Recruitment processes have long relied on traditional methods like job descriptions, academic credentials, and standardized qualifications. While these methods offer a sense of structure and predictability, they often come with unintended consequences: the exclusion of diverse talent, particularly those from disadvantaged backgrounds.

This exclusion reinforces biases, preventing organizations from uncovering ‘diamonds in the rough’—people with immense potential who do not fit the conventional mold.

Take the story of Gary Stevenson as an example.

A Diamond in the Rough

Gary Stevenson was born into poverty in Ilford, Essex, in 1987. His upbringing was riddled with challenges that would disqualify him from most job opportunities on paper. At the age of 16, he was expelled from school for dealing drugs—a background that would disqualify him from many job descriptions that seek “clean records” or “polished candidates”. At this point, many recruiters might have already judged him and moved on to the next resumé.

But Gary’s story doesn’t end there. After being expelled, he didn’t spiral downward as many would expect. Instead, he completed his A-levels and enrolled at the London School of Economics in 2005. There, he developed a sharp understanding of inequality remarking that “a lot of rich people expect poor people to be stupid”. This insight would serve him well in the world of finance, where he would go on to challenge not just economic systems but the biases and structures that uphold inequality.

By 2011, Gary had risen to be Citibank’s most profitable trader globally, retiring from trading at the age of 27 and using his resources to fight against inequality. His journey from poverty to Wall Street success is a testament to the power of potential—but it’s also a critique of the systems that could so easily have excluded him.

Gary’s Breakthrough: A Card Game

Gary’s entry into Citibank wasn’t through the front door of traditional recruitment methods—he didn’t apply through a standard job description. Instead, he got in through what he describes as “the back door”. Citibank ran a card game competition across five UK universities, and the overall winner would be offered an internship. It was a unique assessment designed to evaluate strategic thinking, risk management, and decision-making—skills often missed by conventional academic qualifications.

Gary won the card game, and that was his ticket to Citibank. A traditional job description with a requirement like “degree in finance” or “three years of relevant experience” would likely have excluded people like Gary. As he sardonically put it, “I don’t play the oboe”—a sharp social commentary on how certain backgrounds and cultures are often privileged in elite hiring practices, while others are excluded. The card game was Gary’s leveling up moment, a rare instance where his potential was seen beyond his resumé.

Traditional Recruitment: A Barrier to Diversity

Gary’s story isn’t just an interesting anecdote; it underscores a fundamental flaw in how traditional recruitment methods exclude high-potential candidates, particularly from minority and disadvantaged groups. Job descriptions that require specific academic credentials, a clean career trajectory, or experience in a particular industry often screen out individuals who could bring unique perspectives and skills to the table.

This exclusion disproportionately affects minority candidates who may not have had the same educational or career opportunities as others. In the US, for example, around 32% of Black adults and 20% of Hispanic adults hold a bachelor’s degree, compared to 45% of White adults. When job descriptions list “must be educated to degree level” as a requirement, they automatically exclude a significant portion of underrepresented candidates before they even get a chance to showcase their skills.

The reliance on academic qualifications is especially ironic when considering that many organizations now recognize that soft skills—like critical thinking, adversity quotient, and adaptability—are far more indicative of long-term success than specific technical knowledge. With the half-life of hard skills rapidly decreasing due to technological advancements, it makes even less sense to use academic degrees as a gatekeeping mechanism.

The Role of Unconscious Bias

Traditional recruitment methods also reinforce unconscious biases. Studies have shown that hiring managers tend to favor candidates who share similar backgrounds or qualifications as themselves—a phenomenon known as “similarity bias”. This means candidates from elite schools, with polished resumés and conventional career paths, are more likely to advance in the hiring process, while those from less traditional backgrounds are filtered out.

In Gary Stevenson’s case, had Citibank used traditional job requirements, he might never have made it past the first screening round or would have self-selected out. But the card game—a unique, skills-based assessment—leveled the playing field. It evaluated his true potential based on the abilities relevant to the role rather than on his background, education, or past mistakes.

The challenge for HR professionals and hiring managers today is to recognize these biases and actively seek ways to mitigate them in the recruitment process. Tools like skills-based assessments—such as Citibank’s card game—can play a pivotal role in uncovering talent that might otherwise be missed.

Why Aren’t We All Running Our Own “Card Games”?

So, why are companies still relying on outdated job descriptions that exclude diverse talent right up front? Why are we still clinging to academic qualifications as the gold standard when it comes to identifying potential, even though many of these qualifications are tied to privilege?

Why, when the half-life of hard skills is trending down to one year, are we still using hard skills as the leading determinant for talent acquisition when soft skills are already the basis of internal promotion (i.e. talent management)?

It’s time to rethink the way we assess talent. In the modern workplace, assessments that focus on soft skills such as being self-directed, curious, and consistent are far more valuable than a degree from a top-tier school.

Companies need to start introducing these skills-based assessments early in the recruitment process. These assessments can help identify the “diamonds in the rough”—individuals with the potential to succeed but who don’t fit the conventional mold. And they can help organizations build more diverse and inclusive teams, which in turn drives innovation and better decision-making.

There’s another benefit to using the assessment up front. Business speed. Traditional hiring cycles are too long. The pace of business change in 2024 is already 5x what it was in 2020. Getting quickly to a short list for interview based on soft skills and an up front assessment takes huge chunks out of the recruitment cycle allowing HR to enable the pace of change rather than inhibit it.

The Pathfinder Approach

At The Pathfinder Company, we believe in finding and developing these diamonds in the rough. Our Pathfinder assessment is designed to identify strategic thinkers, innovators, and disruptors—regardless of their background, education, or prior experience. By focusing on skills and potential, rather than rigid qualifications, we help organizations find the best talent for the future.

If you’re still relying on traditional recruitment methods, you could be missing out on your next Gary Stevenson. Instead of filtering out potential trailblazers with outdated criteria, why not introduce your own version of a card game—an up-front assessment that levels the playing field and identifies the true Pathfinders?