University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Unconscious name bias in workplace recruitment and hiring toward individuals with an ethnic name

(USC Thesis Other)

Unconscious name bias in workplace recruitment and hiring toward individuals with an ethnic name

PDF

Download

Open document

Flip pages

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content Unconscious Name Bias in Workplace Recruitment and Hiring Toward Individuals With
an Ethnic Name
Uchenna Onyendu Nwude
Rossier School of Education
University of Southern California
A dissertation submitted to the faculty
in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of
Doctor of Education
May 2024

© Copyright by Uchenna Onyendu Nwude 2024
All Rights Reserved

The Committee for Uchenna Onyendu Nwude certifies the approval of this Dissertation
Richard Grad
Eric Canny
Esther Kim, Committee Chair
Rossier School of Education
University of Southern California
2024

iv
Abstract
Race-typed names can elicit discrimination for minority applicants, consciously and
unconsciously. The barriers experienced in the labor market by members of ethnic minority
groups relative to members of the majority group have been well documented through many
studies. Ethnic minorities are shown to be systematically disadvantaged in the recruitment and
hiring process due to unconscious name bias. Names invoke different ethnic backgrounds.
Unconscious ethnic name bias in recruitment and hiring can limit the potential for building a
diverse and inclusive workforce. Using Clark and Estes’ (2008) gap analysis framework, this
study sought to understand the gaps in knowledge, motivation, and organizational (KMO) factors
that affect the hiring of individuals with an ethnic-sounding name. The study design consisted of
purposeful sampling, collecting data from nine participants with direct hiring authority to assess
and validate assumed KMO influences on hiring candidates with ethnic-sounding names. Semistructured interviews were used to understand the hiring decision makers’ experiences relating to
unconscious ethnic name bias in recruitment and hiring. Based on the conceptual framework and
the findings across the three gap analysis areas, five recommendations for practice and future
research are provided for organizations to dismantle barriers to diversity, equity, and inclusion.
Keywords: unconscious name bias, knowledge, motivation, organization

v
Dedication
To my adoring husband, I could not have achieved this incredible milestone without you. I
appreciate you and thank you for your unwavering love and support throughout this journey.
To my children, Jayden Kenechukwu, Chibuike, Zikorah, and Adaora, I love you endlessly, and I
thank you for your patience and understanding. My sweetest Adaora, the “You Got This” sticker
you made and affixed to my computer screen motivated me to keep going. Thank you, baby girl,
for believing in me.

vi
Acknowledgments
To my Lord and Savior, who shepherds my path, I give you all the praise and glory for
helping me reach this feat. Only by your grace and favor upon my life am I where I am today.
Thank you to my dissertation committee, Dr. Richard Grad and Dr. Eric Canny, for your
time, guidance, and feedback during this study. I am particularly grateful to Dr. Jennifer Phillips
and Dr. Esther Kim, who both served as my chairs. Thank you for championing my study and
encouraging me along the way.
I want to acknowledge my mother, father, husband, children, siblings, sister-in-laws,
family, friends, and colleagues. Thank you all for loving, encouraging, and rooting for me. Mom,
my fierce prayer warrior, I am grateful for your unyielding prayers. To my supervisor, Sonia
Miranda, thank you for your flexibility and understanding. You are a true gem.
May your Igbo name always be a blessing and a reminder to my children, nieces, and
future nephews of your cultural roots. Your name has a deep meaning; say it proudly. You will
be invited, welcomed, seen, and heard in the right spaces, and your name will not hinder you
from achieving what is destined for you.

vii
Table of Contents
Abstract.......................................................................................................................................... iv
Dedication....................................................................................................................................... v
Acknowledgments.......................................................................................................................... vi
List of Tables ................................................................................................................................. ix
Chapter One: Introduction to the Problem of Practice.................................................................... 1
Background of the Problem ................................................................................................ 2
Field Context and Mission.................................................................................................. 4
Purpose of the Study and Research Questions.................................................................... 6
Importance of the Study...................................................................................................... 6
Overview of Theoretical Framework and Methodology .................................................... 7
Definitions........................................................................................................................... 8
Organization of the Dissertation ......................................................................................... 9
Chapter Two: Review of the Literature ........................................................................................ 10
Unconscious Bias and Name Bias Defined in Context..................................................... 11
Presence of Unconscious Name Bias in the Workplace ................................................... 13
Audit and Correspondence Tests...................................................................................... 19
Impact of Unconscious Name Bias on Minority Job Applicants...................................... 21
Conceptual Framework: Clark and Estes’s Gap Analysis Model..................................... 25
Summary........................................................................................................................... 33
Chapter Three: Methodology........................................................................................................ 34
Overview of Methodology................................................................................................ 34
The Researcher.................................................................................................................. 34
Method: Qualitative Interviews ........................................................................................ 36
Ethics................................................................................................................................. 39

viii
Summary........................................................................................................................... 40
Chapter Four: Results and Findings.............................................................................................. 41
Participants........................................................................................................................ 42
Research Question 1: What Knowledge Do Organizational Hiring Decision
Makers Have About Unconscious Name Bias, Including How It Influences
Recruitment Practices?...................................................................................................... 46
Research Question 2: What Are the Motivating Factors for Organizational Hiring
Decision Makers When Assessing Potential Candidates With an Ethnic-Sounding
Name? ............................................................................................................................... 54
Research Question 3: What Organizational Practices and Policies Related to
Mitigating Unconscious Name Bias Do Hiring Decision Makers Report Within
Their Organizations?......................................................................................................... 60
Summary........................................................................................................................... 64
Chapter Five: Discussion and Recommendations......................................................................... 65
Discussion of Findings...................................................................................................... 65
Recommendations for Practice ......................................................................................... 68
Limitations and Delimitations........................................................................................... 73
Future Areas of Research.................................................................................................. 73
Conclusion ........................................................................................................................ 75
References..................................................................................................................................... 77
Appendix A: Interview Protocol................................................................................................... 90
Appendix B: Information Sheet for Exempt Research ................................................................. 93

ix
List of Tables
Table 1: Knowledge Influences 28
Table 2: Motivation Influences 29
Table 3: Organizational Influences 33
Table 4: Interviewees 42
Table 5: Research Question 1 Findings 47
Table 6: Research Question 2 Findings 54
Table 7: Research Question 3 Findings 60
Table 8: Overview of Recommendations 72

1
Chapter One: Introduction to the Problem of Practice
“The past is of value only as it aids in understanding the present; and an understanding of
the facts of the problem … is the first step toward its solution” (Chicago Commission on Race
Relations, 1922, p. 640).
Unconscious name bias in the recruitment, selection, and hiring process harms people of
color, as applicants with a migrant background are less likely to find a job than native-born
people, even with comparable qualifications (Thijssen et al., 2020). A name can imply one’s race
and automatic associations with that race; for example, Maria Ramirez would elicit a Mexican
image, while Maisha Lewis would elicit a picture of a Black woman. Despite constitutional and
statutory protections, in 2021, the EEOC reported receiving over 6,000 national origin-based
charges in the United States (EEOC, 2022). Additionally, Kline and Walters (2021) found that
discriminatory biases adversely affect employers’ hiring decisions across multiple job vacancies,
as did researchers at Ryerson University and the University of Toronto. Zhao and Biernat (2017)
found that job applicants with foreign names were 28% less likely to receive an interview than
applicants with Anglo-sounding names despite having the same educational background and
work experience.
Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 forbids employment discrimination based on
race, sex, color, religion, and national origin. The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
(EEOC, 2022) further defined national origin discrimination to include “the denial of equal
employment opportunity because of an individual’s, or his or her ancestor’s, place of origin; or
because an individual has the physical, cultural or linguistic characteristics of a national origin
group” (para. 2). This definition incorporates discrimination based on the perception that an

2
individual’s name is associated with a national origin group. Nonetheless, the subtle nature of
this type of discrimination makes it difficult to detect and measure (Pager, 2007).
Background of the Problem
Names often indicate belonging to a particular ethnic group, and an individual’s name is
a vehicle to signal group identification (Broom et al., 1955; T. S. Kang, 1971). Also, a name
often establishes gender and ethnic identity and is considered distinctive if it is
disproportionately held by members of a particular group (Goldstein & Stecklov, 2016).
Pertinent to this study, research shows that name bias creates a disadvantage for minority
workers seeking employment, particularly applicants with distinctive racial-sounding names
(Zhao & Biernat, 2017). There has been consistent evidence that job seekers who have ethnicsounding names experience unconscious bias during recruitment and are less likely to be
contacted for roles they are qualified for compared to their counterparts (Bertrand &
Mullainathan, 2004; Booth et al., 2012; Cotton et al., 2008; Howard & Borgella, 2020; Thijssen
et al., 2020).
Resume screening is typically the first selection hurdle in determining an applicant’s job
chances. Recent studies have demonstrated the disadvantage that distinctive racial-sounding
names incur for minority workers in the labor market (Arceo-Gomez & Campos-Vazquez, 2014;
Booth et al., 2012). Potential employers interpret names as a sign of ethnic belonging and
discriminate against people with names commonly used by specific ethnic groups. During the
initial hiring phase, research suggests recruiters typically use the information in the resume to
make inferences about applicants’ job qualifications from college attended, type of degree
earned, affiliations, and previous work experiences (Cole et al., 2009). Job irrelevant
information, such as age and ethnic identification conveyed through applicants’ ethnic-sounding

3
names, pictures, or stereotypes associated with the applicant’s membership group, could trigger
unfair impressions of them (Derous et al., 2017).
Minority job applicants have resorted to Whitening their resumes by deleting references
to their race, including adopting an Anglo name to avoid name discrimination (Zhao & Biernat,
2017). Research has found that minorities who demonstrate an effort to assimilate into the White
majority and abandon ethnic identifiers associated with their ancestral groups benefit
substantially (Gerhards & Hans, 2009). They are viewed as willing to assimilate into their new
land. Changing one’s ethnic name to eliminate the potential for name-based discrimination and
to be perceived as a majority group member has become commonplace (Howard & Borgella,
2020; Zhao & Biernat, 2017).
Moreover, the U.S. labor market has repeatedly shown differential treatment by race
(Bertrand & Mullainathan, 2004). Employers are more likely to “favor prospective job applicants
with names that are stereotypically White over applicants with names that are stereotypically
Black” (Howard & Borgella, 2020, p. 514). Immigrants experience discrimination to a larger
extent compared to natives, particularly when the applicant has a foreign-sounding name
(Gerhards & Hans, 2009). Bertrand and Mullainathan (2004) conducted a study in which they
submitted fictitious matching resumes of both African American and White applicants to
employers and found disparities in the callback rates of African American candidates. Applicants
with White-sounding names prompted 50% more callbacks than those with Black-sounding
names (Bertrand & Mullainathan, 2004). Although equally skilled, distinct racial groups
experience different outcomes based on their racially suggestive name.
Unconsciously hiring staff who resemble oneself limits the potential for building a
racially and ethnically diverse group of employees. In the review of the candidate pool, hiring

4
decision makers knowingly and unknowingly select and hire candidates who resemble
themselves (Edo et al., 2017). They apply a bias of desiring to hire based on racial homophily
(Edo et al., 2017), which further exacerbates hiring discrimination. When there are perceptions
of familiarity and similarity, applicants appear more attractive (Cotton et al., 2008). Further,
Cotton et al. (2008) denoted that certain names deemed to be unusual or unique are less
desirable.
Field Context and Mission
Discrimination in hiring is an enduring phenomenon, particularly for minority groups.
The lack of diversity among professional staff remains an ongoing concern. To examine this
issue, this study focused on medium to large organizations that employ at least 1,000 employees
regarding implicit name bias impacting applicants seeking professional positions in corporate
settings.
Though an invitation to interview does not guarantee a job offer, it is an important
outcome that past research has examined when exploring name bias. Research often compares
callback rates across groups to measure discrimination (Cotton et al., 2008; Zschirnt & Ruedin,
2016). A field experiment conducted in Britain revealed that employers discriminate against job
applicants with ethnic minority backgrounds, signaled by their foreign-sounding names, when
making hiring decisions (Pager, 2007). In that study, 3,200 fictitious resumes of equally qualified
applicants were submitted to employers in response to job vacancies, and one in four applicants
from the majority group received a call back. The study found that ethnic minority applicants
needed to send 60% more applications to receive as many callbacks as the majority group (Pager,
2007). Racial minorities are systematically disadvantaged in the recruitment process because of
unconscious name bias.

5
Staff hiring is continuous as positions become vacant and new positions are added to
organizational headcounts annually. The hiring manager and recruiter play a key role in staffing
open positions; though each company may operate differently, the general process is similar. The
hiring manager and recruiter serve as initial employment gatekeepers, deciding which applicants
should remain active and which should be excluded from further consideration. In large
organizations, the manager seeking to fill a position often must obtain approval to hire from their
senior leadership. Upon receiving approval, the hiring manager will request the recruiter to
publicly announce the position for competitive fill. The hiring manager and the assigned
recruiter, whom this study refers to as the hiring decision makers, will partner in identifying
suitable candidates for consideration. Submitted resumes are used to make decisions regarding
applicants’ work history and qualifications. However, other information in the resume could
unintentionally disqualify a candidate depending on the lens through which the hiring decision
maker reviews it. Applicants identified for further consideration are contacted for a pre-screening
interview. Depending on their performance during the pre-screen, some candidates will be
invited for an in-person interview. In most cases, the hiring decision-maker will determine the
finalist and extend a job offer.
Many public and private organizations have diversity policies to promote diversity in
hiring and publicly announced their support for anti-racism efforts (Hessekiel, 2020). Prodiversity statements have become commonplace on publicly traded and private organizations’
websites. Job postings advertise “equal opportunity employer” as an expression of being
diversity-friendly (Harcourt et al., 2008). While the public display of diversity and anti-racism
commitments are important, demonstrating these pledges through recruitment methods is
paramount in moving words into action.

6
Purpose of the Study and Research Questions
The purpose of this study was to explore knowledge, motivation, and organizational
factors impacting the hiring of individuals with an ethnic-sounding name in medium to largesized corporations. Specifically, recruiters and hiring managers are the two participant groups
included under the umbrella of hiring decision makers. The research questions that guide this
study are as follows:
1. What knowledge do organizational hiring decision makers have about unconscious
name bias, including how it influences recruitment practices?
2. What are the motivating factors for organizational hiring decision makers when
assessing potential candidates who have an ethnic-sounding name?
3. What organizational practices and policies related to mitigating unconscious name
bias do hiring decision makers report within their organizations?
Importance of the Study
The problem of unconscious name bias directly harms minority job applicants looking for
better-paying jobs and career advancement. Black and Hispanic individuals are more likely to be
hired into low-skilled positions (Howard & Borgella, 2020). In a study conducted in 1980,
Terpstra and Larson gave graduate students in management resumes to evaluate and determine
whether they should be assigned to Black-typed, White-typed, or neutral jobs. The study found
that Black names were deemed suitable for Black-typed positions, and White-typed names were
rated suitable for White-typed jobs (King et al., 2006). Without addressing this problem of
unconscious name bias, inequitable treatment of ethnic job seekers with a foreign name in the
workplace will persist.

7
This issue is also significant for improved diversity, equity, inclusion, and economic
performance across various organizations. In a study of 1,000 large companies by McKinsey and
Company, businesses with more ethnic and cultural diversity were 33% more likely to
outperform their less diverse competitors, and businesses in the lowest quarter of ethnic-cultural
diversity were 29% less likely to achieve above-average profitability in comparison to the other
companies in the study (Hunt et al., 2020). The benefits of diversity in organizations are tied to
increased financial performance, higher innovation, amplified creativity, and a better overall
corporate environment and reputation (Stewart, 2016). Thus, increased staff diversity can yield
greater overall success.
Overview of Theoretical Framework and Methodology
Clark and Estes’s (2008) gap analysis provides a researched-based framework that
identifies the root causes of performance gaps between an organization’s current and desired
state. The framework consists of a step-by-step gap analysis that identifies business and
individual performance goals, determines and analyzes the causes of performance gaps, and
identifies and implements solutions to eliminate them (Clark & Estes, 2008). This framework
was useful for determining the gap in the knowledge and skills, motivation, and organizational
barriers that influence name bias in recruitment across medium to large-sized organizations.
This study utilized a qualitative approach to purposefully explore knowledge, motivation,
and organizational (KMO) influences on hiring decision makers’ ability to achieve desired hiring
outcomes by increasing the number of ethnic hires among the staff. Qualitative research seeks to
understand how individuals interpret and make meaning of their lived experiences (Merriam &
Tisdell, 2015). I conducted nine individual interviews to gain the most insight and understanding
to assist in learning the most about the topic (Creswell, 2014; Merriam & Tisdell, 2015).

8
Definitions
The following concepts are included in this study:
• Discrimination refers to actions based on unconscious or conscious prejudice
(Richardson, 2017) and unfair treatment of an individual based on group membership
(McGinnity & Lunn, 2011).
• Ethnic means “of or relating to large groups of people classed according to common
racial, national, tribal, religious, linguistic, or cultural origin or background”
(Merriam-Webster, 2022).
• Ethnic-sounding names refers to names that invoke different ethnic backgrounds
(Rubinstein & Brenner, 2014).
• Homophily is the act of identifying with those who are more like ourselves (Edo et
al., 2017).
• Minority refers to a part of a population differing from others in some characteristics
and often subjected to differential treatment (Phinney, 1996).
• Name bias is a preference over certain names due to assumptions about an
individual’s identity based on their name (Bertrand & Mullainathan, 2004).
• Resume refers to an annotated summary of one’s career and qualifications (Derous &
Ryan, 2019).
• Stereotype means over-generalized and potentially inaccurate beliefs about a group
(McGinnity & Lunn, 2011).
• Unconscious bias refers to prescribed judgments assigned to individuals outside of
one’s awareness (Consul et al., 2021).

