How can we help you?

Bias Reducing Behaviors


Greenhouse Inclusion provides various tools to help your organization reduce bias. Some of these tools include "nudges," equal access to interview preparation materials, and data anonymization. These tools are designed to non-intrusively interrupt decision making processes and proactively level the playing field for all candidates. 



Nudges are timely reminders that help change behaviors by helping employees remember to engage in efforts to disrupt unconscious bias and promote inclusion.1 These well-timed reminders can significantly reduce bias. Without these structured interrupters, our brains quickly process information using mental shortcuts and allows bias to play a bigger role in our decisions.2 Non-intrusive nudges prompt employees to consider diversity in real-time when making referrals, to be consistent and structured in evaluating applications, and to make more objective decisions overall.3   

Greenhouse Inclusion offers a variety of nudges throughout the hiring process to help recruiters and interviewers stay aware of unconscious bias. Once activated these anti-bias nudges will appear in the:

  • “Add a Referral” page 
  • Job Posts 
  • Application Review 
  • Interview Kit 
  • Scorecard Summary 

For instance, the Application Review anti-bias nudge reminds recruiters to keep in mind the explicit criteria outlined for the role during the review stage. 


Likewise, a Scorecard anti-bias nudge continually helps interviewers maintain objectivity when filling out their scorecards.


Click the following links to learn more about the individual anti-bias nudges included in Greenhouse Inclusion: SourcingApplication ReviewInterviewing.


Interview Preparation Materials

Candidates who lack networks of friends that can tell them what to expect, who didn’t attend a school that prepared students well for interviews, or who haven’t interviewed at companies that have a similar process, are at a disadvantage during the interview process. These candidates are often from underrepresented backgrounds.4 By providing interview preparation materials to all candidates, companies can help make their hiring processes more inclusive and appealing to a diverse applicant pool.   

With Greenhouse Inclusion, your organization can activate a nudge that will remind editors of the Default Candidate Interview Confirmation Template to provide preparatory information for all interviewing candidates. Interview preparation materials, like a guide to onsite interviews, can make the hiring process more accessible. This in turn ensures that all candidates are set up for success.   


To learn more about Greenhouse Inclusion's features for Interview Preparation and other Interviewing nudges, click here


Data Anonymization

Anonymizing information during the hiring process is a great way to reduce reliance on mental shortcuts and mitigate bias. Companies that hide whether or not someone is a referral are less likely to automatically assume referrals are better “culture fits”5 and can avoid the perpetuation of a homogenous workforce.6 

Additionally, when interviewers are aware of a candidate’s demographics, they may inadvertently apply different standards when comparing underrepresented group members and their majority group counterparts.7 For example, when orchestras started using blind auditions in preliminary rounds (requiring candidates to play behind a screen so evaluators could not see them), the probability that a woman made it to the final round increased by 50%.8

By building in anonymization into your hiring process, organizations can more easily change behavior, reduce bias, and select the most qualified candidates. Greenhouse Inclusion allows organizations to hide certain elements of a candidate's resume that might influence bias, automatically hide a candidate's source, and anonymize the grading of take home tests.   



To learn about the other data anonymization features included in Greenhouse Inclusion, please click here.




1. Thaler, R. H., & Sunstein, C. R. (2009). Nudge: Improving Decisions About Health, Wealth, and Happiness. New York, NY: Penguin Books.

2. Shleifer, A. (2012). Psychologists at the Gate: A Review of Daniel Kahneman’s Thinking, Fast and Slow. Journal of Economic Literature, 50(4), 1-12. doi:10.1257/jel.50.4.1

3. Nielsen, T. C., & Kepinski, L. (2014, October). WHITE PAPER Nudging the Unconscious Mind for Inclusiveness [Scholarly project]. In Retrieved from

4.Emerson, J. (2015, May 11). Want to Hire More a More Diverse Set of People? Raise Your Bar. In Retrieved from

5. Thompson, D. (2013, January 28). Hire My Friend! The Easy Logic (and Hidden Dangers) of Employee Referrals [Editorial]. The Atlantic. Retrieved from

6. McPherson, M., Smith-Lovin, L., & Cook, J. M. (2001). Birds of a Feather: Homophily in Social Networks. Annual Review of Sociology,27, 415-444. doi:10.1146/annurev.soc.27.1.415; Ingraham, C. (2014, August 25). Three quarters of whites don’t have any non-white friends. The Washington Post. Retrieved from

7. Uhlmann, E. L., & Cohen, G. L. (2005). Constructed Criteria Redefining Merit to Justify Discrimination. Psychological Science, 474-480. Retrieved from and Cohen 2005.pdf; Reeves, A. N. (2014, April). Written in Black and White: Exploring Confirmation Bias in Racialized Perceptions of Writing Skills. Retrieved from

8. Goldin, C., & Rouse, C. (2000). Orchestrating Impartiality: The Impact of ‘Blind’ Auditions on Female Musicians. American Economic Review, 90(4) (September), 715-741. doi:10.1257/aer.90.4.715