Address

(Tower 2, Level 20, Darling Park)

201 Sussex Street

Sydney, NSW, 2000 Australia

Get in touch
Follow us
Addressing The Hidden Biases in Executive Hiring
Debbie Morrison • October 24, 2023

In the corridors of corporate power, the recruitment and selection of executives has traditionally been a carefully curated process. While this careful approach is commendable, many executive teams and boardrooms still lack the rich tapestry of gender, racial, and cultural diversities that their companies profess, potentially jeopardising the richness of diversity and the competitive advantage it brings to leadership teams.


For decades, businesses have hailed the importance of diversity, and the values of equal representation and inclusivity. While overt discrimination might no longer be as rampant, the subtle nemesis of unconscious bias still plays a pivotal role. As we unravel the fabric of executive hiring processes, we discover hidden biases which can significantly impact business growth, performance, and the cultivation of a diverse leadership team.


Unconscious Bias in Executive Hiring: What It Is and Its Implications

At its core, unconscious bias refers to the preferences and prejudices we hold without awareness. It's an inherent human trait, driven by our brain's need to categorise and make quick judgments based on past experiences. 


What’s alarming is that such biases, more often than not, aren’t the result of conscious discrimination. They stem from deep-seated stereotypes or societal norms that we've absorbed over time. When left unchecked and translated to hiring, these biases can have detrimental effects, leading to a homogenous leadership team, which in turn has implications for business growth and performance.


A study by
Harvard Business Review highlighted that despite equal qualifications, a candidate's gender, name, or even hobbies can influence hiring decisions. 1 When biases creep into executive hiring, they limit the talent pool, skewing it towards candidates that 'look' or 'feel' right, rather than those who are objectively the best for the job.


From a business perspective, this is concerning.
McKinsey's landmark study found that companies with more diverse executive teams are 25% more likely to outperform their peers on profitability. When companies overlook diverse candidates due to hidden biases, they're not just bypassing talent—they're missing out on potential profits and innovative ideas.


How Boards Can Identify and Address Bias

Self-Awareness and Training: The first step to combating unconscious bias is recognizing its existence. Boards must commit to regular training that highlights the different forms of bias, from affinity bias (preferring those similar to ourselves) to confirmation bias (focusing on information that confirms our existing beliefs).


Diverse Hiring Panels:
Having a diverse group of individuals involved in the hiring process can help counteract individual biases. The broader the range of perspectives, the less likely a single biassed view will dominate.


Standardised Interview Processes:
Instead of free-form interviews, boards can employ a standardised set of questions and evaluation metrics. This reduces the influence of a candidate's background or extraneous details.


Anonymous Application Processes:
Some companies have started using processes where names, genders, and other potentially bias-triggering information are removed from applications.


Preventing Bias: Proactive Measures

While identifying biases is crucial, prevention is better than cure. Boards can employ the following strategies:


Diversify the Decision-making Team:
Ensuring that the team responsible for executive hires is diverse can help bring in multiple perspectives and reduce the impact of individual biases.


Standardise Interviews:
By asking every candidate the same set of questions in the same order, boards can ensure comparability and reduce the impact of biases on the decision-making process.


Use Data-driven Metrics:
Instead of relying on gut feelings or intuition, boards can emphasise the use of data-driven metrics to assess a candidate's potential and fit.


The Role of Executive Search Firms in Limiting Bias

While internal measures are essential, sometimes, the inherent biases are so deep-seated that an external perspective becomes invaluable. Executive search firms have the expertise and frameworks to source and evaluate candidates objectively. Partnering with a renowned executive search firm can help in the following ways:


Expertise and Objectivity:
These firms bring a level of expertise and objectivity to the hiring process, ensuring that the best candidates are shortlisted based solely on merit.

Wide-ranging Networks: They have extensive networks, allowing for a more diverse pool of candidates than a company might be able to source independently.


Bias-free Technologies:
Many top-tier search firms employ advanced AI technologies that help in unbiased candidate sourcing and assessment.


A study from
Harvard Business Review underscored the value of search firms, noting that companies that used such firms had leadership teams that were 30% more diverse than those who relied solely on internal recruitment processes.


The Urgency of Addressing Bias

The evidence is irrefutable. Addressing and eliminating bias in executive hiring isn’t just an ethical issue—it's a business concern. By limiting the pool from which leaders are drawn, companies can unintentionally stifle innovation, reduce market understanding, and even decrease financial returns.


For boards, the onus lies in not just recognising and preventing biases but in proactively seeking diverse leadership. Boards and executive teams must be introspective, willing to challenge their beliefs and processes. By doing so, they're not just promoting fairness but ensuring that their companies remain at the forefront of global business. So, the next time you sit in that boardroom, remember: diversity isn’t just a checkbox. It's a competitive advantage. 