9
Organization of the Dissertation
Five chapters are used to organize this study. This chapter provided the key concepts and
terminology commonly found in discussing implicit name bias in the recruitment process. The
field’s mission, goals, and framework for the project were introduced. Chapter Two provides a
review of the current literature surrounding the scope of the study. Topics include what
unconscious bias is and how it manifests itself in the workplace. Chapter Two also presents the
KMO influences explored in the study. Chapter Three details the methodology, including the
choice of participants, data collection, and analysis. In Chapter Four, the data and results are
assessed and analyzed, and key findings are presented. Chapter Five provides recommendations
for practice and future research based on the data analysis and literature.

10
Chapter Two: Review of the Literature
The civil rights movement was a turning point for addressing racism in the United States.
Before Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was enacted, it was legal to discriminate against
people for any reason. Companies could elect not to hire someone, refuse an employee for a
promotion, or blatantly discriminate against people based on their race, religion, sex, or national
origin, and it would be lawful (Arnesen, 2006). Employment and labor laws, such as Affirmative
Action, adopted through the Civil Rights Act, were enacted to remedy past inequalities due to
discrimination (Arnesen, 2006), yet these laws are not enough to undermine racial
discrimination.
Although the Civil Rights Act has been in place for over 50 years, Black, Indigenous, and
people of color continue to be underrepresented in staff positions serving business operations and
administrative roles (Beattie et al., 2013). The purpose of the Civil Rights Act was to abolish
future discrimination, yet the structures and systems born through racist ideas and intentions
remain. Despite the good intentions behind them, workplace diversity training and affirmative
action policies have not eradicated the problem. Evidence of conscious and unconscious bias
toward ethnic diversity continues in employment outcomes. While numerous antecedents,
barriers, and influences are associated with discrimination in recruiting, this study is limited to
name bias. Research shows that candidates with an ethnic-sounding name who apply for job
opportunities often experience covert discrimination because of their name (Bertrand &
Mullainathan, 2004). Unconscious name bias runs rampant in the hiring process.
This review covers literature under three primary topic areas: (a) unconscious name bias
in context, (b) presence in workplace recruitment practices, and (c) subsequent impact on
marginalized groups. The chapter concludes with a discussion of Clark and Estes’s (2008) gap

11
analysis framework and the assumed influences that will help to answer the three research
questions.
Unconscious Bias and Name Bias Defined in Context
Racism today looks different from the racism of 50 years ago. Most people condemn
overt bigotry, but racism still exists, and unconscious bias is ubiquitous (Backhus et al., 2019;
Maskaly et al., 2017). Researchers have reached various conclusions on the topic of bias as
unintentional, challenging to suppress, an automatic response, and an unfortunate truth, which
has prompted further investigation to identify ways of controlling it (Brownstein, 2019;
Greenwald et al., 1998). Unlike overt discrimination and prejudicial beliefs detectable in groups
like the Ku Klux Klan, unconscious bias is not noticeable (Banaji et al., 2021; Holroyd et al.,
2017). It is different, more silent, and less obvious in its appearance (Holroyd et al., 2017). It
permeates educational settings (Gilliam et al., 2016; Staats, 2016; Sukhera & Watling, 2018) and
influences hiring decisions (Albert, 2019; FitzGerald & Hurst, 2017).
Unconscious Bias Defined
Unconscious bias happens when our brains make quick, personal judgments and
assessments about people (Cuellar, 2017). Biases are influenced by our background, cultural
environment, and experiences (Cuellar, 2017). Bias is a preference in favor of or against a person
or group compared with another (Holroyd et al., 2017). Individuals are often unaware of these
views and opinions, nor are they aware of their full impact and implications. Unconscious bias
can be an inherited or learned behavior as part of regular socialization, whether a feeling, a
thought, or an action (Holroyd et al., 2017).
As unconscious bias is a behavior that all individuals harbor, it can be changed
(Brownstein, 2019). Unconscious bias often shows up as microaggressions, defined as everyday

12
verbal and nonverbal snubs, whether subtle or unintentional, against marginalized group
members (Sue, 2010). Sue (2010) further discussed microaggression as applying to any
marginalized group, stating, “microaggressions are brief, everyday exchanges that send
denigrating messages to certain individuals because of their group membership” (Sue, 2010,
p. xvii). Microaggressions reflect the active expression of oppressive worldviews that create and
foster marginalization, usually delivered by well-intentioned individuals unaware that they have
engaged in harmful conduct. These everyday occurrences can be observed through unconscious
name bias in the workplace.
Unconscious Name Bias Defined
Name bias is usually subtle and undetectable (Zschirnt, 2016). Unconscious name bias
occurs frequently in many settings, disproportionately affecting minority groups. It is the act of
discriminating against someone because of their name. Names are important symbols of group
affiliation with connotations to one’s race, gender, age, social class, and other social categories
(Goldstein & Stecklov, 2016). Names can evoke positive or negative effects depending on how
they are perceived (Zhao & Biernat, 2017). Researchers have used names on resumes to examine
bias and found that those with ethnic minority names experience greater discrimination relative
to majority-group names (Bertrand & Mullainathan, 2004; Gaddis, 2015; King et al., 2006; Zhao
& Biernat, 2017).
Extensive research has examined unconscious name bias and its pervasiveness. Whether
the outcome is in the realm of hiring, housing, or other areas that affect well-being and daily life,
those with White-sounding names have an advantage over those with non-White-sounding
names. For example, Wood et al. (2009) conducted a study in which White-named candidates
received a 10.7% positive response from 987 applications submitted, while applicants with an

13
ethnic minority name received a 6.2% positive response from 1,974 applications submitted. The
study results indicate that ethnic minority candidates needed to send 74% more applications to
achieve the same success as applicants with White-sounding names. Similarly, a study by Green
et al. (2007) involving 287 physicians who worked at medical centers in Atlanta and Boston
found doctors more likely to prescribe more effective drugs to White patients than Black
patients. In education, a field experiment sampling 6,548 faculty members at 260 universities
found that professors were more likely to reply to emails from students with a White name than
an ethnic minority name (Milkman et al., 2012). Okonofua and Eberhardt (2015) conducted a
study with 57 predominantly White female kindergarten through 12th-grade teachers in school
districts across the country to examine how stereotypically Black and White names may
influence teachers’ responses to classroom behavior. The study found that after the teachers read
about the student’s infractions, they assigned harsher punishment to Black students than to White
students. Regarding housing discrimination, Feldman and Weseley (2013) reported that after
responding to 209 advertisements for rentals, applicants with ethnic names received fewer
responses from landlords. Quadlin and Montgomery (2022) found that the adoption timeframe
for dogs perceived as White was faster than for dogs given Black or Hispanic-sounding names.
Together, these studies demonstrate that unconscious bias toward racialized names is prevalent
in day-to-day social interactions.
Presence of Unconscious Name Bias in the Workplace
Unconscious name bias inadvertently invades the selection and hiring of minority
candidates with an ethnic name. The primary areas identified in the literature on this bias are (a)
hiring and (b) audit and correspondence tests.

14
Hiring Practices
Hiring is a multi-step process that involves selecting and onboarding a new employee.
The hiring decision maker will use both objective information and subjective judgment while
assessing candidates, and unconscious bias could influence decision making. Resume screening
and interviews are pivotal points at which unconscious name bias may emerge. Further,
occupational stereotyping based on unconscious name bias is a third consideration in hiring
decisions.
Resume Review by Hiring Decision-Maker
Resume screening is highly susceptible to unconscious bias (Derous et al., 2015) and
often dictates whether candidates move to the interview stage. A hiring decision maker will use
the resume to draw conclusions about the applicant’s job qualifications, work experience, and
extracurricular activities (Derous et al., 2017). Resume screening is typically the first selection
milestone that determines the quality and quantity of the applicant pool along with applicants’
job possibilities (Derous et al., 2017). A study of 520 recruiting professionals by the Society of
Human Resources Management found that 86% of employers indicated that they review
applicant resumes as part of their candidate selection (Maurer, 2017). The resume screening
stage shapes individuals’ subsequent access to opportunities (S. Kang et al., 2016). Progressing
through the first-round review of resumes is stacked against minority job seekers, with White
applicants receiving approximately 50% more callbacks than Black applicants (Pager et al.,
2009). The resume review comes at the early stage of recruitment and is critical in determining
the applicant’s fate. Applicants bearing an ethnic minority name are considered less desirable,
given the low callback rates.

15
The resume screening stage of the employee selection process has a powerful influence
on an applicant’s subsequent access to opportunities and can serve as a major barrier to
employment for racial minorities. Pager et al.’s (2009) qualitative study revealed what could be
happening at this stage. The study determined that some employers notice Black racial cues and
reject a resume, some evaluate the resume content using more stringent standards than a White
applicant’s resume, and some make decisions on whether they should be considered for a higher
or lower position depending on their race. Midtboen and Rogstad (2012) conducted another
qualitative resume audit in Norway in which applicant resumes with Norwegian names were
compared to those with Pakistani names. The interviewees were 42 employers who had
responded to one or both paired applicant resumes. Some employers acknowledged that the
Pakistani-named applicants had to be more qualified than those with a Norwegian name.
Another concern arising during resume review is the idea of preferential treatment toward
applicants who exhibit characteristics similar to the hiring decision maker (Edo et al., 2017). Edo
et al. (2017) found strong evidence of ethnic homophily in the hiring process after conducting a
correspondence test. The study took place in France, where resumes with French names, North
African names, and foreign-sounding names with no specific ethnic association were used. After
responding to 504 job offers and submitting 3024 resumes of applicants with similar
backgrounds, the results showed a prevalence of discrimination against minority applicants. The
researchers determined that resumes bearing French names produced a callback rate of 17%
compared to 10% for non-French applicants. From this study, Edo et al. found that ethnic
homophily influences hiring discrimination. This can affect whether the applicant advances to
the interview stage.

16
The Interview
For over a century, the informal interview has been the most widely used form of
evaluation for professional-level hiring decisions in the United States (Huffcutt & Youngcourt,
2007; Lievens et al., 2005). It gives the interviewers complete discretion over what questions to
ask without established procedural or evaluative measures (Huffcutt & Youngcourt, 2007). This
method creates inconsistency and increases the subjectivity of the hiring decision-maker. It is
common for an interview to begin with small talk focused on the candidate’s extracurricular
activities, previous work history, and future career aspirations. However, researchers found that
structured interviews and evaluations could increase reliability and validity as selection tools
(McCarthy et al., 2010). Huffcutt (2011) conducted a meta-analysis of 47 studies on actual
employment interviews and found a significant number of racial differences in informal
interview outcomes. White candidates dominated, receiving higher ratings on average than Black
candidates. However, when formal, structured interviews occurred, the difference was negligible.
The hiring of minority candidates increases when an organization follows a formal
interview process. A formal and systematic method for evaluating a candidate’s job knowledge
against the job competencies offers greater consistency and equality in evaluating each
candidate. Lin et al. (1992) found that structured interview questions, ideally situational or
applied knowledge questions, and a standard rubric for evaluating responses minimized hiring
based on racial similarity. The drawback of this study is that it only looked at evaluation ratings
and did not provide data on extended job offers, which is a critique of many studies on hiring.
The studies often look at the evaluator’s ratings and notes, but this data has not been found to be
unrelated to actual hiring decisions (Dipboye, 2017; Goldberg, 2005).

17
While a structured interview increases validity and reliability and reduces racial
differences (McCarthy et al., 2010), unconscious name bias remains an unseen threat to
employment outcomes during interviews. Segrest Purkiss et al. (2006) performed a study to
examine how ethnic cues, such as a person’s name and accent, may elicit unconscious bias in
decision-making. The study involved 212 students attending a large university who were each
asked to view a video recording of a person speaking and to imagine that the speaker was
interviewing for a managerial position in human resources. The students received the speaker’s
resume and the job description. The study determined that when candidates had an accent or
ethnic name, they were unlikely to receive a favorable hiring decision. The study found that
hiring decision makers are more inclined to reject difference, and the more difference there is,
the stronger the rejection, thereby supporting the principle of homophily (Segrest Purkiss et al.,
2006). They tend to seek similarity; when those similarities align, the candidate stands a better
chance of being hired.
The interpersonal dynamics between the interviewer and the candidate can strongly
influence hiring decisions (Kandola, 2004; Rivera, 2012). It is also not unusual for interviewers
to unconsciously look for and favor applicants who show signs of sharing racial, cultural, and
ethnic similarities with the interviewers during the interviews. Rivera (2012) asserted that
subjective impressions of candidates are formed based on their personal tastes and style, hobbies,
and other interests; further, Rivera determined that these extraneous factors often carry more
weight than the candidate’s job qualifications. In this case, the notion of showing greater
attraction toward individuals with similar attitudes and less attraction toward those with
dissimilar attitudes would apply (Cotton et al., 2008). There is a tendency to like that which is

18
familiar and similar to the interviewer. Inherently, applicants bearing an unusual first name
connote less attractive characteristics than more common names (Mehrabian, 2001).
Occupational Stereotyping
Research suggests that occupational stereotyping could be a factor in contributing to
workplace discrimination of race-typed names. Occupational stereotyping is “a preconceived
attitude about a particular occupation, about people who are employed in that occupation, or
about one’s suitability for that occupation” (Lipton et al., 1991, p. 129). Terpstra and Larsen
(1980) enlisted graduate students in management to evaluate resumes for three types of jobs:
Black-typed, White-typed, and neutral. The students assigned applicants with Black names to
Black-typed jobs and White names to White-typed jobs. The participants determined the
evaluation and decision-making regarding minoritized applicants and their suitability for hire
primarily based on racial stereotypes of the applicant driven by their name.
Race is a personal characteristic with status value. In U.S. society, White men
overwhelmingly dominate high-ranking positions (King et al., 2006). As such, when evaluating
applicants with similar qualifications, hiring decision makers tend to favor White men because of
the status value society has afforded them as being the most esteemed applicants (Gaddis, 2015).
King et al. (2006) performed an expanded study similar to that of Bertrand and Mullainathan’s
(2004) study in which multiple racial groups, including applicants with Asian American, Black,
Hispanic, and White names, were incorporated into the research. In addition, King et al. added
occupational stereotyping to the study to determine the relationship between race and evaluations
of applicants. The results revealed strong effects of occupational stereotyping, specifically
toward the Black and Hispanic applicants. Black and Hispanic applicants were deemed more
suitable for low-skill positions than White and Asian American applicants. Further, the Asian

19
American applicants were rated more suitable for high-status positions than Black and Hispanic
applicants, even when the resume quality was substandard. It is believed that racial stereotypes
were triggered during the resume review based on the applicant’s name. A specific limitation of
this study should be noted—the participants used in the study were all White males.
Education has been known as the great equalizer, opening doors to better opportunities
for all (Gaddis, 2015). However, in the labor market, education has not been that for minorities.
Gaddis (2015) conducted a study in which over 1,000 job applications were submitted by White
and Black graduates of elite universities as well as graduates from high-ranked but less selective
institutions. They found that Black candidates were selected for lower pay and prestige jobs than
their White counterparts. The results highlight that an elite education does not improve outcomes
for Blacks in equalizing employment opportunities. In fact, the racial difference suggests that
even a bachelor’s degree from an elite institution cannot fully counteract the significance of race
in the workplace.
Audit and Correspondence Tests
Research has pointed to consistent results when it comes to the negative effects of
racialized names for minorities in the workplace (Arceo-Gomez & Campos-Vazquez, 2014;
Booth et al., 2012; Carlsson & Rooth, 2007; Gaddis, 2015; Kaas & Manger, 2012; King et al.,
2006; Oreopoulos, 2011; Pager, 2007; Pager et al., 2009; Riach & Rich, 2002). Researchers have
used field experiments, often referred to as audit studies, as these experiments offer strong
evidence of discriminatory behavior in the work environment, using either in-person audit tests
or written correspondence tests. The audit method generates data about real employers who
believe they are making real decisions about real applicants (Zschirnt & Ruedin, 2016).
Researchers send out testers to apply for jobs, either in person or by sending in resumes, and then

20
measure employer callbacks for interviews and job offers. The difference in the callback rate
between the groups is interpreted as discrimination. Since discrimination in hiring is less
observable, researchers have used fictitious candidates with identical resumes, but different raceassociated names are assigned to them, to assess the degree to which discrimination exists
(Bertrand & Mullainathan, 2004; Gaddis, 2015; Oreopoulos, 2011). The random assignment of
names to convey ethnicity in applications in a correspondence test indicates no plausible
explanations for the difference in treatment found between White and ethnic minority names
other than racial discrimination. High levels of name-based discrimination were found in favor of
White applicants that continue to point to unconscious name bias.
In a resume audit conducted by Bertrand and Mullainathan (2004), 5,000 fictitious
resumes were sent to 1,300 job vacancies for available sales, clerical, administrative, and
management positions to determine the probability that an applicant is contacted for a job
interview. The study found that applicants with White names received 50% more callbacks for
an interview than matching resumes of applicants with Black-associated names. Further, the
study identified resumes of higher quality (i.e., showing better credentials and/or work
experience) with White bearing names that resulted in 30% more callbacks than lower-quality
resumes of White named applicants. Conversely, resumes of higher quality with Blackassociated names had a smaller effect on the callback rate compared to lower-quality resumes
with Black-associated names. Thus, having a higher quality resume increases the chance for a
callback by 30% for Whites, while Black applicants did not experience a positive change in
callbacks despite having solid credentials. In the study, the largest discrimination ratio occurred
for administrative positions, in which White named applicants were 64% more likely to get a
callback than were Black-named applicants. These results corroborate subsequent

