK OF DIVERSITY ISSUE
Rob Katz is the CEO of Vail Resorts. After the death
