“We’re Comparing Multiple Candidates” Sounds Normal, But Here’s What It Might Really Mean

The phrase "we’re comparing multiple candidates" is often used in discussions related to hiring or promotion, but experts have found that there can be more going on behind the scenes. Many companies use this phrase to explain why there is a delay in giving a clear answer, but experts have found that there can actually be something more going on in the company’s decision-making process.

According to research by AIHR, this can actually relate to something known as contrast bias, which is a mental pattern in which one person is compared to others instead of being compared to some other standard. This means that a candidate’s chances can actually change depending on who the other person is. This challenges the idea that decisions are made on merit.

What is contrast bias in simple terms?

Contrast bias is a psychological phenomenon that has been extensively studied in the past. It has been observed that when humans make judgments based on comparisons rather than absolute standards, their judgments can be swayed by these comparisons.


According to AIHR, contrast bias can lead to inconsistent hiring decisions because the candidates are not being judged as individual entities; rather, they are being judged as part of a sequence of candidates. This can lead to a situation in which time is as important as skills.

As CultureMonkey points out, when there is no system in place to assess candidates, interviewers rely on their memories and instincts.

Why does this happen in workplaces?

Experts claim that such a trend is not always a result of a deliberate approach. Rather, it can be a result of how our brains work when we are under a certain level of information overload. This is because hiring managers often have to deal with a large number of candidates within a short time.

CultureMonkey also emphasizes that when decision-makers feel information-overloaded or time-stressed, they tend to rely more on mental shortcuts than on a careful evaluation approach. Such mental shortcuts include comparing different people to each other, not to set benchmarks.

The lack of standardized interview processes also makes contrast bias more difficult to avoid. This is because, when no set systems of evaluation exist, such processes tend to be subjective.

How it affects employees and candidates

For the candidates and employees involved, this process may prove to be a frustrating and confusing experience. When a person feels that their assessment is based on others and not on their own work and performance, it may lead to a decrease in self-confidence and trust.

According to AIHR, individuals who are subjected to such a process of comparison may end up feeling undervalued and demotivated, as their special abilities are not being considered. Such a process may also lead to a decrease in interest and engagement from these candidates.

Furthermore, such a process may also influence the long-term relationship between the candidates and the company. When candidates feel that they are being subjected to an unfair process of assessment and comparison, they may not return to work for the company or may not refer others to the company.

Impact on workplace culture

The consequences of contrast bias can even spread to the entire team. When employees feel that promotions and salary increases depend on comparisons, it can lead to competition among team members.

According to the AIHR, this can lead to low trust among the team and the leadership. Team members might start to wonder if the recognition is based on merit. It can even lead to high turnover rates.

If the organization does not address these behaviors, it can lead to a situation where the entire organization is plagued by low motivation among employees.

What can companies do to reduce bias?

According to research, structured approaches are the most effective in eliminating contrast bias. CultureMonkey suggests the use of structured questions for each candidate, as well as scoring systems. This way, all candidates can be assessed on the same criteria.

Another approach is blind evaluation, where possible. In addition, the order of the interviews should be rotated. All these techniques help in avoiding decisions made on relative impressions, not absolute evaluations.

The use of training is also highlighted by AIHR. If HR professionals and managers are made aware of cognitive biases, they can easily eliminate them in the real world.

What candidates can keep in mind?

Although a candidate cannot change hiring systems, they can improve their performance in these systems. According to experts, a candidate should concentrate on expressing unique strengths and matching answers to the position's needs.

Asking for feedback and evaluation criteria can also help a candidate gain more information.

According to AIHR, knowing how hiring decisions are made can allow a candidate to concentrate on what is important, avoiding unseen comparisons.

The bigger picture

The phrase "we’re comparing multiple candidates" is seemingly harmless, but research has shown that it can actually reveal more complex patterns in the way decisions are made.

Contrast bias is often unconscious, yet it can have considerable implications for fairness, trust, and workplace culture. By becoming more aware of this pattern, organizations can work towards more equitable systems, and job seekers can gain insight into the forces at work.