21
correspondence studies that also arrived at similar findings (Quillian et al., 2017; Zschirnt &
Ruedin, 2016).
Impact of Unconscious Name Bias on Minority Job Applicants
Resume audits and qualitative studies prove that race-based employment discrimination
occurs in the workplace. Research indicates that unconscious name bias can powerfully impact
the psychological well-being of marginalized groups and affect their standard of living by
creating inequities in health care, education, and employment (Sue, 2010). To adapt to
anticipated discrimination in recruitment, applicants have taken steps to minimize the impact of
experiencing name bias through resume Whitening and assimilation.
Resume Whitening
Despite the proliferation of equal opportunity and diversity initiatives in the workplace
(Kaiser et al., 2013), discrimination based on race remains a pervasive issue. Minorities have
adapted to this discrimination through resume Whitening. Resume Whitening is achieved by
concealing a stigmatized characteristic, such as one’s racial ethnicity, in a resume (S. Kang et al.,
2016). The objective is to even the playing field by removing all racial cues to pass as White
during the resume screening stage in the hopes that their race would not surface until they have
reached the interview.
Presentation of Names
The decision to modify one’s first name has become common among immigrants and job
applicants with an ethnic name when seeking employment opportunities (S. Kang et al., 2016).
The applicant’s name is an important variable in the recruitment process, and research has
established that hiring decision makers may have negative attitudes toward individuals with an
ethnic-sounding name (King et al., 2006). Minorities are changing how they present their name

22
on their resume when applying for jobs to avoid experiencing discrimination and to appear more
relatable. S. Kang et al.’s (2016) study, conducted in the form of qualitative interviews with 59
racial minority students, revealed that 31% of Black respondents and 40% of Asian respondents
reported engaging in resume Whitening. Further, two-thirds of the interviewees indicated that
they have friends and family who have participated in Whitening their resumes. Several Asian
respondents reported that their chosen American-sounding name appears first on the resume
while their legal name is in parenthesis. Many Black respondents opted to alter their first name
by using their middle name if it sounded more White or neutral.
Presentation of Experience in the Resume
As resumes are used to determine if the applicant demonstrates the requisite knowledge,
skills, and abilities, other available information on the resume is reviewed in the initial screening
(Cole et al., 2009). Based on the resume data, this early evaluation phase could exclude
prospective applicants from being hired. Cotton et al. (2008) found that hiring decision makers
act on the name and ethnic cues on the resume rather than using complete information about the
candidate’s experience and qualifications before deciding on the candidate’s employability.
Concern for such practices has prompted applicants to change the presentation of or omit their
professional or extraprofessional experiences in their resume. S. Kang et al. (2016) referenced a
2009 article in The New York Times in which a Black woman named Yvonne Orr was searching
for work in Chicago. She intentionally removed a position at an African American nonprofit
organization from her resume to increase her chances of getting job interviews. Her actions
demonstrate a form of resume Whitening in which she removed a previous job that could
identify her race. Changes such as omitting experiences that could signal racial cues, altering the
description of extraprofessional activities to make it race-neutral, and emphasizing experiences

23
that signal whiteness or assimilation into the White culture are forms of whitewashing one’s
resume to improve their chances of getting a callback (S. Kang et al., 2016).
Assimilation
In response to anticipated name bias, ethnic minority job applicants demonstrate their
desire to assimilate with the majority group by changing their names. Adopting a White first
name signals an individual’s desire to align themselves with the majority group and a rejection of
one’s ethnic ancestry (Zhao & Biernat, 2017). Positioning one’s resume toward Whiteness
reduces racial bias in recruitment (S. Kang et al., 2016). As previously stated, minorities who
assimilate into the White majority and abandon ethnic identifiers benefit substantially (Gerhards
& Hans, 2009). Choosing to assimilate or conform to the White majority by changing their name
minimizes triggering negative stereotypes associated with their racial or ethnic group that could
arise in recruitment. However, this decision can affect the individual’s social identity.
Names have substantial affective value (Falk, 1975) and often establish gender and ethnic
identities (T. S. Kang, 1971). Children’s parents choose their names, which are symbolic
representations of individuals’ social identities (Goldstein & Stecklov, 2016; T. S. Kang, 1971).
Parents may choose a particular name for their child in anticipation of discrimination or choose a
certain name to express belonging to their ethnic group of origin (Goldstein & Stecklov, 2016).
Certain ethnic names can be considered distinctive and recognizable as belonging to a particular
racial group. The individual’s decision to change their first name symbolizes their intent to
assimilate, while keeping their traditional name indicates cultural-ethnic maintenance (Gerhards
& Hans, 2009).
Often, ethnic groups voluntarily give up their traditional first names and adopt the names
of the dominant group as a form of assimilation. In doing so, the individual would need to alter

24
their patterns of social behaviors and make them consistent with the changed structure of their
new identity (Falk, 1975; T. S. Kang, 1971). A study completed by T. S. Kang (1971) showed
that 36.2% of the Chinese students at the University of Michigan replaced their original Chinese
names with names commonly associated with Western culture. The study found that students
who changed their names were better integrated into American society. Lieberson (2000)
analyzed the degree of assimilation in terms of various U.S. immigrant groups’ use of familiar
American names and found that Chinese, Japanese, and Korean immigrants adopt American
names rather quickly soon after their arrival. The pressure to adapt to anticipated discrimination
by changing one’s foreign-sounding name to a native name further perpetuates the problem of
unconscious name bias against individuals with an ethnic name.
Promising Strategies to Counter Unconscious Name Bias in Hiring
Unconscious name bias can quietly sabotage an organization’s efforts to build an equally
diverse workforce. Some organizations have employed different strategies for mitigating
unconscious name bias at multiple levels of the hiring process. Consul et al. (2021) asserted that
the interview is crucial and infamous for being subjective. Three strategies, in particular, have
been found to reduce the influence of name bias in hiring: the use of defined performance-based
scoring criteria, formal training for hiring decision makers, and blind recruitment.
To combat subjectivity, Consul et al. (2021) and McCarthy et al. (2010) suggested
utilizing a structured interview approach by establishing clearly defined performance-based
criteria with a scoring rubric to be used by all interviewers to evaluate applicants. This approach
provides a standardized method to reduce discriminatory outcomes. Another mitigation tactic
identified to counter unconscious name bias is to require hiring decision makers to attend formal
training related to interview bias (Consul et al., 2021). Such training may include increasing the

25
interviewers’ awareness for or against particular applicants and learning to recognize and better
manage unconscious biases at crucial points of judgment and selection. Finally, organizations
adopt blind recruitment to help eliminate unconscious name bias in the resume screening stage
(Derous et al., 2017). Blind resume screening helps to overcome unconscious name bias, given
that personally identifiable information, such as name, is omitted from the applicant’s resume
(Derous et al., 2017; Derous & Ryan, 2019).
Conceptual Framework: Clark and Estes’s Gap Analysis Model
Clark and Estes’s (2008) gap analysis model guided the conceptual framework of this
study. Gap analysis is a systemic analytical method that helps clarify goals and identify the gap
between actual and preferred performance (Clark & Estes, 2008). The steps in the gap analysis
are as follows: defining measurable goals, determining performance gaps, hypothesizing possible
causes for those gaps, validating and prioritizing causes, developing solutions, and evaluating
outcomes. In gap analysis, the potential causes of performance gaps are related to knowledge
(K), motivation (M), and organizational (O) influences.
This gap analysis examined the assumed KMO influences that prevent candidates with an
ethnic name from being considered for employment. Assessing the stakeholders’ knowledge to
perform a given task is central to ensuring productivity (Clark & Estes, 2008). Krathwohl (2002)
noted four types of knowledge that can be employed to meet performance: factual, conceptual,
procedural, and metacognitive. This section will examine the literature on hiring decision
makers’ conceptual and procedural knowledge of unconscious name bias as it relates to hiring
applicants with a racialized name. Motivation stimulates an individual to apply their knowledge
to achieving a goal (Mayer, 2011). This study explored self-efficacy theory and task value theory
as they relate to the motivation to employ an ethnically diverse workforce. Finally, the analysis

26
will describe the organizational influences, specifically the organizational culture and
organizational structure, that may impact goal achievement.
Knowledge Influences
This study focused on knowledge-related influences pertinent to exploring hiring
managers’ ability to mitigate unconscious name bias during recruitment. Knowledge and skills
are essential to examining problem-solving to identify what needs improvement (Langley et al.,
2009). The assumed knowledge influences discussed in this study are conceptual, procedural,
and metacognition. Krathwohl (2002) identified conceptual knowledge as the interrelationships
among the basic elements of factual knowledge that enable them to work together. Procedural
knowledge relates to the understanding of the method for completing a task (Anderson &
Krathwohl, 2001). Metacognitive knowledge, or self-knowledge, is the understanding of
cognition and awareness of one’s own cognition (Krathwohl, 2002).
Hiring Decision Makers Need to Know the Benefits of Hiring an Ethnically Diverse
Workforce
The benefits of having a diverse workforce cannot be overstated. Organizations with
diverse workforces outperform their less diverse competitors (Stewart, 2016). Diversity promotes
different ideas and viewpoints, contributing to better business decisions (Stewart, 2016). The
2020 McKinsey & Company report found that companies with ethnically diverse executive
teams were 36% more likely to have above-average profits than companies whose teams were
the least ethnically diverse (Dixon-Fyle et al., 2020). Alteri (2020) posited that increasing
representation in an organization better reflects societal needs, thus improving the employee
experience in the organization. With the increased inclusion of ethnic minority employees, the
composition of the workforce would be more representative of society. Hiring decision makers

27
need to be aware of the benefits of hiring an ethnically diverse workforce as a component of
countering unconscious name bias in their practices.
Hiring Decision Makers Need to Know How to Mitigate Unconscious Name Bias Toward
Minority Applicants in the Recruitment Process
Unconscious name bias can surface unknowingly, so it is essential to understand when it
surfaces and how to manage it when evaluating applicants. Continuous bias training and holding
oneself accountable for managing one’s personal biases from influencing hiring decision making
is necessary. Fiarman (2016) asserted that individuals favor their own group membership. To
counter this selective behavior, hiring decision makers need the procedural knowledge to
implement strategies to mitigate name bias, including using defined performance-based scoring
criteria, formal training, and blind recruitment. They must recognize and actively work toward
optimizing their hiring practices to eliminate name bias in recruitment.
Hiring Decision Makers Need to Know How Unconscious Name Bias May Affect Their
Predispositions and Processes in Recruiting Minority Candidates
Reflection and self-awareness are critical components of an individual’s metacognition
(Mayer, 2011). The ability to facilitate a self-awareness of knowledge in acquiring knowledge
(Krathwohl, 2002; Rueda, 2011) is paramount in managing predisposed biases. Hiring decision
makers must exercise good discretion by reflecting on their learning practices and cognitive
performance (Mayer, 2011). Previous studies have shown that individuals carry subconscious
attitudes that could inadvertently create biased decision making when recruiting diverse
candidates (Banaji & Greenwald, 2013; Greenwald & Pettigrew, 2014). Organizational support
is necessary to provide hiring decision makers with appropriate training on managing their biases
and establish effective processes that will foster broad inclusion of minority candidates. Table 1

28
presents the knowledge influences necessary for the hiring decision-maker to mitigate
unconscious name bias.
Table 1
Knowledge Influences
Knowledge type Assumed knowledge influences
Conceptual Hiring decision makers need to know the
benefits of hiring an ethnically diverse
workforce.
Procedural Hiring decision makers need to know how to
mitigate unconscious name bias toward
minority applicants in the recruitment
process.
Metacognitive Hiring decision makers need to know how
unconscious name bias may affect their
predispositions and processes in recruiting
minority candidates.

29
Motivational Influences
Motivation is the second factor (KMO) related to organizational success or failure (Clark
& Estes, 2008). This section focuses on the motivational influences pertinent to exploring hiring
managers’ willingness to mitigate unconscious name bias during recruitment. Motivation is
defined as choosing to accomplish a goal, having the persistence to not be distracted from
achieving the goal, and the mental effort to achieve the goal (Clark & Estes, 2008). In addition,
motivation fuels the effort needed to meet the demands to achieve the desired result (Mayer,
2011). Although several motivational theories may be applicable, this study focused on selfefficacy and task value (Table 2).
Table 2
Motivation Influences
Assumed knowledge influences Motivation influences
Self-efficacy Hiring decision makers need to believe that
they have the ability to mitigate
unconscious name bias in hiring practices.
Task value Hiring decision makers need to want to
engage in mitigating unconscious name
bias in hiring practices.

30
Hiring Decision Makers Need to Believe That They Have the Ability to Mitigate Unconscious
Name Bias in Hiring Practices
As Bandura (1977) defined, self-efficacy is the self-belief that individuals can achieve
what they attempt to achieve. Bandura indicated that individuals set goals that align with their
self-efficacy. High self-efficacy will motivate individuals to engage in and persist with a task,
while low self-efficacy will likely lead to avoiding the task (Rueda, 2011). Motivation increases
when individuals believe they can directly affect outcomes (Mayer, 2011). In the context of
staffing, hiring decision makers must believe that they have the ability to consciously make
unbiased hiring decisions regardless of whether the candidate bears an ethnic name.
Short-term wins increase motivation (Kotter, 2012), which inevitably improves selfefficacy. If hiring decision makers learn procedures for increasing the number of ethnically
diverse candidates interviewed and hired, self-efficacy will increase. Through education and
recruiting successes, hiring decision makers can enhance their belief about their effectiveness in
diversity hiring. Hence, recruiting success of ethnic-named candidates will improve hiring
decision makers’ self-efficacy by demonstrating that diversity improvement is attainable.
Hiring Decision Makers Need to Want to Engage in Mitigating Unconscious Name Bias in
Hiring Practices
Eccles (2006) and Mayer (2011) suggested that individuals who do not value a particular
task or do not see a task as contributing to their personal or professional identity are less likely to
choose the task, persist if the task is difficult, or exert effort into it. Clark and Estes (2008)
contended that active choice typically focuses on whether individuals take the first steps in
implementing goals or decisions. Persistence occurs when individuals continue with the tasks
despite distractions or other impediments (Clark & Estes, 2008; Mayer, 2011). Mental effort

31
refers to the intensity individuals exert in attaining goals, solving problems, and implementing
decisions (Clark & Estes, 2008; Mayer, 2011). Motivation relies on the individual’s interests,
beliefs, attributions, mastery, and partnership in relation to the task at hand (Mayer, 2011). Thus,
hiring decision makers need to value engaging in efforts to mitigate unconscious name bias in
their recruitment practices.
Organizational Influences
Organizational influences, in addition to knowledge and motivational influences, can
impact hiring decisions. An organization’s communication, policies, and procedures must align
with its goals and reflect the values of the organization to effect positive change (Clark & Estes,
2008; Schein & Schein, 2016). Organizational styles and structures can influence employees’
knowledge and motivation (Clark & Estes, 2008; Schein & Schein, 2016). Within organizational
style, shared values, norms, beliefs, and expectations (culture) can impact hiring decisions. This
study focused on how organizational culture and the power assigned to hiring decision-makers
unconsciously affect hiring applicants with an ethnic name.
Organizations Need to Foster a Culture That Supports the Mitigation of Unconscious Name
Bias in the Recruitment and Hiring Process
Culture, in the form of shared values, norms, beliefs, and expectations, relates to the
organization’s mission and vision, how it conducts its business, and the interpersonal contracts
between stakeholders (Alavi et al., 2005; Schein & Schein, 2016). An organization’s culture and
climate significantly influence the effectiveness of attempted change initiatives (Clark & Estes,
2008). The existing values, norms, beliefs, and expectations can create an environment that
keeps unconscious name bias in place or addresses it directly to provide equitable hiring
practices. Organizations need to provide an environment where shared values, norms, beliefs,

32
and expectations disrupt unconscious name bias to afford all applicants equity and a process that
represents the organization’s values. This study explored whether decision hiring managers
perceive the organizational culture as valuing initiatives to mitigate unconscious name bias in
hiring practices.
Organizations Need to Empower Hiring Decision Makers to Enact Practices That Mitigate
Unconscious Name Bias in the Recruitment and Hiring Process
Organizational structure is the framework of roles, division of labor, power, and how
knowledge is conveyed that results from decisions made by those with authority (Alavi et al.,
2005). This structure can influence hiring decisions, what authority a hiring decision-maker has
over hiring decisions, and whether hiring selections are subject to approval before extending a
job offer. Unconscious name bias can arise multiple times during recruitment and hiring, and
taking proactive steps can decrease such biases (Consul et al., 2021). As discussed in the
literature review, utilizing standardized criteria for evaluation, participating in formal bias
training, and blind recruitment are strategies that reduce unconscious name bias. In addition to
measuring whether hiring managers know these strategies, this study was also interested in
whether the organizations have implemented them. Additionally, other practices, including
ensuring a widely diverse pool of applicants and whether organizational practices require
assembling an interview panel for candidate selection (Consul et al., 2021), are practices that this
study explored. Table 3 shows the two organizational influences that can impact the hiring
decision-maker’s ability to make equitable hiring decisions.

