One of the more interesting trends in the 2nd half of 2021 has been the tremendous difficulties employers have had in finding workers.  Throughout the world, a combination of early retirements, stimulus payments, the “great resignation”, and Brexit (in the UK) has resulted in a real scramble for talent.

Indeed, earlier in the summer, 91% of small business owners complained that there were insufficient qualified applicants.  A report from Harvard Business School suggests that part of the problem is that up to 27 million people represent a “hidden workforce” who would be fully capable and willing to fill these jobs if only they were given the chance.

Opening our eyes

Instead, our recruitment practices often mean that this diverse group of people is overlooked.  The authors highlight how this “hidden workforce” consists of a wide range of people, including people without a degree, those with a criminal conviction, military veterans, those with gaps in their work history, and someone who is not in employment, education, or training (NEET).

They suggest that most of the automated systems companies use to filter applicants result in people in these groups being bypassed for vacancies and put onto the scrap pile.  The researchers strive to not only identify this huge group of people, but also to break them down into more identifiable chunks so that employers can better work to get them back into the workforce.

The situation is often compounded by the use of artificial intelligence-based systems to help firms winnow down applications to a more manageable number.  Such systems are used by nearly all companies, but in their attempt to get as many qualified candidates as quickly and cheaply as possible, they often throw out many perfectly qualified people.

The authors argue that while companies are often aware that their approach results in many suitable candidates falling by the wayside, their desire for efficiency tends to override any attempts to make a fair and equitable system.  There is also little real comprehension that it is their approach that is largely resulting in the talent shortage we’re currently witnessing.

A risky approach?

The situation is often compounded by the lack of any real and meaningful experience of working with the groups that make up the hidden workforce.  This then creates the impression that hiring them today will be risky and employers have various negative assumptions about them, whether that’s their cost, the difficulty in onboarding them, their poor productivity, or even that they will harm profitability.

Positively, the analysis found that when companies actually made a commitment to changing things, they found that these concerns were largely irrelevant.  Indeed, people from the hidden workforce were often more productive and more likely to stay at the organization.  That’s a key point here.  It’s not a charitable choice to tap into this hidden workforce but a rational business decision.

This is key, as too often today engaging with these groups is seen as part of good corporate citizenry rather than simply rational and logical behavior.  So long as it’s not deemed normal business activity then the authors believe employers will continue to struggle to attract the people they need.