Screening bias check
Set the screening rules for an applicant pool and check the selection rate of each group against the four-fifths rule.
“Equivalents” also accepts account management and client success, the same work under other names. Tap any applicant to see which rule stopped them.
Example data. 40 made-up applicants for a customer success role. The ring marks people a hiring manager rated able to do the job after reading the full resume.
Women selected
15%
3 of 20
Men selected
40%
8 of 20
Impact ratio
0.37
Lowest rate (Women) ÷ highest
Strong people screened out
16
3 weaker ones passed
Selection rate by group
Women are selected at 0.37 times the highest rate, below four-fifths. That is generally regarded as evidence of adverse impact.
The black line on each bar is four-fifths of the highest group's rate.
Where the applicants land
Passes the screen11
Screened out29
Applicant W02Screened out: Career breakStrong candidate
Woman, 6 years in the field, has a degree, a career break over 6 months, resume says “customer success”.
The rule, from the source
“A selection rate for any race, sex, or ethnic group which is less than four-fifths (4/5) (or eighty percent) of the rate for the group with the highest rate will generally be regarded by the Federal enforcement agencies as evidence of adverse impact, while a greater than four-fifths rate will generally not be regarded by Federal enforcement agencies as evidence of adverse impact.”
Uniform Guidelines on Employee Selection Procedures (1978), adopted by the US EEOC with the Departments of Labor and Justice, 29 CFR 1607.4(D). The same section says smaller differences can still be adverse impact, and bigger ones may not be when the numbers are small and not statistically significant. A pool of 40 is small, so treat the ratio as a reason to look closer, not a verdict. It is a rule of thumb, not legal advice.