33
Table 3
Organizational Influences
Organizational influence type Organizational influences
Organizational culture Organizations need to foster a culture that
supports the mitigation of unconscious name
bias in the recruitment and hiring process.
Organizational structure Organizations need to empower hiring
decision makers to enact practices that
mitigate unconscious name bias in the
recruitment and hiring process.
Summary
Chapter Two defined unconscious bias and unconscious name bias and discussed their
prevalence in workplace hiring practices. The chapter outlined how unconscious bias influences
decision-making in ways individuals are generally unaware of and negatively affects hiring
decision-makers’ evaluations and decisions about applicants with ethnic names. The literature on
unconscious name bias in the workplace has shown that sizeable racial gaps for racial minorities
occur across a range of labor market outcomes. Informal interview evaluation methods allow for
subjectivity and discretion, whereas guided questions and standard rating tools reduce bias.
Unconscious name bias harms minoritized groups, and some have resorted to abandoning
outward signifiers of ethnic identity in favor of assimilating with the White majority. Finally,
Chapter Two analyzed the key components of the study, adapting Clark and Estes’s (2008) gap
analysis to understand who the stakeholders are, those affected by unconscious name bias, and
the professional field’s key KMO influences on the hiring decision-maker’s ability to mitigate
unconscious name bias during recruitment. These components form the conceptual framework
for conducting this study according to the methodology identified in Chapter Three.

34
Chapter Three: Methodology
This study aimed to explore hiring decision makers’ knowledge and motivation and
organizational factors impacting the hiring of individuals with an ethnic-sounding name in
medium to large-sized organizations. Chapter Three provides an overview of the methodology
used in obtaining data to answer the research questions:
1. What knowledge do organizational hiring decision makers have about unconscious
name bias, including how it influences recruitment practices?
2. What are the motivating factors for organizational hiring decision makers when
assessing potential candidates who have an ethnic-sounding name?
3. What organizational practices and policies related to mitigating unconscious name
bias do hiring decision makers report within their organizations?
Overview of Methodology
The methodological approach to this study utilized Clark and Estes’s (2008) gap analysis
framework to explore processes for and influences on hiring outcomes for applicants with an
ethnic-sounding name. This analysis is a systematic method that clarifies organizational goals
and identifies the gaps between an organization’s actual and desired performance. The assumed
interfering elements associated with hiring candidates with an ethnic name will be evaluated
based on assumed KMO influences and related literature (Maxwell, 2013). I collected qualitative
data to assess and validate assumed KMO influences on hiring candidates with ethnic-sounding
names.
The Researcher
The researcher is the key instrument and one of the core attributes of qualitative research
(Creswell & Creswell, 2018). As the researcher in this study, I was accountable for identifying

35
and selecting the site and sample, developing the interview protocols, transcribing the interviews,
and analyzing the data. With my identity in mind, I sought to maintain an unbiased approach to
interpreting the data.
I am a human resource professional with over 20 years of related experience. As someone
with an ethnic name who has experienced discriminatory treatment in hiring practices because of
it, I have much empathy for applicants with ethnic names who unknowingly are not being fairly
considered for the positions to which they apply. As a mother of four Black children who have
an ethnic first and last name, I am motivated to contribute toward research that may improve
hiring outcomes for them and other children like them. I believe this is counterbalanced by a
motivation to conduct credible and trustworthy research. To do otherwise would discredit the
findings.
Given my positionality as a Black woman with an ethnic name, I had to be mindful of
how my identity could have influenced this research. These factors could have introduced
unintended biases into the research. I had to be aware of how I reacted and responded to the
answers I received from the participants, especially when these did not align with my
perceptions. I had to ensure they observed me as open-minded and eager to learn from them. I
must also remember that the participants might feel uncomfortable disclosing their truths as they
answer the questions to avoid the appearance of discrimination against ethnic-named applicants.
To minimize my positionality’s influence on the research, I disclosed limited information about
my identity to the participants after data collection. In addition, I used journaling during data
collection as a reflective method to manage my receptivity to the data.

36
Method: Qualitative Interviews
I conducted a single 1-hour recorded interview with each participant. I conducted
interviews via Zoom, a video conferencing platform. Interviews allowed the participants to share
their feelings, thoughts, intentions, and individual perspectives (Merriam & Tisdell, 2015;
Patton, 2002). An informal, semi-structured interview protocol allowed greater flexibility to
explore the topic further. Having the interview guided by a set of questions allowed for a more
casual and comfortable conversation with the participants. Given the study’s KMO framework
(Clark & Estes, 2008), the interview questions stemmed from assumed KMO influences. Openended questions are intended to allow the participants to expand on their experiences, thoughts,
and opinions.
Participants
I recruited nine individuals to participate in the study. Their industry experiences varied
from higher education institutions to public and private sectors. Their areas of functional
experience are recruitment, human resources, and direct authority to make hiring decisions.
Merriam and Tisdell (2015) described qualitative research as focusing on understanding
individuals’ experiences and how they interpret those experiences. Understanding hiring decision
makers’ experience and attitude toward unconscious name bias is essential to developing an
approach for mitigating bias that negatively impacts candidates with an ethnic name.
I used purposeful sampling to deliberately target individuals who met specific criteria. A
recruitment questionnaire managed through Qualtrics aided in identifying potential participants’
eligibility for participation. The questionnaire was disseminated on my LinkedIn page and
emailed to direct contacts in my professional network. An affirmative response to all four

37
questions would deem the individual eligible for participation in the study. Individuals interested
in participating provided their contact information and responded to the following questions:
1. Do you work for a midsize to large organization (200 or more employees)?
2. Do you have two or more direct reports?
3. Do you have hiring decision-making authority?
4. Do you have a minimum of 5 years of hiring experience?
Instrumentation
This study involved nine hiring managers with a minimum of 3 years of hiring
experience. The interviews and the analytic memos were data collection instruments. The three
research questions guided the questions in the interview protocol, aimed at understanding the
KMO inhibiting hiring ethnic-named candidates. Interviews provided me with a deeper
understanding of the KMO needs and possible solutions to these needs related to a systematic
method for improving the discriminatory hiring outcomes resulting from name bias. The
interview protocol was created based on the gap analysis framework and the literature review
conducted for the study. The interview protocol is in Appendix A.
Data Collection Procedures
Qualitative research seeks to understand how individuals interpret and make meaning of
their experiences (Merriam & Tisdell, 2015). The interviews occurred online using the Zoom
platform. I informed the participants that their participation was voluntary and confidential. Each
meeting lasted 60 minutes, and I told the participants that they could stop the interview at any
point. I recorded each interview using audio and video recording features of conference
technology to ensure that the participant’s views were captured and analyzed correctly (Patton,
2002). My phone served as a backup to record the interviews. The data collection took place in a

38
private, quiet setting. I used pseudonyms to mask the participants’ identities and safeguarded the
interview data appropriately. The only way to get good data is to ask good questions (Merriam &
Tisdell, 2015). An incentive in the form of a random drawing for one of two $50 gift cards
served as an incentive to complete the interview.
Data Analysis
The data analysis commenced during and immediately following each interview. I wrote
analytic memos after each interview, documenting my thoughts, reflections, initial conclusions,
and emergent themes in the data in relation to the conceptual framework and research questions.
I derived themes from the conceptual framework regarding KMO factors (Clark & Estes, 2008)
that might inadvertently maintain unconscious name bias in recruitment. I transcribed and
thematically coded each interview based on the frequency of responses. Using Microsoft Excel, I
identified the categorization and coding organization, which coordinated with the study’s
conceptual framework and the research questions. Codes were based on both an inductive
analysis of the interview content and on literature review findings about practices that abet name
bias and factors that promote ethnic diversity with respect to recruitment and hiring of ethnicnamed candidates.
Credibility and Trustworthiness
The trustworthiness of data directly connects to the trustworthiness of the individuals
who design and execute a study. The approach to the research, how the data are collected, and
how the results are analyzed are directly tied to the overall credibility and trustworthiness of the
project (Merriam & Tisdell, 2015). I followed the protocols required to ensure the credibility of
the data and to ensure confidence in the findings. This included receiving approval from the
University of Southern California (USC) Institutional Research Board (IRB) before interviews

39
commenced. USC’s IRB was informed of my study and the process by which I intended to
obtain data for this study. A researcher can use an audit trail to ensure the study’s reliability
(Merriam & Tisdell, 2015). Audio recordings and transcripts of interviews are steps that
establish a robust audit trail. I engaged two peers with terminal degrees to review the data to
ensure credibility and trustworthiness. I obtained informed consent for the study. I notified all
participants about the confidential nature of the data collection and what the data would be used
for moving forward. The participant’s willingness to opt into the study is an act of informed
consent.
Awareness of my positionality as the researcher during and after data collection was
critical to mitigating bias, misinterpreting data, and monitoring reflexivity to ensure the
credibility and trustworthiness of the study (Creswell, 2014; Maxwell, 2013; Merriam & Tisdell,
2016). Participants may be influenced by the researcher’s presence, which could trigger
reactivity and affect their responses (Maxwell, 2013). I utilized reflexivity to analyze the
findings to prevent the potential for bias and data misinterpretation.
Ethics
I adhered to the USC IRB guidelines for this study. I provided participants with a
description of the purpose and methods of the study. Participation is voluntary, and I obtained
informed consent from all participants. Each participant received the USC IRB’s information
sheet for exempt research, which is in Appendix B. To protect participants’ confidentiality, I
assigned them unique identifiers and used neither their names nor the names of their employers
in the study. I informed participants that they could withdraw from the interview at any time. To
ensure confidentiality, I will destroy all electronic documentation after 2 years. The 2-year
period allows me to conduct follow-up analysis for the study if needed.

40
Summary
Chapter Three outlined the procedures and methodology used for this study. These
components included a description of the interview instrumentation and procedures. Chapter
Four will present the data and discuss the validation process.

41
Chapter Four: Results and Findings
The study aimed to explore hiring decision makers’ knowledge and motivation and
organizational factors impacting the hiring of individuals with an ethnic-sounding name. The
study used Clark and Estes’s (2008) gap analytical framework to examine KMO factors
preventing hiring managers from equally considering foreign-named applicants. As such, the
following questions guided this study:
1. What knowledge do organizational hiring decision makers have about unconscious
name bias, including how it influences recruitment practices?
2. What are the motivating factors for organizational hiring decision makers when
assessing potential candidates who have an ethnic-sounding name?
3. What organizational practices and policies related to mitigating unconscious name
bias do hiring decision makers report within their organizations?
The following sections describe the participants’ characteristics, their perspectives about
their organization’s commitment to hiring candidates with an ethnic name, and their own
perceived capacity and willingness to mitigate unconscious name bias from impacting their
hiring decisions. The information presented in this chapter explores the three research questions
relating to the KMO influences impacting the recruitment and hiring of candidates with ethnic
names. The chapter presents the emerging themes associated with knowledge of unconscious
name bias, the benefits and limitations of hiring an ethnically diverse workforce, and the
strategies for limiting unconscious name bias in recruiting. It also examines the motivational
concepts relating to mitigating unconscious name bias, the hiring decision maker’s self-efficacy
for supporting ethnic-named candidates, and the levels of engagement in mitigating strategies to
control for name bias. Lastly, the organizational practices to mitigate unconscious name bias,

42
organizational supportive measures, and the influence of the organizational culture on the hiring
decision makers’ evaluation of ethnic-named candidates are identified in this chapter.
Participants
I interviewed nine managers, six females and three males, who have had hiring decisionmaking authority for at least 3 years and had at least two direct reports. The minimum number of
managerial experience among the participants was 3 years, the maximum was 20 years, and the
mean was 9 years. The participants represent six distinct work industries. The organizations vary
significantly in size, with the largest employing over 200,000 individuals and the smallest
employing 350 individuals. The participants represent five states across the United States. Table
4 summarizes the participants’ personal and organizational characteristics.
Table 4
Interviewees
Participant
pseudonym
Gender Years of hiring
experience
Industry Job title
Brian M 3 Government Deputy director
Carlos M 6 Education Recruiting manager
Kaycee F 6 Education Assistant director
Amber F 7 Finance Senior auditor
Carla F 8 Construction Director of HR
Ricardo M 8 Distribution Director of
operations
Samantha F 10 Education VP of advancement
Ashley F 16 Healthcare VP of operations
Tracy F 20 Education Associate VP,
community belonging

43
Brian
For 3 years, Brian held the position of deputy director, responsible for recruiting and
hiring for civilian positions. He relied on human resources (HR) to provide the names of
individuals to interview. He advised that HR did not screen the resumes prior to sending them,
which often resulted in him interviewing candidates who were “wholly unqualified for the job.”
He felt it was an inefficient process and a waste of time to meet with candidates lacking in
experience. When asked about the definition of name bias, Brian described it as “making
assumptions of an individual based solely off of their name, and then making decisions tied to
those assumptions.”
Carlos
As a recruiting manager, Carlos is responsible for the front-end process of reviewing and
selecting qualified candidates for the hiring managers’ consideration. He is DEI certified. Carlos
uses recruiting software to manage the incoming resumes that he vets before sending them to the
hiring manager. Carlos believes name bias can be tricky at times. He shared his experience with
name bias. He said, “I’m a Black man with a Hispanic name, and sometimes I get opportunities
because of my Spanish name, and there are times when I don’t get opportunities because of my
Spanish name.”
Kaycee
As an assistant director of admissions in higher education, Kaycee is responsible for
identifying the best and brightest students for admission into the university. It is a responsibility
she enjoys but does not take lightly. She values the idea of having a diverse population to make
sure the students feel like “they belong here.” Kaycee’s perception of name bias was clearly
articulated. She stated, “The assumptions that people make subconsciously about a person based

44
on their name and where they think that name originates.” Further, she expressed that “name bias
is real and far too prevalent.”
Amber
Amber is a senior auditor in the finance and banking industry. Her job entails conducting
internal audits to test the controls and risks in different areas of the internal departments. She
oversees a team of employees assigned to various auditing aspects. She participates in interviews
and selection when positions on her team become available. She plays a minor role in filtering
applicant resumes. As she reflected on the meaning of name bias, she shared, “My understanding
is that if a name comes across in the format of a resume, does my mind automatically form
certain assumptions about the individual, and will it lead me to maybe interact with them
differently?”
Carla
Carla works as the director of HR for a construction company. The recruiting department
does not currently fall under her purview. As positions open on her team, she will communicate
what she is looking for to the in-house recruiter, who will post and conduct the preliminary
phone screen before scheduling the panel interview. Carla noted, “Name bias is a big one in the
workplace, especially when looking at recruitment applications. I’ve seen negative judgments
made about people because of their names.”
Ricardo
As the director of operations at a distribution company that mainly distributes wine and
spirits, Ricardo is responsible for hiring team members for the mid and night shifts. He relies on
the HR department to provide the candidate resumes on their SharePoint site. He then filters the

45
resumes based on their work experience before contacting them to invite them for an interview.
Ricardo shared his perspective on name bias:
If I see a Hispanic name, … I automatically think, okay, this guy’s got to be a great
worker. That’s obviously not the way to do things. Also, I think, “Will my name affect
somebody’s decision to call or hire me?”
Ricardo also mentioned that he was not knowledgeable about unconscious name bias until he
received a copy of my flier requesting study participants. He was intrigued and asked a colleague
for more information about name bias. He stated, “I didn’t know this was a thing.” He was the
only participant who shared that he was unfamiliar with the topic but had done research before
his scheduled interview.
Samantha
Samantha, a vice president of advancement, takes an active and primary role in her
institution’s recruiting and hiring practices. She creates or revises the job description, identifies
the appropriate websites to advertise positions, reviews all applications, selects which candidates
get invited for an interview, and generally sits on most interviews. Her objective is to ensure
everyone gets the same interview experience. Samantha’s understanding of name bias comes
from “listening and reading a few articles about candidates who just don’t get through the initial
search process because of their names.”
Ashley
Ashley is a vice president of operations in the healthcare industry. She is directly
involved in recruitment “from beginning to end.” She works closely with the recruiter to identify
candidates who meet the minimum educational requirements. They use recruiting software to
keep track of the candidates and where they are in the process. Ashley concisely defined name

46
bias, stating, “having a preference over certain names.” She further shared that name bias is
“pervasive and detrimental to the work environment.”
Tracy
As an associate vice president of community and belonging, Tracy relishes her role of
creating a network of support for people of color at her institution. She takes her recruiting
responsibilities seriously to increase representation. Tracy manages the full recruitment scope,
from creating job descriptions to deciding on the final candidate. She directs the recruiter on who
to phone screen. Tracy directly stated that name is “the practice of immediately discounting
people because of their name.”
The hiring decision makers’ definitions demonstrate a similarity in perspectives in their
understanding of name bias in recruitment. With this common knowledge of name bias, they
recognize its existence in the workplace. Some even mentioned that name bias as being
ubiquitous. In addition to their shared understanding of name bias, they expressed their beliefs
that recruiting a diverse workforce has rewarding benefits.
Research Question 1: What Knowledge Do Organizational Hiring Decision Makers Have
About Unconscious Name Bias, Including How It Influences Recruitment Practices?
The lack of knowledge can create a significant barrier to achieving organizational goals
(Clark & Estes, 2008). I asked the interviewees questions about their conceptual (principles,
categories, theories, and models), procedural (process and how to perform tasks), and
metacognitive (self-knowledge, belief-based) knowledge in their recruitment practices.
Organizational performance benefits from increased knowledge, skills, and capacity (Aguinis &
Kraiger, 2009). Table 5 summarizes the findings pertaining to the first research question.

