Bias as Incompetence

In an effort to avoid finger-pointing and defensiveness, those studying prejudice -- the tendency to pre-judge others, usually based on stereotypes -- moved away from the term prejudice, which came to be associated with dislike, hostility, and intentional harm, to the term bias: prejudice, but not necessarily with the dislike, hostility, or intention.

Bias is still an ugly word, and researchers went further to use "implicit bias" (or "hidden bias," "unconscious bias," "subtle bias," "modern ___ism," and "second-generation bias") to convey the unwitting nature of many of our prejudices. Rather than bad we are misled, by a world that conditions us to more quickly associate certain characteristics with certain groups (see for example, the IAT) because groups differ in social status and roles.*

The concept of implicit bias has helped us make great strides in accepting and facing our prejudices. It has helped move the discussion away from judgment and blame toward awareness and understanding.

Yet "bias" still invokes motive and the need to interpret it. "Explicit bias" is intentional, driven by conscious endorsement of prejudicial beliefs, whereas "implicit bias" is unintentional, driven by accidental stereotyping.

Ultimately the motive behind biased decision-making and behavior is difficult to discern and irrelevant to the harm done. Focusing on the lack of nefarious motives for bias (or the presence thereof) might help the medicine go down (or not), but directs our attention to the virtue of the decision-maker rather than the competence of the decision.

With now abundant evidence on bias and its workings,** it's time to reframe bias in terms of competence. Those who make use of the knowledge available to become aware of their social biases and to minimize the impact they have on their decisions and behavior are more competent to make decisions and to lead and manage others than those who are not so educated. Just as we wouldn't entrust those with financial ignorance to manage our money, so we should not entrust those with social ignorance to evaluate and manage our employees and clients.

Gender and diversity competence -- the ability to select and evaluate people and ideas on their potential and merits rather than on what they look like or where they come from, and the capacity to build and sustain diverse and inclusive organizations -- is essential to effective leadership. Regardless of the motives professed.
______________________

* Groups that occupy high status roles are are stereotyped as "competent" (e.g., professionals) whereas low status groups are stereotyped as "incompetent" (e.g., the poor). Groups that are harmless or give care are stereotyped as "warm" (e.g., mothers) whereas groups that compete with us for scarce resources are stereotyped as "cold" (e.g., the rich). These stereotypes stem from and reinforce group segregation and inequality (see Fiske, Cuddy, Glick & Xu, 2002).

**We know, for example, that even with identical qualifications, women and minorities are significantly less likely than men and Whites to be evaluated as competent and to be hired, paid well, or offered career mentoring. We know that letters of recommendation are written differently for men and women and that people unwittingly use post-hoc definitions of merit to justify selecting a male over a female candidate. We also know that teams and boards with more women on them outperform teams and boards of mostly or all men, and that increased gender equality enhances the economic growth of nations. There are hundreds more studies documenting gender and racial biases in selection and promotion and the benefits of diversity and inclusion in groups and organizations.