Matt Buckland

Automated resume screening tools can pose legal risks due to potential violations of anti-discrimination laws. In countries with strict regulations, these tools might inadvertently discriminate against protected groups based on race, gender, age, or disability. If candidates from protected categories are systematically disadvantaged or excluded, it could lead to allegations of discriminatory hiring practices and legal consequences, including lawsuits, fines, and damage to the organisation's reputation. Regulation is playing catch up to the wealth of new tools available but hiring is one area that existing laws may prevent the 100% automation or "black box" decision making without human oversight. You should always check the local laws.

Automated resume screening tools may exhibit bias due to their reliance on algorithms trained on historical data, which can reflect past biases present in hiring processes. These tools may inadvertently perpetuate gender, racial, or socioeconomic biases by favoring certain keywords, educational backgrounds, or experiences over others. Additionally, they might overlook qualified candidates who don't fit predetermined criteria, leading to a lack of diversity and perpetuating systemic inequalities in hiring.

Feedback should be constructive, specific, and actionable, ultimately empowering individuals to reach their full potential and achieve desired outcomes. You should always frame a feedback discussion in this way and make this explicit to the receiver. Common anti-patterns of giving feedback include: 1. Being vague or non-specific, 2. Using criticism without offering solutions, 3. Focusing solely on negatives, 4. Providing feedback in public settings, 5. Being overly harsh or confrontational. If your feedback could fall into these categories you should take time to reassess and rephrase.

Before giving feedback you should ask for permission. Asking permission to give feedback respects the individual's autonomy and readiness to receive constructive criticism. It sets a positive tone, demonstrating empathy and consideration for their feelings. This approach fosters openness, trust, and a willingness to engage with the feedback constructively, leading to more effective communication and growth. If a person isn't in the right mindset to receive constructive feedback it might be better to reschedule or to opt for a pre-meeting to explain the need for the feedback process.

Specific and timely feedback is essential for its effectiveness. Specificity clarifies what needs improvement, guiding actions more effectively. Timeliness ensures relevance and prevents issues from escalating. It fosters a culture of continuous improvement and provides immediate opportunities for adjustment, enhancing performance and productivity.

The sandwich method, where criticism is sandwiched between two layers of praise, can be ineffective because it dilutes the clarity of feedback. It may mask critical points and undermine sincerity. Recipients may focus more on the positive, missing crucial areas for improvement. Additionally, it can erode trust if individuals feel their feedback is sugar-coated. Direct, constructive feedback fosters growth and development more effectively. Whilst this method may be more comfortable for those giving the feedback it is often reductive and less useful for the receiver.