47
Table 5
Research Question 1 Findings
Knowledge type Findings
Conceptual knowledge Hiring decision makers understand the
benefits of hiring an ethnically diverse
workforce.
Conceptual knowledge Hiring decision makers encounter unforeseen
limitations with hiring an ethnically diverse
workforce.
Procedural knowledge Hiring decision makers place great emphasis
on how they limit unconscious name bias
from affecting their decisions.
Procedural knowledge Hiring decision makers apply mixed strategies
for mitigating unconscious name bias.
Metacognitive knowledge Hiring decision makers exhibit limited selfreflection in mitigating their biases.
Metacognitive knowledge Hiring decision makers exhibit sensitivity
when pronouncing ethnic names.
Conceptual Knowledge
The interviewees possess some conceptual knowledge of name bias in recruitment and
hiring. They believe their perception of name bias comes mostly from reading articles,
conversations with colleagues, or from first-hand experience with name bias. Carlos explained
that his name would sometimes work in his favor, as it would “depend on whether they are
looking for diversity and whether [his] name could draw their attention to [his] application.” The
conceptual knowledge of name bias and its importance and value helps hiring decision makers
ensure that they intentionally prevent it from affecting their hiring decisions. The participants
provided insights into their understanding of how name bias can impede organizational diversity.
Thus, the benefits of recruiting diverse talent were discussed.

48
Hiring Decision Makers Understand the Benefits of Hiring an Ethnically Diverse Workforce
All interviewees were familiar with name bias in recruitment and acknowledged the
benefits of having a diverse workforce. Brian had a poignant response to the benefits of
diversity. He said, “The downside of diversity is not being cognitively aware of the upside.”
Brian firmly believes workforce diversity should not be compromised, and everyone should
know its benefits.
The interviewees believed in the significance of having a racially and ethnically diverse
workforce. All nine mentioned the benefits of diversity, including the following: diversity of
experience, ideas, thoughts, perspectives, backgrounds, and enhanced creativity. As Tracy
described her students’ success, she mentioned there is a significant benefit of “having different
voices at the table; it creates a sense of belonging and community, which is vital to their career
success.” Kaycee echoed Tracy’s sentiments by sharing that she wanted “to be surrounded by a
diverse staff that would be able to engage with people from different backgrounds and make [her
students] feel like they belong.” Amber called out how diversity can be achieved by an
individual’s “race, age, educational experience, gender, and so on.” Diversity can be defined by
different types of people in a group, such as people of different races, cultures, religious
affiliations, and abilities. The hiring decision makers expressed joy as they talked about the
benefits of having an ethnically diverse team. Per Kaycee, Tracy, and Amber, the benefits of
employing diverse individuals in a team are increased creativity and belonging.
Hiring Decision Makers Encounter Unforeseen Limitations With Hiring an Ethnically
Diverse Workforce
Despite the range of benefits mentioned, limitations affect the ability to create and sustain
an ethnically diverse workforce. For example, Ashley shared that “a limitation experienced in

49
my field is that it is mostly dominated by White women. Although this profile is changing, it
takes longer to recruit for clinicians.” Carla and Samantha shared similar concerns about being
unable to diversify their teams due to their work location. Carla stated, “It can be tricky when the
pool of candidates is limited because we are located in a small town.” Samantha elaborated,
“Contributing factors include [a] location that’s predominantly White, and maybe the reputation
of the university, and probably the pay scale.” The participants identified these limitations as
something that is out of their control, yet they are choosing to persevere in their pursuit of
diversity.
Albeit different industries, some interviewees expressed how an organization or a
workgroup lacking in diversity can have rippling effects on the individuals and the work
environment. For example, Brian, who works for the government, explained, “When the
organization lacks diversity, the downside is the impact on the employees not having a mentor
and potentially individuals feeling like they’re on an island.” Ricardo, who works in distribution,
shared a similar perspective to Brian’s. He asserted that “people feel more comfortable in the
workplace and will perform better when they feel included and not alone.” Tracy, employed in
education, spoke explicitly about the barriers she encounters by working with the recruiter or
HR. Her perception is that the recruiter is not knowledgeable about “where to post positions to
generate a diverse pool of candidates,” so she has to provide guidance, which should be the
recruiter’s job to know how to recruit widely. She added that she gets “pushback from HR about
the cost of posting the job on specific job boards.” These actions lead her to believe “they are
just trying to fill the role by finding people in their network who often resemble themselves.”
Like many of the other participants, Tracy expressed that diversity work becomes her own

50
because others do not understand or care that it matters. As a result, she ends up having another
item on her to-do list.
Procedural Knowledge
Procedural knowledge is an understanding of how to do something or how to get
something accomplished (Krathwohl, 2002). Analysis of interviews showed that seven
interviewees had some knowledge of some effective procedures for mitigating name bias in
recruitment and selection practices. They expressed their understanding of how they apply their
knowledge of name bias in recruitment to prevent their biases from seeping in. However, it
should be noted that there is a lack of standardization to control for name bias.
Hiring Decision Makers Place Emphasis on How They Limit Unconscious Name Bias From
Affecting Their Decisions
Several hiring decision makers articulated their process in eliminating name bias from
impacting their decisions while reviewing applicant resumes. Ashley noted that she is “not
focused on the name; rather, I’m looking at the clinical skills in their resume and whether they
speak multiple languages.” Amber stated that she is “truly looking at the person’s qualifications
to guide [her] direction and not allowing anything else to interfere with the evaluation of that
person’s qualifications.” Carla said, “I tend to look at skills, education, and whether they are cut
out to do the job.” Similarly, Samantha shared, “I think the quality of a candidate is their
experience,” while Ricardo added that he looks “at the experience and the amount of time
they’ve been at their jobs.” He emphasized that the length of time spent at each job is an
important factor in his review. Amber had a neutral response in her practice of limiting name
bias by approaching resume review by being “open-minded and not having any preconceptions
based on whatever information is available.” These four participants expressed the view that the

51
content of the resume is their primary focus. For example, they focused on language abilities,
qualifications, educational background, and work experience to help guide their decisionmaking.
Interestingly, two interviewees explained how they use the names on the resumes to
identify diverse candidates to fill vacant positions. For example, Tracy contended, “I don’t limit
name bias from affecting my decisions; I lean into it.” Her goal is to use the name on the resume
to identify people of color. She further stated that she purposely “[seeks] out candidates with a
non-Western name.” Kaycee indicated,
I don’t always think unconscious name bias is a bad thing. I think that it has a negative
connotation. If the intention is we want to have a more inclusive team, I think we could
use biases to try to create that space.
On top of ensuring top candidates by narrowing the search for strong qualifications, Tracy and
Kaycee admit that they intentionally “lean into” searching for resumes with non-White-sounding
names.
Hiring Decision Makers Apply Mixed Strategies for Mitigating Unconscious Name Bias
The hiring decision makers conveyed a variety of mitigation strategies they have used or
considered using at their current and previous workplaces. Brian explained how “using a
regimented question set and then having a point scale of did not meet, met, or exceeds the
criteria. This makes it a rational decision-making model.” Ashley described how she uses the
referral program at her company to mitigate name bias. She stated, “I rely on referrals, so if
someone recommends a candidate, I disregard the name and look to see if the person has
trustworthy qualities and whether the person could vouch for them as a good employee.” Carla
shared how she uses self-awareness and self-regulation to manage her bias. She noted,

52
“consciously checking herself on her bias because everyone has biases. I’ll run the scenario by a
mentor or someone I trust to self-regulate myself.” Brian, Ashley, and Carla described their
approaches for mitigating name bias; however, they were unsure whether their strategies were
enough to counter it.
Two interviewees provided responses similar to those received for the question related to
limiting unconscious name bias from affecting their decisions. For instance, Carlos expressed, “I
stop looking at the names. I remember details about the application versus the person’s name.”
He feels their name is irrelevant to the recruitment process, so he does not consider it as part of
the resume evaluation. Along the same vein, Samantha shared that she is only interested in the
“content of the resume.”
One hiring decision-maker mentioned training as a strategy they would recommend being
provided by their employer. Amber shared that training is overutilized in her line of work in
Finance to keep the staff apprised of relevant information. She asserted,
Providing some type of awareness, whether it is in the form of training or talking to peers
about it in an open forum where there isn’t any judgment or any risk of repercussions, so
they can be transparent about their feelings.
She further explained how “the annual unconscious bias training has been effective because it
brings it from a subconscious perspective to a more conscious perspective.” However, she
clarified that name bias is not overtly mentioned in the training.
Metacognitive Knowledge
Metacognitive knowledge involves self-reflection and awareness of one’s strengths,
limitations, ways of cognition, contextual factors, strategic methods, and approaches to
completing tasks (Krathwohl, 2002; Rueda, 2011). Furthermore, metacognitive knowledge

53
engages self-awareness and understanding (Krathwohl, 2002) of the role every hiring decisionmaker plays in ensuring an ethnically diverse workforce.
Hiring Decision Makers Exhibit Limited Self-Reflection in Mitigating Their Biases
Of the nine interviewees, only one mentioned using self-awareness and self-regulation to
control their biases. Effective self-regulatory skills allow the hiring decision-maker to control
their biases appropriately. Carla commented about “being very self-aware and grounded” during
the resume review, which helps her remain open-minded to every candidate. The vast majority of
participants shared that they evaluate the candidate based on their work experience. Ricardo
shared that he has “100% ability to mitigate name bias” since his only focus is their experience
and length of service at the job. However, he did not mention self-reflection as a practice of
mitigating the effects of unconscious name bias in recruiting.
Hiring Decision Makers Exhibit Sensitivity When Pronouncing Ethnic Names
When discussing the pronunciation of unique names, several hiring decision makers said
they would ask the candidate how to pronounce the name. In other words, they would rely on
hearing the candidate say their name before trying to say it. For example, Carlos would ask,
“Can you tell me how to pronounce your name?” Ricardo, Kaycee, and Samantha’s responses
paralleled Carlos’s. Samantha added that she would “say it back and then ask if I am saying it
correctly. Then, I will write it down phonetically for myself.”
Seven interviewees mentioned their perspectives on names and how important it is for
them to get them right. Brian noted, “It is common in the military to just ask people how to
pronounce their name, especially given that we wear our last name on our chest.” As a
Recruiting Manager, Carlos shared how he “honors the name the person was given.” He further
explained how “the candidates appreciate the effort we put into saying their name correctly.

54
They feel a level of support and encouragement that your organization is a good fit for them.”
Tracy had a strong opinion about “names representing their culture” and “we as a people should
take the time to learn their name.”
Research Question 2: What Are the Motivating Factors for Organizational Hiring Decision
Makers When Assessing Potential Candidates With an Ethnic-Sounding Name?
The hiring decision makers in this study professed high motivation to recruit and hire a
diverse workforce. Success in diversifying the labor pool requires motivation. The linkage
between knowledge and motivation drives organizational performance (Clark & Estes, 2008;
Rueda, 2011). This section explores self-efficacy and task value as motivational influences
affecting hiring outcomes. The emerging themes related to motivation and centered around
confidence in hiring candidates with an ethnic name, their years of hiring experience, and their
willingness to engage in strategies to mitigate name bias. Table 6 summarizes the findings for the
second research question.
Table 6
Research Question 2 Findings
Motivational influences Findings
Self-efficacy Hiring decision makers are confident in their
abilities to mitigate unconscious ethnic
name bias.
Self-efficacy Hiring decision makers identify years of
experience as a factor in increasing their
belief in mitigating name bias in their
hiring practices.
Task value Hiring decision makers identify inequity in
hiring.
Task value Hiring decision makers desire training to help
mitigate name bias.

55
Self-Efficacy
The participants held an internal belief in their own competency and ability to mitigate
name bias in their hiring practices. Bandura (2012) asserted that one’s belief in one’s
competency is a stronger predictor of success than one’s knowledge of the task. Self-efficacy
influences behaviors relative to three fundamental motivational indices: active choice, mental
effort, and persistence (Bandura, 2012; Clark & Estes, 2008). Self-efficacy emerged as a
dominant theme during interviews.
Hiring Decision Makers Demonstrate Confidence in Their Abilities to Mitigate Unconscious
Name Bias
The interviewees exhibited a fair amount of confidence in their capacity to mitigate name
bias. Amber commented on how she goes into an interview with a “willing intent to take all
things out of the equation, excluding the individual that’s in front of you, and for them to show
you what value they will add to your organization.” Brian stated that he has thought about
applying “different tactics like giving pseudonyms or candidate numbering to the resumes” to
eliminate the name bias. Carlos detailed how he controls for name bias during resume screening.
He asserted that when he notices that he has “a biased feeling toward someone, I say it out loud.
I talk to my counterparts to get their perspectives or delegate the screening responsibility to
someone else to neutrally look at the candidate.” Further, he insisted, “I don’t want my bias to
prevent you from opportunities. I’m not oppressive.” Carla also shared her confidence in how
she conducts a “self-check” when she believes her biases are coming to the surface. She
mentioned “being super conscious and continuously checking yourself and actively naming if
there’s a bias and not being scared to do so. This takes time and effort, and sometimes it’s
uncomfortable as well.” The participants seemed to value preventing name bias through self-

56
awareness, seeking feedback, intentionally naming it, and being willing to give every individual
a fair chance.
Another approach the hiring decision makers used to display their confidence in
mitigating name bias was reviewing every application received for the open position. Tracy
noted, “One thing I use to control for name bias is I say to HR, I want to see every application
that comes through for the position. I don’t let them filter the applicants for me.” Kaycee
affirmed Tracy’s approach by sharing, “I believe in reviewing every resume received and taking
the time to read through the resume even when I notice my bias creeping in. Something in the
resume could change my initial bias of the candidate.” Although Kaycee prefers to review all
resumes to curb HR from disqualifying candidates, she recognizes that her review process could
create a biased judgment against the candidate if she is not careful about managing her biases
effectively. These comments align with the concept of self-efficacy, which has developed over
the years.
Hiring Decision Makers Identify Years of Experience as a Factor in Increasing Their Belief in
Mitigating Name Bias in Their Hiring Practices
Experience serves as a driver for self-efficacy in mitigating name bias. The interviewees
alluded to their years of experience in the workforce and their learnings over time. Ashley
described a behavior that occurred as a young supervisor:
Honestly, early in my career, I would see a name that I didn’t recognize and wonder
whether the person spoke English. Being that I work in an industry where communication
and socialization are really important, I wonder if that hindered me from pursuing a
qualified candidate.

57
Ashley expressed this experience with remorse and candor, recognizing that she was unaware of
her actions given her lack of hiring experience at the time.
Brian conveyed a similar situation: “As a young lieutenant and being my first level of
management training, I knew nothing about bias or name bias and remember calling an exchange
student who was Thai, Bob.” Brian shared this story to convey how he asserted his authority by
giving the exchange student with a foreign name a different name to make it easy for himself due
to his inexperience. Carlos indicated that he learned some years into his career that you must
“talk your biases out loud. We all have them. It’s not something to be bashful or ashamed of, but
it’s something that you really note and work through.”
As Samantha advanced into positions of authority, she became more intentional about
demonstrating behaviors for her team to emulate. She shared,
I have to model the right behavior for my team by double-checking myself to make sure
that I’m not discounting or disqualifying anyone, especially when their name might give
the impression of a certain ethnicity. Knowing how to pronounce the name so that I can
say it properly and become familiar with it so that I am demonstrating that their name is
not a barrier to the hiring process.
The collective responses highlight experience as a seasoned manager’s best teacher in
mitigating name bias in their hiring practices. The hiring decision makers realized that in their
early career as new supervisors, there were many things they were naive of, contributing to
unknowingly making poor decisions like calling someone out of their name and disqualifying
candidates who were assumed not to speak English. Through the years, they have learned about
biased treatment and the inappropriateness of their inexperienced behaviors.

58
Task Value
Hiring decision makers need to want to engage in efforts to mitigate unconscious name
bias in their hiring practices. Increased motivation occurs when individuals have high
expectations regarding their ability to complete tasks and place a high value on the task being
performed (Eccles, 2006). The interviewees identified hiring equity as a task they value.
Hiring Decision Makers Identify Hiring Inequities
All nine interviewees believe that applicants with an ethnic name experienced injustice.
This feeling and observation incentivize all participants to want to engage in ways to mitigate
name bias. Amber stated, “We need to be deliberate about taking away any potential
disadvantage that could deter hiring qualified minority candidates.” Ashley similarly indicated
that as a hiring manager, “being in a position to grant somebody a job, you have to be mindful to
not perpetuate an underrepresentation issue that will ultimately harm the company.” Samantha
expressed that she would “hate to pass on a great candidate because I made assumptions about
them after seeing their name.” Amber, Ashley, and Samantha recognized the importance of
supporting ethnic-named candidates by being intentional in their recruitment practices to
dismantle hiring inequities. Carlos mentioned finding the ideal candidate as his mission for not
using the name to influence his opinion about the candidate:
If your job is to find the right person, then you should be making the effort to simply
know their name and learn how to pronounce their name. You should be looking at the
whole person, not just someone who meets the metrics of your position. Positions evolve,
so it’s important to find the right talent and avoid supremacist ideals and oppression of
other people.

59
Carlos spoke passionately as he shared how important it is for him to dissolve inequities
to ensure all candidates receive fair treatment regardless of their name. Jason expressed a similar
thought: “As a hiring manager, my primary focus is finding the best person for the job. Man,
woman, White, Black, ethnic, first- or second-generation citizen didn’t matter.” Although several
hiring decision makers acknowledged that they must intentionally manage the hiring process to
avoid prejudice against candidates with an ethnic name, their responses demonstrate that it is
important to them to ensure equity. Still, there is an opportunity to further their efforts in making
the best hiring decisions that would benefit the team and the organization.
Hiring Decision Makers Desire Training to Help Mitigate Name Bias
All nine interviewees expressed openness to new ways of mitigating unconscious name
bias, mainly through training. Multiple individuals mentioned providing unconscious bias
training to educate hiring managers about name bias. Tracy offered, “I would love to train the
hiring managers on unconscious bias and knowing what that means and what that looks like.”
Carla said, “I would put a process in place where individuals involved in hiring decisions go
through unconscious bias training so that they can watch out for their biases.” Ricardo shared
that he wished his company provided “some formal training to make sure we are all doing things
right.” Tracy, Carla, and Ricardo identified training as essential in helping hiring managers
become more aware of their biases and understand how to manage unconscious bias from
negatively affecting hiring decisions. Amber is the only hiring decision-maker who indicated that
her employer provides unconscious bias training annually. Amber believes the training required
has improved the diversity of hires across the organization. She stated that the “training is a
helpful reminder about being aware of your bias” when interviewing candidates.

