The framework

The 16 archetypes of Inclusive Recruitment

Every result in the What kind of hirer are you? self-check resolves to a four-letter code and one of sixteen archetypes — from The Talent Gardener to The Conveyor Belt . They sit where Why you hire meets How you hire.

Read your code

Your four letters describe how you show up across four dimensions. The first two place you on Why you hire; the last two on How you hire.

Orientation H Human-led  ·  C Compliance-led
Measure of success X Experience & outcomes  ·  E Speed & cost
What you select for T Potential & fit  ·  P Pedigree & past
How you assess S Structured & fair  ·  G Gut feel

The map

Rows: Why you hire. Columns: How you hire. Your type is where they meet.

Fair & future-focused
Intuitive talent-spotter
Rigorous but conventional
The mirror-hirer
Purpose-led
HXTS The Talent Gardener HXTG The Warm Intuition HXPS The Polished Idealist HXPG The Charmed Mentor
Diligent improver
CXTS The Diligent Assessor CXTG The Procedural Punter CXPS The Risk-Averse Gatekeeper CXPG The Cautious Pedigree Picker
Warm but rushed
HETS The Kind Optimiser HETG The Hurried Humanist HEPS The Efficient Traditionalist HEPG The Friendly Fast-Tracker
The processing plant
CETS The Streamlined Screener CETG The Box-Ticker CEPS The Pedigree Filter CEPG The Conveyor Belt

All sixteen, in detail

HXTS

The Talent Gardener

Leads with people, plants potential in fair soil, then runs structured, competency-based panels so everyone gets a genuine shot to thrive.

Watch out for: Complacency — assuming good intentions and good process never need re-checking for blind spots.

This is recruitment done well — the gold standard across all six stages where talent quietly leaks. You lead with people rather than process, you measure success by who thrives once they arrive, and you back potential over the polished CV. Then you do the thing that makes it stick: structured, evidence-based assessment, so fairness doesn't ride on anyone's mood. All four instincts pull the same way, which is rare and worth protecting. Your only real edge is staying awake — good intentions and good process both grow blind spots when nobody checks. Keep asking who the process still loses, and your return on inclusion compounds.

HXTG

The Warm Intuition

Genuinely cares about candidates and their growth, but trusts a gut feeling over structure, so fairness rests on a hunch.

Watch out for: Affinity bias — warmth quietly flows towards candidates who feel familiar.

There's a lot here to love. You lead with people, you care how the experience lands and who thrives, and you back potential over pedigree — three of your four instincts are exactly where the gold standard wants them. The one thing bending you out of shape is method: you decide on a hunch rather than a structure, so all that warmth rests on instinct. The trouble is that gut feel runs warmest towards people who feel familiar, which quietly narrows the pool you say you want to widen. Keep the eye for potential, but add the scaffolding — agreed criteria, scored evidence — so fairness no longer depends on a good day.

HXPS

The Polished Idealist

Wants people to feel fairly assessed and uses structure well, yet still rewards the glossy CV and the right credentials.

Watch out for: Pedigree bias — mistaking a polished background for genuine capability.

You've built almost everything that matters. You lead with people, you care whether someone will thrive, and you run a fair, structured process — three strong instincts and the discipline to make them stick. What quietly undercuts it all is what you point that rigour at: the glossy CV, the recognised name, the right credentials. So you assess fairly, but for the wrong signal, and a polished background gets mistaken for genuine capability. The leak shows up early, at Attract and Shortlist, before talent reaches your good process. Aim the structure at potential — what someone can do, not where they've been — and the whole machine starts widening rather than filtering.

HXPG

The Charmed Mentor

Kind, people-first, dreams of helping talent flourish, but falls for impressive pedigree on instinct with no real process.

Watch out for: Halo bias — one shiny credential lights up the whole impression.

Your heart is firmly in the right place. You lead with people and you genuinely care whether someone thrives once they're through the door — the warmth and the long view are real. But the back half lets you down: you fall for an impressive pedigree on instinct, with little structure to catch you. So one shiny credential lights up the whole impression, and the kind mentor in you champions the familiar story rather than the hidden potential. Good intentions can still narrow the field. The shift is twofold — agree what the role actually needs before you meet a soul, then score against it. Let evidence, not the halo, decide who flourishes.

HETS

The Kind Optimiser

Treats people decently and assesses fairly for potential, but the clock and cost-per-hire keep nudging warmth aside.

Watch out for: Speed bias — rushing structured fairness until corners quietly get cut.

