What Is Recency Bias And How Can Managers Avoid It?

Recency bias can affect judgment in many ways, from gambling on the stock market to the way you interact with people around you.

In this article, we will look at what recency bias is, and why it should be avoided when managing staff - particularly when it comes to completing performance reviews.

We will also look at ways that managers can avoid recency bias when they are dealing with employees and staff to make sure that reviews are fair representations of performance over a certain period.

What is recency bias?

Recency bias is what happens when the events of the recent past affect how you think events in the future will be. This is sometimes called availability bias, and it is completely natural. As humans, accessing recent events in our memory is much easier.

Recency bias is an unconscious bias - it isn't something that we will be actively thinking about when we are interacting with others and the world around us. It is similar to other types of bias that can affect the way we interact, such as the idea that the first thing we hear about something must be the most important fact about it (primacy effect) or where the earlier we hear about something, the more true it must be (serial position effect).

Recency bias - or basing our perception on the most recent thing that has happened - can affect the way we think about a certain person, place, or event. A popular example outside the world of work that is often used is in the financial industry; someone who is trading on the stock exchange might look at the recent (rising) price of a stock and buy into it because of their recency bias.

The most recent movements might not be a good representation of the overall performance of the stock, which could lead to losing money because all the available information is not being taken into account.

Why is it important to be aware of recency bias?

In the HR world, or in management, recency bias needs to be avoided.

It can have an effect on every interaction with staff, peers, and other managers - impacting everything from hiring decisions to disciplinary action, and it can lead to unfair decisions being made.

This is especially true when it comes to performance reviews, as a staff member might be held back from getting the recognition they deserve because of a singular, recent event.

Objectivity is essential when looking at the way an employee has performed over time. Basing a performance review on something that has just happened is also a really small sample size which might not be representative of the full year (or however long the performance review period is).

Our recent experience of a person will impact the way we interact with them - again, this is natural but it is part of the unconscious bias that might be detrimental to relationships. Being aware of the effect that recency bias can have on a management relationship with an employee, and tackling it properly, will ensure a fair outcome whether in hiring, in performance reviews, or in disciplinary processes.

Examples of recency bias in the workplace

There are several different ways that recency bias might have an effect on workplace dynamics, right from the very beginning of the employee lifecycle.

Hiring Decisions

Hiring can be a place where unconscious bias is rife, and recency bias might have an effect here in particular.

If managers and recruiters have had a certain experience with a certain type of applicant, whether that be based on experience, a certain place of education, or any other criteria.

If a type of applicant has not been successful, or caused a certain issue, recruiters might not want to entertain a new applicant who were similar - and this could mean missing out on the best candidates. The same is true of the opposite, of course - recent positive experiences might bias the recruiters towards the wrong people.

Performance Reviews

Performance reviews should be a complete picture of an employee's performance over a certain period of time, the good, the bad, and everything in between.

If a manager only uses the recent events of the employee's career to complete a performance review, it could be an unfair overview and lead to some terrible results.

As an example, if a well-performing employee was not performing as highly recently, so perhaps missed a target this month, or was involved in some other issue in the workplace, a review based on recency bias would be more negative than perhaps the person deserved.

In the same way, an underperforming employee might have a spark of genius about something at the end of the year, and thanks to recency bias they might be offered a bonus or a promotion that they actually did not deserve.

Promotions

Promotions are often connected to performance reviews, and it is obvious that recency bias could lead to the wrong person being offered a promotion, with long-lasting effects.

Recency bias (and other unconscious biases) should be avoided when thinking about internal mobility, because in an ideal world the promotion should only be offered to the person who is the best at the job and is most likely to be more successful in the future.

Project Assignments

Choosing the best person to take on a project should be based on their skills and abilities, not on something as short-sighted as their recent performance.

An employee might have done something really well the last time they were asked, but that doesn't mean that they will be in the best position to complete a different project.

Disciplinary Actions

An employee that usually underperforms but has a good day could avoid needed disciplinary or support actions, whereas a usually well-performing employee that is suddenly not reaching targets might be the focus of disciplinary processes.

This is unfair on both sides, and only by avoiding recency bias can this disparity be addressed.

How to avoid recency bias

As mentioned, recency bias is perfectly normal, and as humans this behavior has had some benefits to us - providing us with knowledge of something being dangerous (a nettle leaf stings you, you won't touch it again). However, there are ways that we can plan to avoid recency bias when we are dealing with our employees and colleagues in the workplace.

1. Keep detailed records

A detailed record-keeping system gives managers something to refer to when they are dealing with an employee.

These records should include both positive and negative feedback from other employees, from managers, and even from customers.

Other records that you might want to keep include things like details of targets and KPIs, any training that has been completed, and any other details about their employment and performance.

2. Use a performance review system

Keeping all these records on paper might be a problem - it can become unmanageable when there are many employees to review.

Using some sort of HR information system (HRIS) will make this much easier, because everything will be in one place and relatively easy to access.

The HRIS can be used to collate this information, and then it can also be used to record details about performance reviews, personal detail changes, and all the other data that is used.

3. Use multiple sources of feedback

Avoiding recency bias can also be achieved by getting data from other sources too. This might include facts and figures (like sales data) and subjective information from people that are involved with the employee.

360 reviews are essentially performance reviews that are completed by colleagues, peers, and even customers of the employee, giving the manager a more broad overview of the way the employee is viewed by others.

They can be particularly useful when checking to see if there are any areas where unconscious bias like recency bias might be an issue.

4. Evaluate performance based on goals

Turning what could be a subjective review into something more objective is easier if there is quantifiable data available to use - and goals or other Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) might be a good start.

With targets to achieve and other metrics to measure, any review can be boosted with objective data that shows whether an employee is performing as they are expected to, and where they are exceeding expectations.

This also shows if there are any areas where the employee might be underperforming, and these can be addressed in a multitude of ways.

5. Conduct regular check-ins

Performance reviews in particular should not just be something that is done once a year; while the period covered by the review might be 12 months, ideally you should be checking in for updates at least every quarter if not once a month.

At these meetings, goals can be set and adjusted, and any issues that might crop up in terms of short-term performance can be looked at before they become an issue.

6. Take time to reflect

Recency bias can be tied in with what is sometimes called a ‘gut reaction’, and it can make decision-making difficult.

Reacting without taking time to think about the situation can affect the way you approach a problem - and this can be hugely detrimental to building successful working relationships with employees.

One of the best things that you can do to fight against the presence of recency bias in your dealing with employees is to take some time to reflect, to make sure that you are being fair, balanced, and unbiased in your approach.

Final thoughts

As a manager, avoiding those biases that can affect your decision-making can be difficult - but first, you need to know what the bias is and why it is detrimental to your relationship building and how you deal with individuals and situations.

With recency bias in particular, the best thing that you can do to avoid ‘tunnel vision’ and focus on only the most recent events is to keep detailed records of achievements, complaints, and everything you can about an employee to had, make use of HR software to keep track, and get feedback from other sources.

Avoiding recency bias will ensure that you are able to fairly appraise your staff members, based on their long-term performance and their ability, rather than just something that they did last week.