60
Research Question 3: What Organizational Practices and Policies Related to Mitigating
Unconscious Name Bias Do Hiring Decision Makers Report Within Their Organizations?
Organizations are dynamic entities with unique cultures and processes that define the
manner of performing work (Bolman & Deal, 2003). This section illustrates the influence of
organizational culture and structure in mitigating unconscious name bias. The emerging themes
related to organizational culture and structure center around the influence of their organizational
culture on their hiring decisions, the lack of organizational processes, and the hiring decisionmaker’s opinions of organizational improvement opportunities in recruitment and hiring. Table 7
summarizes the findings for the third research question.
Table 7
Research Question 3 Findings
Organizational influences Findings
Organizational culture Hiring decision makers are strongly
influenced by their organization’s culture.
Organizational structure Hiring decision makers report differing levels
of organizational processes and practices to
mitigate unconscious name bias.
Organizational structure Hiring decision makers see new opportunities
to enact organizational practices for
improving the recruitment process.

61
Culture: Hiring Decision Makers Are Strongly Influenced by Their Organization’s Culture
The organizational influence of culture is crucial in mitigating unconscious name bias in
hiring. An organization’s culture is dynamic; it is constructed and reconstructed by its employees
(Rueda, 2011). A cultural setting induces specific contexts where behavior is enacted. Cultural
models capture beliefs and understandings that people develop unconsciously. It is a shared
understanding of how the world works or ought to work and is often automated (Gallimore &
Goldenberg, 2001). Therefore, these concepts of culture are both overt and covert. Findings in
this study show that culture plays a significant role in hiring decisions.
The degree of cultural influence the hiring decision makers expressed within their
organizations while reviewing applicant resumes varied. Some indicated diversity as a significant
consideration in selecting candidates since their organization values diversity. For example,
Amber discussed how her organization “strongly encourages diversity as we see the benefits of
having a diverse workforce.” She added that the individual must be qualified with the
fundamental capabilities and skills to perform the position’s duties. Based on Tracy’s role, she
expressed that she would be expected to find diverse candidates to fill open positions. However,
she shared that the existing makeup of the workforce lacks diversity, which makes her question
whether she should hire a diverse candidate or not. She mentioned, “I sometimes think, is it fair
to bring the person into this unsupportive environment?” Even though Tracy’s organization
advocates for diversity, and she agrees that this is the right approach, she feels conflicted due to
the present underrepresented population.
Some interviewees reported that their organizational culture implicitly compels them to
identify candidates who resemble the current workforce. Ricardo explained that his work
environment is primarily Hispanic, and most of the resumes he receives from HR are of Hispanic

62
descent. Ricardo stated, “My organization is 99% Hispanic, which has a direct influence on who
we decide to hire.” Although no one has ever told him to hire only Hispanic employees, he feels
it is an unspoken expectation. Samantha and Carla also talked about the hurdles they have
encountered with their organizational cultures influencing their hiring decisions due to their work
location. Carla mentioned that the “city is not very diverse, but we still need to promote
diversity, equity, inclusion, and belonging.” They both shared that their location hinders them
from becoming a diverse organization, and their organizations seem comfortable accepting it
despite their ambitions for diversity.
Structure
Organizational structure is a key component of a strong organization. This concept
explains the authority hiring decision makers have over making hiring decisions. Existing or
nonexistent processes and practices govern hiring outcomes. The organizational structure
identifies the roles, division of labor, power, and how knowledge is conveyed (Alavi et al.,
2005). The interviewees expressed an overall lack of organizational systems to help mitigate
unconscious name bias.
Hiring Decision Makers Report Differing Levels of Organizational Processes and Practices to
Mitigate Unconscious Name Bias
The participants’ lack of processes and practices to mitigate name bias in their
organizations was underwhelming. Generally, they expressed similar comments about each of
their organizations. Carlos advised, “No specific organizational processes are in place,”
Samantha indicated, “There’s no process or policy,” Tracy stated, “There’s nothing,” Salvador
posited, “None that I can think of,” and Carla expressed, “Honestly, there really isn’t any
processes in place.” There was a common expression of shame in their responses. Ashley noted

63
that her company uses recruiting software to “organize the applicant pool” and mitigate name
bias. Two others called out that they have personally taken on the responsibility of managing
unconscious name bias from affecting their decisions. Carlos noted, “I take steps on my own to
ensure I am giving all candidates a fair shot.” Similarly, Tracy and Samantha shared that the
responsibility has fallen entirely on the hiring manager. Tracy said, “I can’t say that anyone else
is intentional in their recruiting strategy to mitigate bias.” The interviewees have taken on the
undue burden of establishing individual practices to help mitigate name bias while their
organizations remain silent.
Hiring Decision Makers See Opportunities to Enact New Organizational Practices for
Improving the Recruitment Process
The participants reported a wide range of responses regarding opportunities to change
hiring practices to eliminate name bias. Seven stated that they would anonymize the resumes and
assign candidate numbers during the screening process. Tracy said that she removes the name
and “any identifier [from the application] or anything that would give away a hint of the person’s
race.” Three others mentioned standardization via using the same interview questions, the same
application, and the same panel participants for each position. Kayce shared that creating a
consistent approach to recruitment is a way to be “intentional, you know, designed to curb any
biases.” Six interviewees emphasized the need for formal training for anyone who participates in
hiring. For example, Carla stated, “I would put a process in place where individuals involved in
hiring decisions go through unconscious bias training and incorporate name bias into the training
so that they know it exists and can watch out for their biases.” Carla was intent on using training
to help combat name bias.

64
Other suggested organizational approaches were diversifying the locations for the job
postings and an updated interview protocol. Two interviewees indicated that they would post the
positions on various job boards to increase the diversity of applicants. Samantha noted that she
“would make sure we are posting our jobs at organizations like the Urban League and the
NAACP and to our friends in the Latino community to broaden the candidate pool.” Carlos and
Brian discussed allowing every applicant to interview if they meet the minimum qualifications.
Carlos was adamant about allowing “everyone to interview” if they satisfied the minimum
standard. Brian added that after the final decision, he would “require the hiring decision-maker to
defend or to justify their decisions as to why they selected someone or why they did not select
somebody.” Although the applicants would appreciate interviewing all candidates who meet the
minimum qualification, the time commitment involved could make it an inefficient and
untenable process.
Summary
This study sought to understand the gaps in knowledge, motivation, and organizational
factors that affect the hiring of individuals with an ethnic-sounding name. The interviewees have
a minimum of 3 years of experience in the hiring process. Although they have grown in their
understanding of unconscious name bias and learned methods for mitigating it, the study
identified opportunities for improving their KMO influences and for improving the hiring
outcomes of minority candidates. The following chapter will discuss the analysis of these
findings and effective recommendations for practice and future research.

65
Chapter Five: Discussion and Recommendations
This chapter begins with a discussion of the findings that emerged from qualitative
themes based on the current KMO elements impacting the equitable hiring of ethnic-named
candidates. This chapter also presents the connections between this study’s results and prior
literature. Then, the last sections provide recommendations for practice based on the research
findings and discuss potential areas for future research.
Discussion of Findings
Several of this study’s findings can drive meaningful recommendations for practice. The
study identified opportunities for improving hiring decision makers’ conceptual, procedural, and
metacognitive knowledge. Additionally, the study identified areas for improvement linked to
motivational factors influencing hiring decision makers prioritization in improving racial and
ethnic diversity in their organizations. The study also validated organizational barriers related to
the culture, structure, and diversity processes and practices. The findings from this study suggest
gaps in each KMO area.
The hiring decision makers demonstrated a gap in knowledge about the multitude of
benefits of hiring a racially or ethnically diverse workforce and about the approaches to limit
unconscious name bias from affecting decision making when recruiting minority candidates. The
nine participants offered, for the most part, a conceptual understanding of name bias in
recruitment and hiring. Procedurally, they confirmed a lack of a standardized approach for
mitigating name bias. In relation to their metacognitive knowledge, most participants were
unaware of the role awareness and self-reflection play in mitigating unconscious name bias.
Although the study participants mentioned factors such as innovation, differences in thought and
ideas, diverse backgrounds, and lived experiences, there was no mention of the positive financial

66
impacts of diversity on the organization (Dixon-Fyle et al., 2020; Stewart, 2016). Interestingly,
despite the hiring decision makers’ familiarity with name bias, no one explicitly stated that the
drawback of unconscious name bias could limit workforce diversity. Several mentioned that
diversity is an element of their organization’s mission and goal. However, some seemed
committed and focused on diversity hiring, while others appeared nonchalant about the topic.
Thus, they have not purposely created diversity initiatives to improve their organization’s racial
and ethnic diversity. Self-reflection was an area for improvement, as all but one hiring decision
maker engaged in self-reflection and self-regulation to mitigate the effects of name bias in
recruiting. Self-reflection is essential and encourages self-awareness and understanding of others.
The hiring decision makers’ motivation levels to recruit and hire ethnic-named candidates
were inconsistent. I was surprised to learn that the participants had a strong sense of self-efficacy
in their abilities to control for name bias and have modified their individual approach over the
years to reduce biased treatment in their hiring practices. Further, participant findings suggest
that they value ensuring equity is preserved in the hiring process for all applicants. A few
participants indicated that they take steps to post their open positions on various job boards to
source diverse candidates. However, it is not a uniform practice among other hiring managers in
their organization. Efforts toward improved diversity hiring are individualized, contingent upon
the individual’s desire and willingness to do what it takes to find the right minority person for the
position. The hiring decision makers expressed an openness to be intentional about their efforts
toward mitigating name bias, highlighting unconscious bias training as a viable method to
support this endeavor. Several participants are active in ensuring they are not negatively
influenced by their biases.

67
The primary challenges exist in the organizational context. Organizational influences
such as culture and structure significantly impact the fate of ethnic-named candidates seeking
employment opportunities. The hiring decision makers alluded to biased processes in their
organization’s hiring practices. Some shared that human resources staff filters incoming resumes,
and others mentioned the lack of a standardized question set or consistent interview panel. The
most obvious organizational concern was the lack of systems, diversity initiatives, written
policies, and formal unconscious bias training at most organizations. Without adequate and
consistent organizational support, the hiring decision makers are left to their own devices to
create practices that may or may not yield the intended result.
Organizations play a pivotal role in creating a work environment that values and enforces
diversity, equity, and inclusion. We know intuitively that diversity matters, as it has become
increasingly clear that it makes sense. However, organizations must take sustained actions to
demonstrate the need to develop, grow, and openly support their diversity efforts. Diversity
appears to be a fleeting concept that resurfaces and becomes popular depending on societal
situations. In short, diversity is not important until it is important. It is not consistently at the top
of many organizations’ minds. Leaders’ actions or inactions can create significant distance in the
daily practice of diversity. Increasing organizational growth in diversity and inclusiveness
depends on the structure of organizational practices built around professional norms of
welcoming and appreciating human differences.
A frequency analysis of the hiring decision maker’s responses made it clear that the
organizational culture and climate are the primary obstacles to improving ethnic diversity.
Contrary to my expectations, knowledge and motivation were not absent in the recruitment
processes and practices that limit hiring ethnic minorities. Most hiring decision makers

68
demonstrated a keen awareness of name bias and a genuine desire to address it. However, their
organizations are yet to translate this into substantive action to improve hiring outcomes for
ethnic-named candidates. A targeted and sustained focus on ethnic diversity is desired, and
internal accountability structures for addressing this problem are required.
Recommendations for Practice
Clark and Estes (2008) suggested that collecting data and researching performancebased issues is only a first step; developing action plans addressing KMO gaps provides a
means to meet the organization’s overall goal. As such, this section outlines effective
recommendations and implementation strategies to address unconscious name bias, which
impacts hiring outcomes for minority candidates.
Recommendation 1: Unconscious Bias Learning and Interventions
The study participants reported training as a key initiative to prevent unintentional name
bias from influencing their decision making. Training on how to intervene when people
demonstrate bias can reduce prejudice, and such training efforts among hiring decision makers
could increase the hiring of ethnic-named individuals. Organizations ought to consider training
and interventions to reduce name bias in hiring decisions that harm minority applicants.
Prejudice-habit interventions help individuals learn and become motivated to act in less biased
ways by becoming aware of when they are vulnerable to unintentional bias. Interventions also
help people understand the consequences of unintentional bias, learn, and practice effective
strategies to minimize the impact of unintentional bias (Devine et al., 2017). Prior research
demonstrated an increase in the hiring of women in STEM fields at higher-education institutions
when hiring decision makers received gender bias habit-breaking training and interventions by
expert facilitators.

69
Understanding and applying knowledge about unconscious bias in thought processes is a
lifelong endeavor. It requires not a one-and-done training session but a professional commitment
to learning and growing. Confronting unconscious name bias requires hiring decision makers to
identify and apply what they have learned from the training. Hiring decision makers can gain
awareness of where unconscious bias creeps indiscreetly into the recruitment process through
practice exercises, watching mock demonstrations on unconscious bias situations, and engaging
in role-playing with peer and trainer feedback. These efforts would be beneficial in developing
the skill to recognize and combat unconscious name bias. The training should be assigned to
hiring decision makers as mandatory training.
Recommendation 2: Blind Recruitment
Resumes are often used in the recruitment process to assess the applicant’s skills,
education, and previous job experiences (Cole et al., 2009). Although hiring decision makers are
supposed to focus on factual job-relevant content, other dispositional characteristics can be
inferred (Derous et al., 2017; King et al., 2006). While an applicant can choose whether to list
experiences that suggest gender, race, or age, listing their name is unavoidable. Therefore,
applying a blind recruitment strategy to hide the name and other personally identifiable
information from the resume prevents hiring decision makers from making prejudiced decisions
during resume screening. This allows for evaluating the applicant across objective metrics such
as skills and experience. This technique can help organizations ensure a diverse flow of talent in
their selection process. It creates a level playing field for all applicants for equal consideration.
With blind recruitment, the goal is to diversify the candidate pool. Increasing the number
of candidates across demographics, including gender, ethnic background, and age, increases the

70
odds of improving workforce diversity. The applicant’s name is their most prominent identity
marker, and hiding it during initial screening prevents their name from working against them.
Recommendation 3: Organizational Policy Changes
Organizations are dynamic environments with unique processes and cultures that define
work performance and shape organizational stakeholders’ beliefs (Bolman & Deal, 2003).
Missed performance targets are not simply due to deficits in employee or stakeholder knowledge
and motivation; they also connect to the missing processes, materials, or cultural alignment
required for success (Clark & Estes, 2008). Whether formal and rigid (processes and procedures)
or informal and implied (culture and climate), such organizational factors play a part in an
organization’s design. In conjunction with human resources, organizational leaders are
positioned to implement and revise systems and policies that will enhance recruitment processes
to eliminate unconscious name bias. Leadership must drive the policy changes that hiring
decision makers must adhere to while also leading by example.
According to Clark and Estes (2008), stakeholders do not achieve their goals because
they lack resources, which typically means time and money. The disconnect found in the data
reflected a lack in the organization’s processes, procedures, commitment, and resources to ensure
equitable hiring. Thus, the hiring decision makers need the organization to lay out an
accountability roadmap to follow, beginning with the senior leaders as diversity advocates. The
organization must ensure that resources and processes align with the company’s business goal.
Organizational performance increases when leadership is continually involved in the
improvement process (Clark & Estes, 2008). With this in mind, senior organizational leaders are
pivotal in providing the needed resources and support to improve hiring outcomes.

71
Recommendation 4: Structured Interviews
This recommendation proposes a structured interview process to establish an objective
method that mitigates unconscious name bias. Hiring decision makers would follow the same
procedure established for each position. The process would consist of asking the same
predetermined interview questions and rating each candidate using a common evaluation scale.
The interview questions are consistently administered to all candidates using panel interviews.
Establishing a racially diverse panel or interview committee is a reliable method for aggregating
independent interview ratings for each candidate to create an overall score. This structured
process minimizes the potential of the single interviewer rejecting the candidate based on
irrelevant demographic data that could interfere with the evaluation of the applicant.
While a conversational interview is more enjoyable for both the interviewer and
interviewee, structuring the content of the interview is important to avoid unintended pitfalls that
could lead to an unfair assessment of the candidate. With a structured interview, the panel is
focused on the applicant’s responses to the questions that would indicate the applicant’s future
behavior based on their past behaviors. Table 8 offers an overview of each recommendation,
related literature, and demonstration of need through quotes.
Recommendation 5: Systematic Evaluation of Hiring Practices
As organizations implement formal processes and protocols to prevent unconscious name
bias from influencing their hiring practices, regular assessments are essential. This includes
soliciting feedback on the hiring processes from the hiring decision makers, the applicants, and
the employees to identify areas for improvement and to address potential sources of subtle bias.
Ongoing organizational evaluation and the adaptation of the hiring practices allow for continuous
improvement to remain current in the changing market.

