SECTION 3: The Application Form and Process.
Please select to move back to this section’s menu of tiles.
Anonymising applications can promote the EDI of your application process in multiple ways. More diverse applicants may be encouraged to apply if they know their application will be judged on merit, not based on whether they are known by the reviewers or come from specific countries or institutions.
However, there are some drawbacks to anonymisation:
A useful solution is to use a two-stage review process of ‘sequential anonymised-deanonymised review’. Here, there is an initial anonymised review of aspects of the application for which anonymisation makes sense. Once reviewers submit scores on this anonymous part of the application, scores are locked before aspects of the application containing identifying information is released to reviewers.
A two-stage review process can be onerous on the reviewers and those creating and managing the application process if not automated. An automated process ensures that the deanonymised second part of the application is automatically sent to the reviewer upon receipt of their scores/comments on the first anonymous part. Handily, you can use a simple Power Automate tool developed by the CES Transformation Fund team to automate this process.
Please select to move back to this section’s menu of tiles.
Consider collecting basic EDI data to determine whether your EDI efforts have paid off, and whether the EDI data may be used to enhance your review process.