Why Hiring Across Generations is the Key to Business Growth

, , ,

Breaking Down Age Bias in Hiring

When evaluating job applications, hiring managers and HR professionals strive to make decisions based on skills, qualifications, and cultural fit. However, implicit and explicit biases, particularly those related to age, can unconsciously influence hiring outcomes. A recent study by Kleissner and Jahn (2021) sheds light on how both implicit (age-stereotypic traits) and explicit (stated age) cues impact hiring decisions—and what organizations can do to mitigate age-related bias.

The Impact of Age Cues in Hiring Decisions

Kleissner and Jahn (2021) conducted a series of studies exploring how age influences hypothetical hiring scenarios. Their findings revealed significant age bias, with both explicit and implicit cues shaping hiring preferences:

  1. Explicit Age Bias: Applicants whose resumes explicitly stated they were older (e.g., 60 years) were consistently rated lower than younger candidates (e.g., 20 years). This occurred even when older candidates had the same qualifications as younger ones.
  2. Implicit Age Bias: Characteristics associated with youth, such as creativity, willingness to change, and technical orientation, made younger applicants more attractive. Conversely, traits stereotypically tied to older individuals, such as prudence and cautiousness, reduced their likelihood of being hired.
  3. Preference for Younger Applicants in Profit-Driven Roles: When profitability was the hiring goal, younger applicants were favored. This likely reflects stereotypes that younger employees are more dynamic, adaptable, and better suited to fast-paced, high-growth environments.
  4. Anti-Discrimination Intervention Works: A simple anti-discrimination prompt—reminding hiring managers to ignore age and focus solely on skills—significantly reduced age bias. While older candidates still faced challenges, the gap between younger and older applicants narrowed substantially.

Why Younger Candidates Are Perceived as More Profitable

One curious finding from the study was the preference for younger candidates when profit maximization was a factor. This bias can be explained by age-related stereotypes:

  • Dynamic Traits Associated with Youth: Younger applicants are often stereotyped as being more motivated, adaptable, and innovative—qualities associated with driving revenue and growth.
  • Negative Perceptions of Older Candidates: Older applicants may be (unfairly) viewed as less adaptable or less likely to thrive in fast-changing industries, even when this is unsupported by evidence.
  • Perceived Cost vs. Benefit: Younger candidates might be seen as a “better investment” due to assumptions about their willingness to work longer hours or for lower salaries, as well as their potential for career longevity.

While these perceptions are not necessarily accurate, they can influence hiring decisions, especially in industries or roles where profitability is prioritized.

What Employers and HR Professionals Can Do to Mitigate Age Bias

Bias, whether implicit or explicit, undermines efforts to create fair and inclusive hiring practices. Here’s how HR professionals and employers can address and mitigate age bias:

1. Remove Explicit Age Cues

  • Avoid including birthdates, graduation years, or other direct age indicators in resumes or job applications.
  • Consider adopting blind hiring practices to focus on qualifications, experience, and skills.

2. Provide Anti-Bias Training

  • Train hiring teams to recognize and address implicit age biases.
  • Conduct workshops or discussions about the value that diverse age groups bring to the workplace.

3. Incorporate Anti-Discrimination Prompts

  • Implement brief reminders during the hiring process to focus on candidates’ skills rather than age-related cues.
  • Use structured evaluation tools to minimize subjective judgments.

4. Use Age-Neutral Language in Job Descriptions

  • Avoid terms like “digital native” or “energetic” that may inadvertently signal a preference for younger candidates.
  • Highlight the importance of experience and expertise, which can appeal to older applicants.

5. Foster Inclusive Hiring Goals

  • Ensure that hiring decisions are based on a balance of skills, experience, and cultural fit, rather than assumptions about productivity or profitability.
  • Emphasize the value of intergenerational teams, which benefit from diverse perspectives and approaches.

Additional Benefits of Addressing Age Bias

Eliminating age bias is not only about fairness—it offers substantial advantages to organizations, including:

  1. Access to a Larger Talent Pool:
    By avoiding age-based exclusions, employers can tap into a broader, more experienced, and highly skilled workforce, reducing skill shortages and filling roles more effectively.
  2. Enhanced Employee Retention:
    Older employees often bring greater loyalty and lower turnover rates, saving organizations the costs associated with recruitment and training.
  3. Improved Team Performance:
    Intergenerational teams blend youthful innovation with seasoned expertise, fostering creativity, collaboration, and problem-solving.
  4. Better Decision-Making:
    A diverse workforce, including age diversity, leads to more balanced and inclusive decision-making. Organizations benefit from perspectives informed by a range of life and professional experiences.
  5. Stronger Employer Branding:
    Companies that actively promote inclusivity and diversity, including age diversity, are more attractive to potential employees, customers, and stakeholders. They are seen as forward-thinking and ethical.
  6. Regulatory Compliance and Reduced Legal Risk:
    Adhering to anti-discrimination laws protects organizations from potential lawsuits and reputational harm. Proactively addressing age bias reinforces compliance and reduces liability.
  7. Innovation and Knowledge Sharing:
    Older employees often serve as mentors, sharing knowledge, training younger staff, and ensuring the continuity of institutional expertise.

Final Thoughts

Age bias—whether explicit or implicit—can have far-reaching consequences for hiring decisions and workplace diversity. As the study by Kleissner and Jahn (2021) demonstrates, small interventions like anti-discrimination prompts can significantly reduce these biases. By raising awareness, implementing targeted strategies, and fostering inclusive hiring practices, employers and HR professionals can combat ageism and build stronger, more dynamic teams.

Citation:

Kleissner, V., & Jahn, G. (2021). Implicit and explicit age cues influence the evaluation of job applications. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 51(2), 107–120. https://doi.org/10.1111/jasp.12720

Written by Lisa J Meier with support from ChatGPT.