How can you actually boost Diversity, Equity & Inclusion (DE&I) through recruitment?
Beitragstyp
BlogbeitragDieser Beitrag ist auch in Deutsch verfügbar.
From Past to Present
For literal decades, companies have tried to boost diversity through recruitment. Approximately in the mid-1990s, companies (first in the US, then quickly also in Europe) began adopting diversity initiatives as a business necessity, driven by market pressure and the desire to maintain their competitiveness. Where are we today? Where do companies get started if they want to strengthen DE&I?
The growing use of artificial intelligence (AI) in recruitment has added a new layer to this conversation. With AI-driven tools now widely used for candidate screening, resume analysis, and even initial interviews, the potential for both positive change and unintentional bias have increased. According to a 2025 report by the World Economic Forum, 69% of organizations use AI in recruitment to improve efficiency - yet evidence shows that algorithmic bias can result in discriminatory hiring practices based on gender, race, color, and personality traits.
Both research and our own consulting work provide ample evidence that recruitment is usually where companies first take action when trying to increase diversity. And yet, Gender bias still exists in the hiring process, with women being judged more harshly than men on the same qualifications. In Switzerland, studies clearly demonstrate that women still face disadvantages in the labor market. For example, an experiment reveals that women experience a penalty of 7% in professions that are dominated by men, while the opposite pattern emerges for men in female dominated fields.
Why recruitment is the gateway to real DE&I progress
Many companies that approach us with the goal to foster their employer diversity first ask about changing their recruitment practices. The reasons for this are fairly intuitive. First, you can’t broaden diversity across the organization without bringing in more diverse talent – which happens through recruitment. Second, changing recruitment practices is (or at least seems) comparatively straight-forward: Talent acquisition is the easiest lever to pull compared to slower-moving areas like promotions, culture, or pay equity. It’s also where companies can demonstrate, rapid and measurable progress (e.g., percentage of diverse hires, or the sourcing of new talent pools), especially because recruitment efforts are by nature very public. Finally, changing hiring policies doesn’t (at least at first glance) require reshaping entrenched company culture right away — it’s seen as a more "front-end" adjustment.
Beyond quick fixes
Recruitment has been a focal point of DE&I initiatives for so long, there is a seemingly overwhelming amount of advice at your fingertips: A quick search promises “5 Tips: Ensure Workplace Diversity Through Recruitment,” no, “10 Ways to Enhance Your Diversity Recruiting Strategy,” even “13 Ways to Improve Your Diversity Recruitment Strategy.” The message is clear: Recruitment is an easy entryway into boosting DE&I.
That’s the wrong take-away. For one, there is no one-size-fits all, quick-fix approach to increasing diversity through hiring or making your recruitment process more equitable and inclusive. First, you need to figure out your company’s specific pain points. What do your numbers say? For example, you notice a low share of women in management and conclude: we need to hire more female managers. But that could be the wrong focus. Maybe you’re already hiring them — but losing them within the first two years after hiring. Or you're not bringing in enough women at junior levels to grow into leadership. Perhaps you’re hiring women into support roles, while technical or high-visibility positions remain a blind spot. We can help you with this:
| Our HSG Diversity Benchmarking helps you pinpoint strengths and areas for improvement in your HR processes. also in recruitment. Which talents are you attracting, and which are you missing? We enable you to objectively assess your current standing – in comparison with peers, industry averages, and the broader market. |
How inclusive and fair are your recruitment processes both on paper and in practice? For example, your recruiters might be well-trained when it comes to bias-free decision-making, have clear diversity goals for compiling an initial long list of candidates, ask the same standard questions in the same standard order of all candidates in an initial screening phone call. This might still not lead to the desired results if the hiring managers aren’t following similar best practices. Or: A company that overly relies on internal referrals and a small range of alumni networks to identify candidates can have the best processes in the world but will still fail to identify diverse talents. This remains a common issue today: hiring managers often have a preference for candidates who resemble themselves— the so-called mini-me mentality or affinity bias – and there’s little incentive or accountability for them to comply or explain their choices. Without a push for more inclusive hiring practices, this cycle continues, limiting diversity in the talent pool.
Our Recommendations: Calls to action for inclusive hiring
Once you’ve identified your company’s pain points, what are some examples of effective and sustainable steps can you take to make your recruitment processes more inclusive and equitable, and increase the chances of diverse candidates? Moreover, what role does Artificial Intelligence (AI) play in hiring—and what are the risks? Can it reinforce existing inequalities and bias?
- Advertise jobs that are attractive to diverse candidates: Offering roles with part-time or flexible options helps attract women. In a study with over 20 million participants, employers attracted up to 30% more candidates when they advertised flexible conditions. In addition, be very clear about the skills and qualifications required for the position. In an experiment where job seekers were encouraged to apply for different positions, the percentage of qualified women who applied for an expert position jumped by 20 percentage points if the job posting listed clearly defined qualifications compared to less defined ads.
- Pay attention to who is evaluating your candidates: Sure: The four- or multi-eye principle matters when it comes to selecting the most suitable candidate for a role. But selection panel diversity matters greatly, too. Research indicates that including women on interview panels can reduce unconscious bias and lead to fairer, more objective evaluations. Evidence suggests that a diverse panel not only improves the candidate experience but also enhances the quality of the hiring decision by mitigating stereotypical assumptions, such as the “think manager, think male” phenomenon.
- Make algorithms work for you: While hiring algorithms could bring a solution to de-biasing selection processes, they are still often regarded as tools amplifying human prejudices. There is evidence that using gender-blind, personality-based algorithms in early recruitment stages can minimize gender biases inherent in human judgment. These algorithms assess candidates on skills and fit without direct reference to gender, resulting in a more balanced selection process. However, other studies show that just having a gender-balanced shortlist doesn’t guarantee more diverse final hires. Why? Because often, the algorithm and the hiring manager use similar criteria to evaluate candidates. So if both focus on the same things, they tend to pick the same types of people. To truly improve diversity, it’s not enough to balance the shortlist. The algorithm also needs to compensate for human blind spots in hiring.
Opportunities and risks of Artificial Intelligence (AI)
To answer the earlier question: yes, AI can reinforce existing inequalities — but only if it’s not carefully designed, monitored, and used. These algorithms aren’t perfect: AI should support, not replace, human judgment. Recruiters must actively monitor and test AI-generated recommendations: To do this effectively, it is essential to train recruiters to critically assess or override them to ensure fairness and accuracy when necessary. AI should enhance decision-making — not make decisions on its own.
In conclusion, recent research highlights that AI tools can effectively enhance diversity in hiring only when they are part of a broader, well-rounded DEI strategy. This means using explainable AI that provides transparent decision-making, embedding clear and meaningful DEI principles within the organization—not just numerical targets—and ensuring that HR professionals are equipped to recognize and mitigate bias. Without this comprehensive framework, AI alone cannot drive real progress toward equitable and inclusive recruitment.
Das könnte Sie interessieren
HSG Diversity Benchmarking
Das HSG Diversity Benchmarking ist schweizweit der grösste Benchmark im Bereich Diversity, Equity & Inclusion. Unser Ansatz verbindet Wissenschaft mit Praxis - und macht Vielfalt, Chancengerechtigkeit und Inclusion messbar. Mit dem HSG Diversity Benchmarking erhalten Sie als Unternehmen ein strategisches Steuerungsinstrument, das Handlungsfelder erkennen lässt und für Ihre wichtigsten Anspruchsgruppen relevante Ergebnisse liefert.
