Actually test your bias objectively and receive feedback.
EX1: If you only add people to your team that pass your interview process you never test if it’s actually effective.
If you replace that with say a score card to rate people on various metrics then compare actual preformace with your metrics then you have some feedback to improve the system.
EX2: For a one time event like a music / art / writing contest. Remove the bias inducing elements by just judging the output.
Many people do higher hundreds of people. Finding good metrics for each job is harder, but large organizations with reasonable turnover can have a lot of data to work with.
Comments
Actually test your bias objectively and receive feedback.
EX1: If you only add people to your team that pass your interview process you never test if it’s actually effective.
If you replace that with say a score card to rate people on various metrics then compare actual preformace with your metrics then you have some feedback to improve the system.
EX2: For a one time event like a music / art / writing contest. Remove the bias inducing elements by just judging the output.
You would have to hire hundreds before the things that hiring processes can't test for get smoothed out.
Many people do higher hundreds of people. Finding good metrics for each job is harder, but large organizations with reasonable turnover can have a lot of data to work with.
You can't do this in respect of every level of metacognition, so this loops back to you needing to be aware of an issue prior to testing for it.