A very interesting story happened to me in the last few weeks.
I have an academic administration position. A few weeks ago, I posted an ad for a professor on a well known academic careers website.
A few days later, among my applicants was a resume with the exact academic credentials I had set forth; one from a top school and one from a good school. The name on the resume was certainly Americanized, but with a surname that is popular in the African American community. The applicant's listed undergraduate school was a famous historically black college. The resume also lists experience in exactly the areas I remarked as "helpful" in the add.
I was very interested in this candidate and so I did what I always do when I get an interesting resume: I looked for his cyber-presence. Nothing. No Facebook, no Linkedin, no Twitter; not even any evidence of him on a plain old Google search. I called the school listed under teaching experience and left a message trying to confirm employment. No response. I called the law school's registrar's office and was unable to confirm his JD.
I now suspect that this submission was one of these studies to measure how black candidates are treated by employers, e.g.,
http://www.nber.org/digest/sep03/w9873.html
http://www.princeton.edu/~pager/annualreview_discrimination.pdf
http://www.chicagobooth.edu/capideas/spring03/racialbias.html
Now, unless I can confirm this fellow's credentials (if he exists), I have no interest in calling him back. Even if his credentials are real, lack of a cyber-presence is a red flag in itself as far as I'm concerned. Yet, if this is some sort of a study or fishing expedition, the fact that I am not going to contact him might count in some future academic article as just one more example of a qualified "black" candidate not getting a callback.
My question now as to the validity of all of these studies is: How do they expect the get callbacks with fake resumes when doing basic internet checks before giving a callback is so easy and so routine?
Originally posted by sh76If the lack of internet presence was an issue then wouldn't there be the same problem with callbacks for typically white names with no internet presence and typically black names with no internet presence?
My question now as to the validity of all of these studies is: How do they expect the get callbacks with fake resumes when doing basic internet checks before giving a callback is so easy and so routine?
If it was an issue where assumed white people were given callbacks without an internet presence where assumed black people were not then race definitely would still be an issue.
If none of them got callbacks then they could conclude that there is something else at play for sure that they hadn't accounted for.
Originally posted by PsychoPawnThat's a good point of course, but it just seems bizarre that this sort of experiment could work at all. For example, maybe employers who don't bother checking for an e-presence are lower eschelon employers who also happen to be more ignorant and thus also more racist. I do not see in their methodology that they correct for that possibility when applying their numbers to the general population.
If the lack of internet presence was an issue then wouldn't there be the same problem with callbacks for typically white names with no internet presence and typically black names with no internet presence?
If it was an issue where assumed white people were given callbacks without an internet presence where assumed black people were not then race defin ...[text shortened]... y could conclude that there is something else at play for sure that they hadn't accounted for.
Originally posted by sh76The idea that "lower echelon employers" are "more ignorant and also more racist" sounds like a rationalization to hide the fact that you hadn't really thought this through.
That's a good point of course, but it just seems bizarre that this sort of experiment could work at all. For example, maybe employers who don't bother checking for an e-presence are lower eschelon employers who also happen to be more ignorant and thus also more racist. I do not see in their methodology that they correct for that possibility when applying their numbers to the general population.
Originally posted by sh76The first experiment was conducted in 2001-02 when it was quite hard to check someone's Facebook page. The third link is the same experiment as the first.
A very interesting story happened to me in the last few weeks.
I have an academic administration position. A few weeks ago, I posted an ad for a professor on a well known academic careers website.
A few days later, among my applicants was a resume with the exact academic credentials I had set forth; one from a top school and one from a good school. The na es when doing basic internet checks before giving a callback is so easy and so routine?
Anecdotal but we -- lower and middle management -- would never hire from traditionally-black schools unless forced to by upper management. As for us, the resume with the black school on it would immediately go in the trash no matter how good a fit otherwise. I do not know that upper management were less racist but maybe other motives for wanting to diversify.
Earlier in my life, I remember working fast-food in college, and the resume of any black applicant immediately went in the trash. The manager's call. We had no black employees, though we did have one employee from Bangladesh.
Originally posted by moon1969Well that was a crappy thing to do. Why would you do such an ignoble thing especially when your superiors were hostile to it?
Anecdotal but we -- lower and middle management -- would never hire from traditionally-black schools unless forced to by upper management. As for us, the resume with the black school on it would immediately go in the trash no matter how good a fit otherwise. I do not know that upper management were less racist but maybe other motives for wanting to divers ...[text shortened]... he manager's call. We had no black employees, though we did have one employee from Bangladesh.
Originally posted by sh76I find the lack of an e presence in this era, and in an application for a high level job at least a red flag. If the applicant is on the younger side, it seems more of a red flag.
That's a good point of course, but it just seems bizarre that this sort of experiment could work at all. For example, maybe employers who don't bother checking for an e-presence are lower eschelon employers who also happen to be more ignorant and thus also more racist. I do not see in their methodology that they correct for that possibility when applying their numbers to the general population.
I don't know about the lower levels being more ignorant or racist. I don't believe many companies are filling lower level jobs much via the internet. Big companies tend to move in lockstep, and have web based HR searches, not because this works, but because everyone else is doing it. The majority of hiring still happens at the local level, whether in manufacturing or retail.
Few people are going to drive long distances, or relocate for a job with Walmart or Meijers.
Originally posted by sh76Here's a thought. Why don't you call the applicant back and ask him for proof of his credentials?
A very interesting story happened to me in the last few weeks.
I have an academic administration position. A few weeks ago, I posted an ad for a professor on a well known academic careers website.
A few days later, among my applicants was a resume with the exact academic credentials I had set forth; one from a top school and one from a good school. The na ...[text shortened]... es when doing basic internet checks before giving a callback is so easy and so routine?
Originally posted by sh76"Now, unless I can confirm this fellow's credentials (if he exists), I have no interest in calling him back. Even if his credentials are real, lack of a cyber-presence is a red flag in itself as far as I'm concerned. Yet, if this is some sort of a study or fishing expedition, the fact that I am not going to contact him might count in some future academic article as just one more example of a qualified "black" candidate not getting a callback."
Okay, so please explain why the idea is invalid.
Seems logical, whether or not lower levels evaluate differently or the same. The suspicion that this isn't a real person could be verified by a phone call, and a few identity questions. I wouldn't worry about feeding a study, as these things are predetermined in any case.