72
Automating the resume review process by using artificial intelligence (AI) could
transform how resumes are evaluated. Through the adoption of an AI system, this intervention is
designed to mitigate resume bias, reduce discriminatory decisions, and eliminate human biases
from the recruitment and selection process. However, given the newness of utilizing AI systems
in recruitment and hiring, additional evaluation must be explored to ensure organizations are
aware of the pros and cons of using AI. Finding efficient and bias-free ways of managing the
resume review process should be a constant within organizations as emerging technologies
provide new ways of improving hiring decision-making processes and, through that, improving
organizational diversity.
Table 8
Overview of Recommendations
Recommendation Related literature Example of need
Unconscious bias learning
and interventions
Consul et al. (2021)
Devine et al. (2017)
“Providing diversity training
and holding them accountable
to completing the training and
applying their learning is
key.”
Blind recruitment Cole et al., 2009
Derous et al. (2017)
King et al. (2006)
“Blind application review,
where we can hide the name,
would be a good practice to
implement.”
Organizational policy
changes
Bolman and Deal (2003)
Clark and Estes (2008)
“There really isn’t any
processes in place or training
programs at my company.”
Structured interviews McCarthy et al. (2010)
Lin et al. (1992)
Goldberg (2005)
Dipboye (2017)
“Using the same application,
same questions on the actual
application, and set of
questions in the interview.”

73
Limitations and Delimitations
Limitations are influences the researcher cannot control, and the delimitations are
boundaries the researcher sets in designing the study (Creswell, 2014). Given the nature of the
qualitative study whereby participants provide data to the researcher, the possibility of human
error is unavoidable. The data represent solely the opinions and perspectives of the participants.
There were two limitations. The first limitation included the participant’s interpretation of the
interview questions and the truthfulness of their responses. Conducting interviews could elicit
socially desirable responses. I relied on the participants’ candor about their experience with
unconscious name bias in the recruitment process. The second limitation is the time provided to
complete the study, which prevented the participation of other stakeholder groups and the use of
more validation strategies.
Delimitations are elements of the study the researcher chooses to set boundaries in the
study and to protect the credibility and reliability of the study (Maxwell, 2013). The study had
two delimitations. First, although there are many methodological approaches to research, this
study solely employed qualitative methodology, including interviews. Second, several
frameworks provide an ability to assess unconscious name bias in the recruitment and hiring
processes and practices; however, the study limited its scope to utilizing Clark and Estes’s
(2008) framework to explore hiring decision makers’ knowledge and motivation and
organizational factors impacting the hiring of individuals with an ethnic-sounding name.
Future Areas of Research
While many studies have examined unconscious name bias, they were mostly field
experiments using resumes with identical skills, qualifications, education, and work experience
to validate the discrimination. The apparent characteristic between the resumes is the ethnicity,

74
typically signaled by the foreign-sounding name. Ethnic minorities are less successful in
receiving a callback compared to their White counterparts. This study aimed to understand the
barriers that inhibit applicants with an ethnic name from advancing through the recruitment
process through the eyes of the hiring decision makers. Future opportunities for research might
consider a larger sample, as well as the sector (private or public), which may offer interesting
avenues for future studies. Are certain patterns of unconscious name bias more prone to private
firms or public entities?
Future researchers could examine the experiences of White applicants with ethnicsounding names. How do their experiences differ? Given the existing research on name bias, it
would be interesting to know whether this would impact the callback and hire rates. Another area
for future research relates to specific bias against certain ethnic-sounding names for certain
positions. For example, would an applicant with an Asian-sounding name like Yu-Ting Huang
have a chance at STEM jobs? In contrast, that application might be overlooked for a marketing
or client relations position at a predominantly White organization.
Finally, this study recommended formal unconscious bias training for hiring decision
makers. Future research might explore the long-term effects of this intervention on hiring
decision makers’ hiring behaviors immediately after training and 6 months later. It would help
determine whether refresher training is needed to sustain the positive effects of bias recognition
and proactively confront bias to help hiring decision makers maintain fairness. Implementing this
intervention could also reveal the effect of organizational climate perceptions and practices in
hiring and should be considered in future research endeavors.

75
Conclusion
The purpose of this study, applying Clark and Estes’s (2008) gap analysis framework,
was to understand what hiring decision makers knew about unconscious name bias, what
motivates them to consider applicants with an ethnic-sounding name, and what organizational
factors reinforce or mitigate unconscious name bias in its recruitment and hiring practices. This
study answered these questions and, using data obtained through qualitative interviews, made
five recommendations related to the three gap areas of knowledge, motivation, and
organizational factors.
The study data suggested that hiring decision makers’ unawareness of their unconscious
biases can stifle the organization’s diversity efforts, workforce creativity, and overall employee
experience. Diversity in the workplace means maintaining a workforce of people with varying
backgrounds and life experiences that enrich the work environment. Therefore, all five of these
recommendations serve as the outcome of reducing unconscious name bias by helping to
produce the circumstances that support fair hiring practices to mitigate unconscious name bias.
The problem of unconscious name bias impacts the organization, hiring decision makers,
and unsuspecting ethnic-named applicants who are seeking career opportunities. Unconscious
name bias is often subtle and difficult to measure. It undermines the organization’s diversity
efforts. The literature and findings illuminate the inherent challenges ethnic-named applicants
encounter because of their given names. Filling these manager and organizational gaps solves an
equity and inclusion epidemic and strengthens the organization’s reputation and revenuegenerating talent. This problem requires the joint effort of organizational leadership, talent
acquisition, learning and development, human resources, and hiring decision makers to
collectively partner on implementing the recommended solutions that welcome and embrace the

76
diversity of all individuals, including applicants with foreign or unfamiliar names. After all, there
is no such thing as an easy or hard name. Just names you have heard before and those you have
not heard before.
“We shall overcome because the arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward
justice” (King, 1968, para 21).

77
References
Aguinis, H., & Kraiger, K. (2009). Benefits of training and development for individuals and
teams, organizations, and society. Annual Review of Psychology, 60(1), 451–474.
https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.60.110707.163505
Alavi, M., Kayworth, T., & Leidner, D. (2005). An empirical examination of the influence of
organizational culture on knowledge management practices. Journal of Management
Information Systems, 22(3), 191–224. https://doi.org/10.2753/MIS0742-1222220307
Albert, E. T. (2019). AI in talent acquisition: A review of AI-applications used in recruitment
and selection. Strategic HR Review, 18(5), 215–221. https://doi.org/10.1108/SHR-04-
2019-0024
Alteri, A. M. (2020). Side-effects of representation: Measuring the impact of representative
hiring on employment discrimination complaints. Administration & Society, 52(10),
1562–1592. https://doi.org/10.1177/0095399720915293
Anderson, L. W., & Krathwohl, D. R. (2001). A taxonomy of learning, teaching, and assessing:
A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives. Pearson Education Group.
Arceo-Gomez, E., & Campos-Vazquez, R. (2014). Race and marriage in the labor market: A
discrimination correspondence study in a developing country. The American Economic
Review, 104(5), 376–380. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.104.5.376
Arnesen, E. (Ed.). (2006). Encyclopedia of US labor and working-class history. Taylor and
Francis. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203944417
Backhus, L., Lui, N., Cooke, D., Bush, E., Enumah, Z., & Higgins, R. (2019). Unconscious bias.
Thoracic Surgery Clinics, 29(3), 259–267. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.thorsurg.2019.03.004

78
Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change.
Psychological Review, 84(2), 191–215. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.84.2.191
Bandura, A. (2012). Cultivate self-efficacy for personal and organizational effectiveness. In E.
A. Locke (Ed.), Handbook of principles of organizational behavior: Indispensable
knowledge for evidence-based management (2nd ed., pp. 179–200). Wiley.
Banaji, M.R., Fiske, S., & Massey, D. (2021). Systemic racism: Individuals and interactions,
institutions and society. Cognitive research: Principles and implications, 6(1), Article 82.
https://doi.org/10.1186/s41235-021-00349-3
Banaji, M.R., & Greenwald, A. G. (2013). Blindspot: Hidden biases of good people.
Delacorte.
Beattie, G., Cohen, D., & McGuire, L. (2013). An exploration of possible unconscious ethnic
biases in higher education: The role of implicit attitudes on selection for university posts.
Semiotica, 2013(197), 171–201. https://doi.org/10.1515/sem-2013-0087
Bertrand, M., & Mullainathan, S. (2004). Are Emily and Greg more employable than Lakisha
and Jamal? A field experiment on labor market discrimination. The American Economic
Review, 94(4), 991–1013. https://doi.org/10.1257/0002828042002561
Bolman, L., & Deal, T. (2003). Reframing organizations: Artistry, choice and leadership (3rd
ed.). Jossey-Bass.
Booth, A., Leigh, A., & Varganova, E. (2012). Does ethnic discrimination vary across minority
groups? Evidence from a field experiment. Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics,
74(4), 547–573. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0084.2011.00664.x
Broom, L., Beem, H., & Harris, V. (1955). Characteristics of 1,107 petitioners for change of
name. American Sociological Review, 20(1), 33–39. https://doi.org/10.2307/2088197

79
Brownstein, M. (2019). Implicit bias. In E. N. Zalta & U. Nodelman (Eds.), Stanford
Encyclopedia of Philosophy. https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/implicit-bias/#HistFiel
Carlsson, M., & Rooth, D. (2007). Evidence of ethnic discrimination in the Swedish labor market
using experimental data. Labour Economics, 14(4), 716–729.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.labeco.2007.05.001
The Chicago Commission on Human Relations. (1922). The negro in Chicago: A study of race
relations and a race riot. The University of Chicago Press.
Clark, R., & Estes, F. (2008). Turning research into results: A guide to selecting the right
performance solutions. Information Age Publishing.
Cole, M., Feild, H., Giles, W., & Harris, S. (2009). Recruiters’ inferences of applicant
personality based on resume screening: Do paper people have a personality? Journal of
Business and Psychology, 24(1), 5–18. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10869-008-9086-9
Consul, N., Strax, R., DeBenedectis, C., & Kagetsu, N. (2021). Mitigating unconscious bias in
recruitment and hiring. Journal of the American College of Radiology, 18(6), 769–773.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacr.2021.04.006
Cotton, J., O’Neill, B., & Griffin, A. (2008). The name game: Affective and hiring reactions to
first names. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 23(1), 18–39.
https://doi.org/10.1108/02683940810849648
Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods
approaches (4th ed.). SAGE.
Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed
methods approaches (5th ed). Sage.

80
Cuellar, N. G. (2017). Unconscious bias: What is yours? Journal of Transcultural Nursing,
28(4), 333. https://doi.org/10.1177/1043659617713566
Derous, E., Pepermans, R., & Ryan, A. (2017). Ethnic discrimination during résumé screening:
Interactive effects of applicants’ ethnic salience with job context. Human Relations,
70(7), 860–882. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018726716676537
Derous, E., & Ryan, A. (2019). When your resume is (not) turning you down: Modelling ethnic
bias in resume screening. Human Resource Management Journal, 29(2), 113–130.
https://doi.org/10.1111/1748-8583.12217
Derous, E., Ryan, A., & Serlie, A. (2015). Double jeopardy upon resumé screening: When
Achmed is less employable than Aïsha. Personnel Psychology, 68(3), 659–696.
https://doi.org/10.1111/peps.12078
Devine, P., Forscher, P., Cox, W., Kaatz, A., Sheridan, J., & Carnes, M. (2017). A gender bias
habit-breaking intervention led to increased hiring of female faculty in STEM
departments. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 73, 211–215.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2017.07.002
Dipboye, R. L. (2017). The selection/recruitment interview: Core processes and contexts. In A.
Evers, N. Anderson, & O. Smit-Voskuijl (Eds.), The Blackwell handbook of personnel
selection (pp. 119–142). Wiley. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781405164221
Dixon-Fyle, S., Dolan, K., Hunt, D., & Prince, S. (2020). Diversity wins: How inclusion matters.
McKinsey & Company. https://www.mckinsey.com/featured-insights/diversity-andinclusion/diversity-wins-how-inclusion-matters
Eccles, J. S. (2006). Expectancy value motivational theory.
http://www.education.com/reference/article/expectancy-value-motivational-theory

81
Edo, A., Jacquemet, N., & Yannelis, C. (2017). Language skills and homophilous hiring
discrimination: Evidence from gender and racially differentiated applications. Springer
Science and Business Media. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11150-017-9391-z
Falk, A. (1975). Identity and name changes. The Psychoanalytic Review, 62(4), 647-657.
Feldman, M., & Weseley, A. (2013). Which name unlocks the door? The effect of tenant
race/ethnicity on landlord response. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 43(S2), E416–
E425. https://doi.org/10.1111/jasp.12034
Fiarman, S. E. (2016). Unconscious bias: When good intentions aren't enough. Educational
Leadership, 74(3), 10–15.
FitzGerald, C., & Hurst, S. (2017). Implicit bias in healthcare professionals: A systematic
review. BMC Medical Ethics, 18(1), 19–36. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12910-017-0179-8
Gaddis, S. (2015). Discrimination in the credential society: An audit study of race and college
selectivity in the labor market. Social Forces, 93(4), 1451–1479.
https://doi.org/10.1093/sf/sou111
Gallimore, R., & Goldenberg, C. (2001). Analyzing cultural models and settings to connect
minority achievement and school improvement research. Educational Psychologist,
36(1), 45–56. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15326985EP3601_5
Gerhards, J., & Hans, S. (2009). From Hasan to Herbert: Name‐giving patterns of immigrant
parents between acculturation and ethnic maintenance. American Journal of Sociology,
114(4), 1102–1128. https://doi.org/10.1086/595944
Gilliam, W., Maupin, A., Reyes, C., Accavitti, M., & Shic, F. (2016). Do early educators’
implicit biases regarding sex and race relate to behavior expectations and

82
recommendations of preschool expulsions and suspensions? Yale University Child Study
Center.
Goldberg, C. (2005). Relational demography and similarity-attraction in interview assessments
and subsequent offer decisions: Are we missing something? Group & Organization
Management, 30(6), 597–624. https://doi.org/10.1177/1059601104267661
Goldstein, J., & Stecklov, G. (2016). From Patrick to John F: Ethnic names and occupational
success in the last era of mass migration. American Sociological Review, 81(1), 85–106.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0003122415621910
Green, A., Carney, D., Pallin, D., Ngo, L., Raymond, K., Iezzoni, L., & Banaji, M. (2007).
Implicit bias among physicians and its prediction of thrombolysis decisions for black and
white patients. Journal of General Internal Medicine, 22, 1231–1238.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11606-007-0258-5
Greenwald, A., McGhee, D., & Schwartz, J. (1998). Measuring individual differences in implicit
cognition: The implicit association test. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
74(6), 1464–1480. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.74.6.1464
Greenwald, A. G., & Pettigrew, T. F. (2014). With malice toward none and charity for some:
Ingroup favoritism enables discrimination. American Psychological Association, 69(7),
669–684. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0036056
Harcourt, M., Lam, H., Harcourt, S., & Flynn, M. (2008). Discrimination in hiring against
immigrants and ethnic minorities: The effect of unionization. International Journal of
Human Resource Management, 19(1), 98–115.
https://doi.org/10.1080/09585190701763958

83
Hessekiel, D. (2020, June 4). Companies taking a public stand in the wake of George Floyd’s
death. Forbes. https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidhessekiel/2020/06/04/companiestaking-a-public-stand-in-the-wake-of-george-floyds-death/?sh=7bfc18577214
Holroyd, J., Scaife, R., & Stafford, T. (2017). What is implicit bias? Philosophy Compass,
12(10), Article e12437. https://doi.org/10.1111/phc3.12437
Howard, S., & Borgella, A. M. (2020). Are Adewale and Ngochi more employable than Jamal
and Lakeisha? The influence of nationality and ethnicity cues on employment-related
evaluations of blacks in the United States. The Journal of Social Psychology, 160(4),
509–519. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224545.2019.1687415
Huffcutt, A. (2011). An empirical review of the employment interview construct literature.
International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 19(1), 62–81.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2389.2010.00535.x
Huffcutt, A. I., & Youngcourt, S. S. (2007). Employment interviews. In D. L. Whetzel & G.
R. Wheaton (Eds.), Applied measurement: Industrial psychology in human resources
management (pp. 181-199). Taylor & Francis.
Hunt, V., Prince, S., Dixon-Fyle, S., & Dolan, K. (2020). Delivering through diversity.
McKinsey & Company. https://www.mckinsey.com/capabilities/people-andorganizational-performance/our-insights/delivering-through-diversity
Kaas, L., & Manger, C. (2012). Ethnic discrimination in Germany’s labour market: A field
experiment. German Economic Review, 13(1), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-
0475.2011.00538.x

84
Kaiser, C., Major, B., Jurcevic, I., Dover, T., Brady, L., & Shapiro, J. (2013). Presumed fair:
Ironic effects of organizational diversity structures. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 104(3), 504–519. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0030838
Kandola, B. (2004). Skills development: The missing link in increasing diversity in leadership.
Industrial and Commercial Training, 36(4), 143–147.
https://doi.org/10.1108/00197850410542365
Kang, S., DeCelles, K., Tilcsik, A., & Jun, S. (2016). Whitened résumés: Race and selfpresentation in the labor market. Administrative Science Quarterly, 61(3), 469–502.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0001839216639577
Kang, T. S. (1971). Name change and acculturation: Chinese students on an American campus.
Pacific Sociological Review, 14(4), 403–412. https://doi.org/10.2307/1388539
King, E. B., Mendoza, S. A., Madera, J. M., Hebl, M. R., & Knight, J. L. (2006). What’s in a
name? A multiracial investigation of the role of occupational stereotypes in selection
decisions. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 36(5), 1145–1159.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0021-9029.2006.00035.x
King, M. L., Jr. (1968). Remaining awake through a great revolution. Oberlin College.
https://www2.oberlin.edu/external/EOG/BlackHistoryMonth/MLK/CommAddress.html
Kline, P., & Walters, C. (2021). Reasonable doubt: Experimental detection of Job-Level
employment discrimination. Econometrica, 89(2), 765–792.
https://doi.org/10.3982/ECTA17489
Kotter, J. (2012). Leading change. Harvard Business Review Press.
Krathwohl, D. (2002). A revision of Bloom’s Taxonomy: An overview. Theory into Practice,
41(4), 212–218. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip4104_2

85
Langley, G. J., Moen, R. D., Nolan, K. M., Nolan, T. W., Norman, C. L., & Provost, L. P.
(2009). The improvement guide: a practical approach to enhancing organizational
performance. John Wiley & Sons.
Lieberson, S. (2000). A matter of taste: How names, fashions and culture change. Yale
University Press.
Lievens, F., Highhouse, S., & De Corte, W. (2005). The importance of traits and abilities in
supervisors’ hirability decisions as a function of method of assessment. Journal of
Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 78(3), 453–470.
https://doi.org/10.1348/096317905X26093
Lin, T., Dobbins, G. H., & Farh, J.A. (1992). A field study of race and age similarity effects on
interview ratings in conventional and situational interviews. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 77(3), 363–371.
Lipton, J. P., O’Connor, M., Terry, C., & Bellamy, E. (1991). Neutral job titles and occupational
stereotypes: When legal and psychological realities conflict. The Journal of Psychology,
125(2), 129–151. https://doi.org/10.1080/00223980.1991.10543278
Maskaly, J., Donner, C., & Fridell, L. (2017). Police CEOs and subordinates’ perceptions of
workplace misconduct. Policing, 40(1), 57–70. https://doi.org/10.1108/PIJPSM-07-2016-
0112
Maurer, R. (2017). Most recruiters not fully confident in applicant screening methods: Survey
finds talent professionals would like to use more objective selection tools. Society for
Human Resources Management.
Maxwell, J. (2013). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach (3rd ed.). SAGE.
Mayer, R. E. (2011). Applying the science of learning. Pearson Education.

