Cognitive Biases in Recruitment
What failed hires really teach us
“We hire for skills, but we fire for attitude.”
During our recent workshop, 15 HR professionals from diverse industries (IT, consulting, retail, tech, services…) shared a common insight: despite structured interviews, tools, and tests, our cognitive biases still heavily influence hiring decisions, and often make us overlook the best talents.
Learning from past recruitment mistakes
Recruitment isn’t an exact science, and sometimes, failure is the best teacher. Participants shared real-life cases:
-
- Technically brilliant candidates who turned out to have poor attitudes or professionalism.
- Rigid recruitment processes that excluded atypical profiles.
- Cultural fit overemphasized at the expense of skills, or the opposite.
👉 Looking deeper, one pattern emerge: most of these recruitment mistakes could have been avoided if biases had been identified earlier.
Understanding cognitive biases in hiring
Our brain loves shortcuts, they help us make quick decisions. But in recruitment, those shortcuts can distort judgment. Here are some of the most common cognitive biases:
-
- Halo effect: one positive trait makes us forget the weaknesses.
- Anchoring bias: the first impression weighs too heavily.
- Confirmation bias: we seek to validate our initial opinion.
- Affinity bias: we favor those who resemble us.
These biases aren’t “bad” by nature, but they must be recognized and challenged.
Cultural fit vs. experience: which matters most?
“A successful hire isn’t always the one who ticks every box.”
During the workshop, we explored practical cases. We recently worked on a mission where a former military officer became a District Manager in the consumer services sector. He didn’t have the required university degree, but his internal career progression, discipline from his military background, and entrepreneurial mindset made him stand out.
👉 Looking beyond the résumé revealed real potential and motivation to outweigh experience.
How to overcome cognitive biases in recruitment
The group identified several actionable ways to make hiring fairer and more human:
-
- Challenge the need before posting the job: what are we really looking for?
- Separate must-have skills from those that can be learned.
- Seek multiple perspectives: co-interview or cross-review to reduce blind spots.
- Think long term: assess the candidate’s growth potential.
- Write inclusive job ads to attract diverse profiles.
👉 In short: slow down to choose better. Because hiring in a rush often means hiring twice.
The recruiter’s dual responsibility
Recruitment isn’t just about choosing for the company — it’s also about protecting the candidate from a poor fit. The role of the recruiter has two faces:
-
- Ensure the right cultural and human match for the company.
- Offer candidates an honest experience aligned with their aspirations.
Towards a more conscious and human-centric recruitment
This workshop acted as a mirror, reflecting our biases, habits, and our ability to evolve. Because the goal isn’t to eliminate biases (that’s impossible), but to recognize, name, and challenge them.
And this is precisely where the GRAM, our exclusive aspirations tool, comes into play. Based on seven motivational profiles, the GRAM goes beyond the CV to uncover what truly drives a candidate: their motivations, values, adaptability, and collaboration style.
By using GRAM, recruiters can make intuition measurable, assess cultural fit more accurately, and create stronger, more human, and more sustainable matches between people and companies.
Recruiting is about seeing beyond appearances. It’s about betting on potential, culture, and attitude. It’s about putting the human back at the heart of recruitment.
