Abbreviated Program

Meeting One

Meeting One is the first time that the committee has come together. The membership, terms of reference and work plan are all determined. An important part of recommendation committee work is to be aware of bias. A good tool is a checklist that can focus our decisions. This checklist has been created using the UAPPOL Chair's Roles & Responsibilities that is useful for Chair Review Committees. The checklist should reflect the job description and job advertisement.

** Bias is formed through a combination of our brain's natural cognitive processes and the cultural and social environments we grow up in. Neurologically, our brains rely on heuristics—mental shortcuts that help us make quick decisions—but these shortcuts can also lead to distorted judgments. Over time, repeated experiences, societal norms, and cultural conditioning reinforce certain patterns of thinking, shaping our biases. These biases are often subconscious and can be influenced by factors such as media, family, education, and peer interactions, making them difficult to recognize and challenge without intentional effort. 

The biggest take-away is that bias is a normal part of being human and not a bad thing. We just need to reflect on potential bias we may have in order to ensure that our decision making is based on evidence and fairness, respect, dignity and kindness. 

**  Why We Focus on Unconscious Bias? 

Undoubtedly everyone here has completed some sort of bias training in the past. Learning and reflecting about bias and fairness is not “one and done” but a constant reflection of how our unconscious biases align with our conscious values. We will never remove all of our implicit biases, that isn’t the goal, the idea is to reflect and be aware of them so we can understand when a bias may be influencing a decision. 

 You are asked to watch a short video (approximately 8 minutes) on implicit bias. 

Strategies for Mitigating Bias
Types of bias

Affinity Bias. Having a preference or personal connection for an individual who may be similar to you. Perceiving people who are similar more positively than those who are different.

Confirmation Bias. Looking for information that confirms your assumption about someone. Involves selective attention to information that supports your stance or belief. Dismissing opinions, no matter how valid. Confirms pre-existing perceptions or stereotypes without using actual or objective information.

Halo Effect. Where a positive impression based on one aspect of performance  creates an overall positive perception. An individual is rated highly in all areas because of one thing they do really well.

Horn Effect. An individual is denied progression because of one thing they do not do well. One negative trait overshadows other traits, behaviors, or beliefs.

Spillover Effect. Pertains to a manager or evaluator judging the current performance by using past performance as a reference point.

Projection. A feature in human thinking where one thinks that others have the same priorities, attitudes or beliefs as oneself, even if this is unlikely to be the case.

Recency Effect When the individual’s most recent behavior becomes the primary focus of the review. Note this can go both ways. A poor performer does something terrific and the past performance is forgotten and vice versa with an exceptional performer.

Anchoring Bias. The tendency to rely too heavily or “anchor” on one trait or piece of information when making decisions. Usually the first piece of information.

Distance Bias. Favoring those who are closer in proximity by location, time zone or relationship. 

Gender Bias. Stereotypes about gender roles can influence how perception an employee’s communication style, leadership skills, or work ethic.

Attribution. How individuals perceive, assess, and rationalize their own actions, accomplishments, behaviors, and motivations against those of others. Leads to a tendency to focus on the faults of others and minimize or undervalue their accomplishments.

Personal Bias Reduction Strategies

With credit to:Dr. Nabil Mitha, Dr. Dominic Mudiayi, Dr. Jennifer Ringrose, Dr. Farah Shariff and Dr Lindsay Bridgland

This bias reduction strategy list is not exhaustive, nor is it meant that every strategy will be employed with every decision or step in FEC. Some may “speak” to you more than others. The following strategies are meant to be applied before and during review and the discussion process at the FEC meeting.  

1. Use structured feedback (checklist/evaluation tool) to deliver specific and actionable feedback

Refer to the evaluation checklist and make notes 

2. Counter stereotype exemplars 

- Focus on individuals you admire and respect who are in the same demographic as the candidate. 

3. Consider the opposite 

- After an initial review of an annual report or promotion package, re-review the information, actively looking for evidence for the opposite conclusion. Then make a final decision. 

4. Question your decision 

- Ask yourself if you would make the same decision if the faculty was of a different race, gender, ethnicity, or ability. If so, why? If you would not make the same decision, why not? 

5. Remember and work against bias. Consciously ask yourself if any of the biases above are coming into play. 

6. Consider positionality and intersectionality 

 Refer to the Academic Wheel of Privilege (above) and consider how your lived experiences are impacted by your positionality and intersectionality and how your lived experiences may differ from the faculty member. Is your positionality biasing your review?

*For Reflection

*What assumptions might you have about the candidate’s personality type, gender, dis/ability, type of academic background, public profile, and other characteristics?

*Are these assumptions valid, based on the work required for the role? Or do they simply reflect what you have seen in previous candidates, or drawn from other sources?

**A Message about Discomfort 

Conversations about bias can make people feel uncomfortable.  Remember it is simply a part of our humanity. I encourage you to allow yourself the space to spend time with the discomfort if it happens to you. As you reflect, be critical of your views but also remember to be compassionate with yourself.  The aim during our meetings is to create a brave space for everyone, with a “Vegas rule” of confidentiality to allow respect for what everyone brings.

Meeting Two

This meeting is often a combination of the interview and decision discussion. 

As you prepare to interview, take the time to explore the process through an empathy lens.  Please complete the videos and readings below. The total time to complete is estimated at approximately 15 minutes.

* Cognitive empathy is comprehending or understanding someone else's point of view or how they experience the world. 

• Watch this 1:30 min YouTube video with Daniel Goleman, the psychologist and author of the book. Emotional Intelligence  

* Cognitive empathy can be used to mitigate bias. 

• Please read: Mitigating Implicit Bias Through Understanding By Zack Janiel. 

Before the interview please reflect on:

*How do we foster empathy during the interview process? Be mindful of the vulnerability people experience during an interview process, no matter what their current rank in the Faculty.

Before Decision Making

Affinity bias - the unconscious human tendency to gravitate toward other people with similar backgrounds, interests, and beliefs.3

Confirmation bias - tendency of people to favor information that confirms or strengthens their beliefs or values and is difficult to dislodge once affirmed.4

All committee members should have the opportunity to complete their evaluation of the candidate prior to the group deliberation.

In Preparation for the decision discussion

Please take the time to think through the experience, skills, abilities of the candidate and all other sources of feedback supplied.  

We suggest writing down all of your thoughts and evaluating the candidate against the evaluation checklist.  

Having your thoughts somewhat solidified prior to discussion is important in the mitigation of affinity and confirmation bias.  As humans we can be easily influenced by committee deliberation and discussion. We want to ensure that any changes we make to our decisions are based on evidence provided during the discussion, not because we haven’t thought through our perspective. 

For discussion:

*How do we manage our own biases when evaluating the candidate? How can we ensure the committee is candid and kind?

References

1.  Ruedinger E, Evans YN, Pham D-Q, Hooper L. Just-in-Time Strategies to Reduce the Effect of Interviewer Bias During Trainee Recruitment. Acad Pediatr. 2024; Jan 25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acap.2024.01.020

2.  Wang CS, Kenneth T, Ku G, Galinsky AD. Perspective-Taking Increases Willingness to Engage in Intergroup Contact. PLoS One. 2014.

3.Forbes article on affinity bias

4. APA definitions