86
McCarthy, J. M., Van Iddekinge, C. H., & Campion, M. A. (2010). Are highly structured job
interviews resistant to demographic similarity effects? Personnel Psychology, 63(2),
325–359. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.2010.01172.x
McGinnity, F., & Lunn, P. D. (2011). Measuring discrimination facing ethnic minority job
applicants: An Irish experiment. Work, Employment and Society, 25(4), 693–708.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0950017011419722
Mehrabian, A. (2001). Characteristics attributed to individuals on the basis of their first names.
Department of Psychology University of California, Los Angeles
Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2015). Qualitative research: A guide to design and
implementation. Jossey-Bass.
Merriam-Webster. Ethnic. In Merriam-Webster.com dictionary. Retrieved April 9, 2024, from
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/ethnic
Midtbøen, A. H, & Rogstad, J. (2012). Discrimination. Methodological controversies and
sociological perspectives on future research.” Nordic Journal of Migration Research,
2(3), 203–212.
Milkman, K., Akinola, M., & Chugh, D. (2012). Temporal distance and discrimination: An audit
study in academia. Psychological Science, 23(7), 710–717.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797611434539
Okonofua, J., & Eberhardt, J. (2015). Two strikes: Race and the disciplining of young students.
Psychological Science, 26(5), 617–624. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797615570365
Oreopoulos, P. (2011). Why do skilled immigrants struggle in the labor market? A field
experiment with thirteen thousand résumés. American Economic Journal. Economic
Policy, 3(4), 148–171. https://doi.org/10.1257/pol.3.4.148

87
Pager, D. (2007). The use of field experiments for studies of employment discrimination:
Contributions, critiques, and directions for the future. The Annals of the American
Academy of Political and Social Science, 609(1), 104–133.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0002716206294796
Pager, D., Bonikowski, B., & Western, B. (2009). Discrimination in a low-wage labor market: A
field experiment. American Sociological Review, 74(5), 777–799.
https://doi.org/10.1177/000312240907400505
Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods (3rd ed.). SAGE.
Phinney, J. S. (1996). Understanding ethnic diversity: The role of ethnic diversity. The American
Behavioral Scientist, 40(2), 143–152. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764296040002005
Quadlin, N., & Montgomery, B. (2022). When a name gives you pause: Racialized names and
time to adoption in a county dog shelter. Social Psychology Quarterly, 85(2), 210–235.
https://doi.org/10.1177/01902725221090900
Quillian, L., Pager, D., Hexel, O., & Midtbøen, A., (2017). Meta-analysis of field experiments
shows no change in racial discrimination in hiring over time. Proceedings of the National
Academy of Sciences, 114(41), 10870–10875. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1706255114
Riach, P., & Rich, J. (2002). Field experiments of discrimination in the market place. Economic
Journal, 112(483), F480–F518. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-0297.00080
Richardson, J. (2017). Can we talk about race? An interview with Beverly Daniel Tatum. Phi
Delta Kappan, 99(3), 30–36. https://doi.org/10.1177/0031721717739590
Rivera, L. A. (2012). Hiring as cultural matching: The case of elite professional service firms.
American Sociological Review, 77(6), 999–1022.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0003122412463213

88
Rubinstein, Y., & Brenner, D. (2014). Pride and prejudice: Using ethnic-sounding names and
Inter-ethnic marriages to identify labour market discrimination. The Review of Economic
Studies, 81(1), 389–425. https://doi.org/10.1093/restud/rdt031
Rueda, R. (2011). The 3 dimensions of improving student performance. Teachers College Press.
Schein, E., & Schein, P. (2016). Organizational culture and leadership (5th ed.). Wiley.
Segrest Purkiss, S., Perrewé, P., Gillespie, T., Mayes, B., & Ferris, G. (2006). Implicit sources of
bias in employment interview judgments and decisions. Organizational Behavior and
Human Decision Processes, 101(2), 152–167.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2006.06.005
Staats, C. (2016). Understanding implicit bias: What educators should know. American
Educator, 39(4), 29–33.
Stewart, C. (2016). How diverse is your pipeline? Developing the talent pipeline for women and
black and ethnic minority employees. Industrial and Commercial Training, 48(2), 61–66.
https://doi.org/10.1108/ICT-09-2015-0059
Sue, D. W. (2010). Microaggressions in everyday life: Race, gender, and sexual orientation.
John Wiley & Sons.
Sukhera, J., & Watling, C. (2018). A framework for integrating implicit bias recognition into
health professions education. Academic Medicine, 93(1), 35–40.
https://doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0000000000001819
Terpstra, D., & Larsen, J., Jr. (1980). A note on job type and applicant race as determinants of
hiring decisions. Journal of Occupational Psychology, 53(2), 117–119.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8325.1980.tb00015.x

89
Thijssen, L., Coenders, M., & Lancee, B. (2020). Ethnic discrimination in the Dutch labor
market: Differences between ethnic minority groups and the role of personal information
about job Applicants—Evidence from a field experiment. Journal of International
Migration and Integration, 22(3), 1125–1150. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12134-020-
00795-w
U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (2022). National origin discrimination.
https://www.eeoc.gov/national-origin-discrimination
U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (2022). Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of
1964. https://www.eeoc.gov/statutes/title-vii-civil-rights-act-1964
Wood, M., Hales, J., Purdon, S., Sejersen, T., & Hayllar, O. (2009). A test for racial
discrimination in recruitment practice in British cities: Research report no 607.
Department for Work and Pensions.
Zhao, X., & Biernat, M. (2017). “Welcome to the U.S.” but “change your name”? Adopting
Anglo names and discrimination. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 70, 59–68.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2016.12.008
Zschirnt, E., & Ruedin, D. (2016). Ethnic discrimination in hiring decisions: A meta-analysis of
correspondence tests 1990–2015. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 42(7), 1115–
1134. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369183X.2015.1133279

90
Appendix A: Interview Protocol
Thank you for taking the time to meet with me today. Your perspective and experience as
a hiring manager in your organization will be very useful as I study the knowledge, motivation,
and organizational influences that address unconscious ethnic name bias in the recruitment and
hiring process.
All the data that is gathered will be confidential and kept in a secure place, and your
insights will not be shared with others. I wanted to confirm that it is okay that I record our Zoom
meeting and record using a voice recorder so that it helps me accurately gather information and
reflect on our discussion. Please be assured that you will not be identified in written materials,
and if quotations are used from our conversation today, I will use a pseudonym for you. At this
point, I wanted to get your consent to record our conversation today. There is no pressure for you
to complete this interview, and we can stop the interview at any point. Do you have any
questions for me at this point?
1. Please describe what you do professionally, and tell me about your involvement in the
recruitment and hiring process. (Icebreaker)
2. What benefits, or limitations, do you believe are associated with hiring an ethnically
diverse workforce? (RQ1; knowledge)
3. What is your understanding, if any, of name bias in the recruitment process? (RQ1;
knowledge)
4. What, if anything, do you think you could do to mitigate unconscious name bias
toward minority applicants? (RQ1; knowledge)
5. To what extent, if at all, do you believe you have the ability to mitigate unconscious
name bias when evaluating candidates? Probe: What supportive measures, if any, can

91
be provided by the organization you work for or others to better assist you with
ensuring that you feel confident in your abilities to control for name bias? (RQ2; selfefficacy)
6. If you receive a resume for an applicant with an ethnic name, and you are unsure how
to pronounce the name, to what extent, if at all, are you confident in your ability to
consider the candidate? (RQ2; self-efficacy)
7. How important, if at all, is it to you to engage in strategies to mitigate unconscious
name bias from influencing your decisions? (RQ2; task value)
8. What strategies, if any, might you use or have you used to mitigate unconscious name
bias from impacting your decisions? (RQ1; knowledge)
9. What processes are in place, if any, within your organization to help you to ensure all
qualified ethnic-named applicants are evaluated equitably compared to applicants
with a White-sounding name? (RQ3; org structure)
10. What practices, if any, does your organization use to mitigate unconscious name bias
from influencing the hiring decisions in the recruitment process? Probe: To what
extent are you enabled to enact practices that you determine would support mitigating
name bias? (RQ3; org structure)
11. In what ways, if at all, does your organizational culture influence your decisionmaking when reviewing resumes of applicants with an ethnic-sounding name? (RQ3;
org culture)
12. If you had sole decision-making authority in the recruitment and hiring process, what
changes, if any, would you make to the hiring process to eliminate name bias? (RQ2;
task value//RQ 1; knowledge)

92
13. Is there anything else you would like to add to the conversation today that was not
already covered as it relates to unconscious name bias in the hiring process at your
organization or in other hiring processes you are familiar with?

93
Appendix B: Information Sheet for Exempt Research
STUDY TITLE: Unconscious Name Bias in Workplace Recruitment and Hiring Toward
Individuals with an Ethnic Name
PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR: Uchenna Nwude
FACULTY ADVISOR: Jennifer L. Phillips, D.L.S.
You are invited to participate in a research study. Your participation is voluntary. This document
explains information about this study. You should ask questions about anything that is unclear to
you.
PURPOSE
The purpose of this study is to seek to understand more about the hiring decision makers’
knowledge, motivation, and organizational structures in the recruitment and hiring process
impacting applicants with an ethnic name. You are invited as a possible participant because you
have worked for 5 or more years in a managerial capacity with two or more direct reports and
have participated in the direct hiring process of your employees.
PARTICIPANT INVOLVEMENT
If you decide to take part, this is what will happen:
• You will complete a brief questionnaire to confirm you meet the criteria for eligibility
to participate in the study.
• Upon eligibility confirmation, you will be scheduled to participate in a virtual, faceto-face interview via Zoom.
• You will be asked questions about your experience with the recruitment and
hiring process relating to unconscious name bias at your workplace. This
interview will take approximately 1 hour to complete.
Finally, you will be asked if you would like to participate in a follow-up interview so that the
researcher may verify that she understood what you reported accurately.
• If you agreed and are selected, you will participate in a follow-up interview where the
researcher will report some of her findings to you and check with you to see if she
accurately represented what you reported in your interview.

94
• Audio Taping: Interviews will be recorded for note-taking purposes only. Recording
is required as part of the protocol.
PAYMENT/COMPENSATION FOR PARTICIPATION
If you complete the full interview, you will be entered into a random drawing for a $50 Amazon
gift card. There will be up to two winders. The Amazon gift card will be emailed to the winners
of the random drawing 5 days after all interviews have been completed.
CONFIDENTIALITY
The members of the research team, and the University of Southern California Institutional
Review Board (IRB) may access the data. The IRB reviews and monitors research studies to
protect the rights and welfare of research subjects.
When the results of the research are published or discussed in conferences, no identifiable
information will be used.
Your data will be assigned a random number and any identifying information for the purposes of
receiving a gift card, if you meet the qualifications to receive a gift card, will be removed from
the data.
Audio/video recordings will be transcribed. Upon verification of the transcript by the Principal
Investigator, all audio and video recordings will be erased, approximately within 30 days of the
interview.
INVESTIGATOR CONTACT INFORMATION
If you have any questions about this study, please contact the investigator Uchenna O. Nwude at
nwude@usc.edu. You may also contact my faculty advisor, Dr. Jennifer L. Phillips at
jlp62386@usc.edu.
IRB CONTACT INFORMATION
If you have any questions about your rights as a research participant, please contact the
University of Southern California Institutional Review Board at (323) 442-0114 or email
irb@usc.edu.

Abstract (if available)

Abstract Race-typed names can elicit discrimination for minority applicants, consciously and unconsciously. The barriers experienced in the labor market by members of ethnic minority groups relative to members of the majority group have been well documented through many studies. Ethnic minorities are shown to be systematically disadvantaged in the recruitment and hiring process due to unconscious name bias. Names invoke different ethnic backgrounds. Unconscious ethnic name bias in recruitment and hiring can limit the potential for building a diverse and inclusive workforce. Using Clark and Estes’ (2008) gap analysis framework, this study sought to understand the gaps in knowledge, motivation, and organizational (KMO) factors that affect the hiring of individuals with an ethnic-sounding name. The study design consisted of purposeful sampling, collecting data from nine participants with direct hiring authority to assess and validate assumed KMO influences on hiring candidates with ethnic-sounding names. Semi-structured interviews were used to understand the hiring decision makers’ experiences relating to unconscious ethnic name bias in recruitment and hiring. Based on the conceptual framework and the findings across the three gap analysis areas, five recommendations for practice and future research are provided for organizations to dismantle barriers to diversity, equity, and inclusion.

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

Underemployment among U.S. military veterans in the private sector after transitioning from the military

PDF

Applying best practices to optimize racial and ethnic diversity on nonprofit boards: an improvement study

PDF

Cultivating workplace belonging through managerial impact

PDF

Ambient anxiety within leadership teams and its impact on organizational efficiency in mental health organizations

PDF

Ageism and ingrained stereotypes: a qualitative study of systemic injustices in hiring practices

PDF

Recruiting and hiring female police officers: an evaluative study

PDF

Breaking barriers to leadership: what's the best solution?

PDF

Recruiting police diversity

PDF

Reducing the environmental impact of mining - a promising practice study

PDF

The case for leader self-reflection in the workplace

PDF

Implicit bias: an advancement opportunity limiter for African American women in entertainment

PDF

Knowledge, motivation and organizational influences impacting recruiting practices addressing the gender gap in the technology industry: an evaluation study

PDF

Towards ideological clarity: an action research project on the role of a teacher in unearthing unconscious bias to embrace culturally relevant pedagogy

PDF

Belonging in America: Black Muslim refugee women’s’ trials and triumphs in the workplace

PDF

The role of organizational leaders in creating sustainable diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives in the workplace

PDF

Increasing organizational trust within financial services during times of change: an improvement study

PDF

No officer left behind? The promotion experiences of retired and separated Black commissioned officers in the United States Army

PDF

"After a neutral and impartial investigation...": implicit bias in internal workplace investigations

PDF

Creating support infrastructure for women of color advancing toward clinical department administrator role

PDF

An examination of ethnic minority physician representation in clinical medicine to reduce health disparities among minoritized groups

Asset Metadata

Creator Nwude, Uchenna Onyendu (author)

Core Title Unconscious name bias in workplace recruitment and hiring toward individuals with an ethnic name

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Educational Leadership (On Line)

Degree Conferral Date 2024-05

Publication Date 05/09/2024

Defense Date 04/24/2024

Publisher Los Angeles, California (original), University of Southern California (original), University of Southern California. Libraries (digital)

Tag knowledge,Motivation,OAI-PMH Harvest,organization,unconscious name bias

Format theses (aat)

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Kim, Esther (committee chair), Canny, Eric (committee member), Grad, Richard (committee member)

Creator Email nwude@usc.edu,uchennanwude@gmail.com

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-oUC113925201

Unique identifier UC113925201

Identifier etd-NwudeUchen-12899.pdf (filename)

Legacy Identifier etd-NwudeUchen-12899

Document Type Dissertation

Format theses (aat)

Rights Nwude, Uchenna Onyendu

Internet Media Type application/pdf

Type texts

Source 20240509-usctheses-batch-1149 (batch), University of Southern California (contributing entity), University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses (collection)

Access Conditions The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the author, as the original true and official version of the work, but does not grant the reader permission to use the work if the desired use is covered by copyright. It is the author, as rights holder, who must provide use permission if such use is covered by copyright.

Repository Name University of Southern California Digital Library

Repository Location USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus MC 2810, 3434 South Grand Avenue, 2nd Floor, Los Angeles, California 90089-2810, USA

Repository Email cisadmin@lib.usc.edu