By John Elliott March 24, 2025
Emotional intelligence is one of the most valued traits in executive leadership today.  It’s also one of the most misunderstood. In interviews, every candidate knows how to speak about empathy, collaboration, and “bringing people on the journey.” But when does that emotional intelligence start to look more like emotional avoidance? If you’re hiring into a senior role in consumer goods or food and beverage manufacturing, this distinction matters. Hiring someone who avoids hard conversations risks building a culture that performs around problems, not through them. The leaders delivering the best outcomes in 2025 understand how to build trust and rapport — without dodging the accountability that comes with real leadership. Emotional Intelligence: What It Gets Right In complex, fast-paced industries like FMCG and food production, leaders need more than technical expertise. They must influence, de-escalate tension, manage change, and build alignment across functions. That’s where emotional intelligence shines. High-EQ leaders are more likely to: Retain talent through strong, trust-based relationships Remain composed in high-stakes environments Reduce conflict through proactive, clear communication Drive psychological safety while still pushing for results The research backs this up. According to a 2024 EHL Insights report , emotionally intelligent leaders improve employee satisfaction, engagement, and collaboration — all essential in manufacturing settings where coordination between departments is critical. But there’s a fine line between emotional intelligence and emotional overcorrection. When Emotional Intelligence Becomes Emotional Avoidance The risk is subtle: leaders who over-index on empathy may begin to avoid the discomfort of conflict altogether. That looks like: Letting underperformance linger to “keep the peace” Over-relying on collaboration instead of making firm decisions Avoiding direct feedback Prioritising harmony at the expense of clarity A 2024 Forbes article described how emotionally avoidant leaders — despite good intentions — often undermine the very culture they’re trying to protect. Accountability erodes, decisions slow down, and high performers become disengaged. We’ve seen this play out in executive search mandates across the sector. On paper, a candidate may appear ideal: emotionally intelligent, highly personable, well-liked. But dig deeper, and a pattern emerges — reluctance to address performance issues, vague language around past team challenges, and a track record of avoiding direct confrontation. That’s not emotional intelligence. That’s fear, dressed as empathy. Emotional Intelligence Is a Must — But It’s Not the Full Picture More organisations are making emotional intelligence a key leadership trait in hiring — and for good reason. In high-change environments, emotionally intelligent leaders: Build trust across teams quickly Navigate transformation without losing people along the way Stay composed under pressure Handle interpersonal complexity with clarity But some of the most costly mis-hires we see come from leaders who present as highly empathetic, but struggle to lead through tension. Not because they lack EQ — but because they confuse it with keeping everyone comfortable. The difference? The leaders delivering the best outcomes in 2024 and 2025 are doing both: Holding people accountable while building engagement Delivering hard feedback without defensiveness Balancing calm with courage These are the leaders who retain high performers, protect standards, and still earn trust across the business. Hiring Outcomes Are Better When EQ Is Tested in Context The most effective hiring processes we’re seeing in the market today aren’t just asking, “Is this leader emotionally intelligent?” They’re asking: Can this person hold accountability and empathy at the same time? Have they delivered under pressure without letting performance slide? Do they create safe cultures that are also high-performing? The difference in outcomes is clear: More resilient leadership teams Better cultural fit Fewer surprises post-placement What to Look for in Executive Interviews Hiring emotionally intelligent leaders isn’t just about what they say — it’s about how they’ve acted in real moments of challenge. The most effective hiring panels are getting beyond rehearsed narratives by asking sharper questions: To probe real emotional intelligence: “Tell me about a time you had to lead a team through a change that wasn’t popular.” “How do you approach a conversation when someone on your team is underperforming?” “Describe a time you disagreed with your CEO or board. What did you do?” Watch for signals: Are they clear and specific, or vague and diplomatic? Do they show respect and resolve? Do they accept responsibility, or redirect it elsewhere? In reference checks, ask: “How did they manage pressure or uncertainty?” “Were they able to deliver difficult feedback directly?” “Did they avoid difficult decisions in the name of team cohesion?” When emotional intelligence is genuine, it shows up in results — not just relationships. Why This Matters Now Organisations in the consumer goods and food manufacturing sectors are undergoing constant disruption — from digitisation to regulatory shifts to cost pressures. In this environment, leadership soft skills aren’t optional. But it’s not enough to hire likeable leaders. The ones delivering real impact are those who bring empathy and edge. They’re able to sit with discomfort, hold the mirror up, and still bring people with them. That’s what true emotional intelligence looks like in 2025. So when you’re hiring your next senior leader, don’t just ask if they care. Ask if they can care and confront — with courage, with clarity, and with conviction. Because your culture doesn’t need more harmony. It needs more truth.
By John Elliott March 18, 2025
AI is Changing Business—So Must Its Leaders
Share by: