Diversified committees in hiring processes: Lab evidence on group dynamics

Abstract

In recent years, committee quotas have been introduced to combat the underrepresentation of women in male-stereotyped environments. However, the lack of clarity surrounding in-group preferences and gender differences in group dynamics calls into question the inclusion of women as a solution to the gender gap in labour market outcomes. In this paper, I provide experimental evidence to show: a) how the gender composition of committees affects the probability of female candidates being recruited in a hiring process; and b) how men and women behave in group dynamics as a mechanism explaining the outcome of the policy. I designed a laboratory experiment in which groups of three subjects had to jointly select two candidates from a pool of six to perform a task. Female candidates’ probability of success did not improve as the number of women in the committee increased. I found that male-majority committees were the most beneficial for female candidates. In these groups, men and women exhibited a similar level of voice and influence during deliberations, proposing both male and female candidates for recruitment. Conversely, female-majority groups were the most detrimental to female candidates. Women in female-majority groups exhibited a similar level of voice, but men, who proposed more male candidates, were more influential, which limited the contribution of women. The paper suggests that having more women in the committee does not necessarily benefit female candidates and calls for caution when it comes to designing policies for equality in the labour market.