Career progression is often reliant on a metric - some form of measurement that assesses performance, undertaken during a job interview, or perhaps an appraisal. But a single metric can hide a lot of information, and it may not always be fair. This case study considers three individuals who have applied for a position in a company: one is a neurotypical individual who is an all-rounder, and the other two individuals are neurodivergent.. The hiring managers discussing the applicants’ performance, may or may not be exhibiting unconscious bias.
This scenario depicts how the framing of questions and personal biases of interviewers can impact the interviews e.g. biases against gender, age, race, mental health. The two main characters (Claire and Michelle) are conducting an interview process and it becomes clear that they are not entirely happy with any of the candidates, but feel they need to make a decision rather than go through the process again, due to other work pressures.
This case study has been created to tease out, what is on the surface, straight forward interactions with colleagues. Do you consider the consequences of your reaction when involved in these types of conversations?
Sam, an actuary, is having an off day when his day starts badly with travel disruption and meetings are re-arranged at short notice. Allie is more sympathetic than other colleagues. However, the following day we see a different side to Sam when things have gone more smoothly. Allie values Sam’s amazing attention to detail and had asked Sam to check a report before it is submitted to a client. Sam, true to form, spots an error which was missed by his actuarial colleagues.
Diverse Minds
Four colleagues discuss the recruitment of new members to an internal working team. But the line between appropriate comments and inappropriate comments seem very blurred, sometimes crossing the line completely.
An insurance company has invited an actuarial consultancy to a meeting to pitch for a climate change and sustainability project. Through a lack of preparation, in-built biases and preconceptions by the consultancy staff, the meeting goes from bad to worse.
Peter, a junior actuary in the actuarial department of an insurance company, has recently moved to the Asset and Liability Modelling (ALM) team. They are a very close team and Peter is having some difficulty settling in and feeling part of the team. Peter comes up with an innovative idea around managing the firm’s currency risk and shares this with his boss, Fern. The idea then gets presented to the Asset Liability Committee but it has come across as Fern’s and the others’ idea.
That was my idea too!
Keith, an actuary, sees a post on social media which enrages him. He’s deeply passionate about the impact that COVID-19 has had on our everyday lives and loved ones, and attempts to correct the comments as he feels ‘it’s the right thing to do’, but lets his emotions run away with him. Others get involved in the online exchange and a journalist picks up on the thread and uses the comments that Keith has posted.