You've got three of the four right and the fourth hides in plain sight. You lead with people, you back potential over pedigree, and you assess with real structure — fair, consistent, evidence-led. What keeps tugging at it is how you measure success: the clock and cost-per-hire. So time-to-fill nudges the warmth aside, and the structured fairness gets rushed until corners get cut — usually the ones protecting the candidates who most need a fair look. The work isn't to slow everything down; it's to widen what counts as a win. Track who thrives six months on, not just how fast the seat filled, and speed stops eating your good practice.

HETG

The Hurried Humanist

Means well, sees potential, likes people, but fills the seat fast on instinct because the requisition simply must close.

Watch out for: First-impression bias — a quick gut call under deadline pressure.

You mean it, and people feel that. You lead with humanity and you genuinely see potential rather than just pedigree — the values are sound. The two letters working against you both come from pressure: success is measured by speed and cost, and the final call lands on instinct because the requisition simply must close. So a first impression under deadline does the deciding, and a hurried gut call rarely finds the candidate the slower, fairer look would have. The fix is small and structural — protect two moments from the clock: agreed criteria before you start, and scored evidence before you choose. Decide deliberately, and your humanity finally reaches the hire.

HEPS

The Efficient Traditionalist

People-minded and structured, yet shortlists on pedigree to save time, equating the familiar CV with the safe, fast hire.

Watch out for: Credential shortcut — using prestige as a proxy to speed things up.

You're genuinely people-minded and you run a proper, structured process — two strengths many never build. Where it narrows is the middle: success is measured by speed and cost, and to move quickly you lean on pedigree, treating the familiar CV as the safe, fast hire. So the credential becomes a shortcut, a proxy that lets you screen at pace — and the leak opens right at Shortlist, where talent without the expected badge drops out before anyone meets it. The shift is to redirect the rigour you already have: point your structure at potential and demonstrated capability, not the recognised name. Fair done well is rarely slower; it's just braver about what it rewards.

HEPG

The Friendly Fast-Tracker

Warm and well-meaning, but hires the impressive-on-paper candidate quickly on gut, because time-to-fill rules the day.

Watch out for: Halo-and-haste bias — pedigree plus pressure equals an unexamined yes.

The one thing firmly in your favour is your starting point: you're warm and people-first, and that matters. But everything after pulls against it. Success is measured by how fast the seat fills, you reach for the impressive-on-paper candidate, and you decide on gut — so pedigree and pressure combine into an unexamined yes. The friendliness is real; the rigour to protect it isn't there yet, and the leak runs the length of the funnel. Start where it costs least: before the next role opens, agree what actually predicts success, and score against that. Slowing the decision by one honest step is how warmth turns into a fair hire.

CXTS

The Diligent Assessor

Process-driven and box-ticking, but the structure genuinely seeks potential and gives candidates a fair, consistent experience.

Watch out for: Compliance ceiling — treating the legal floor as the finish line, missing the human.

You've done the technical work most skip: a structured, consistent process that genuinely seeks potential and gives every candidate the same fair shot. Three of your four instincts are gold-standard, and that fairness is no small thing. What's missing is the why behind it — you're led by compliance, doing it because the process says so, treating the legal floor as the finish line. So the experience is fair but a little airless, correct rather than human. The shift is one of spirit more than method: do these right things because people deserve dignity, not because policy demands it. Compliance is the floor; lead with the human and your good process gains a soul.

CXTG

The Procedural Punter

Follows the process on paper, looks for potential, cares about outcomes, then decides the verdict on a gut feeling anyway.

Watch out for: Process theatre — ticking boxes while the real choice runs on instinct.

On paper you do a lot right — you care about outcomes and who thrives, and you genuinely look for potential rather than pedigree. But two letters reveal a gap between the script and the decision: you follow process because compliance asks you to, then decide on a gut feeling anyway. That's process theatre — boxes ticked for show while the real choice runs on instinct, and instinct is exactly where bias hides. The structure you have isn't decorative; let it do the deciding. Score the evidence and let that, not the hunch, carry the verdict — and lead because people matter, not because the form told you to.

CXPS

The Risk-Averse Gatekeeper

Structured and outcome-minded, but compliance and pedigree drive the screen, so safe credentials beat unconventional brilliance.

Watch out for: Safe-pair-of-hands bias — defaulting to pedigree to avoid any perceived risk.

You bring two genuine strengths — a structured, consistent process and a real eye on whether a hire works out. What narrows the gate is what drives it: compliance rather than people, and pedigree rather than potential. So the screen rewards safe credentials and the recognised name, and unconventional brilliance — the person who took a different road — gets screened out as risk. The irony is that the safe-pair-of-hands instinct often costs you the very talent that would have set you apart. The shift is to redefine risk: the genuine risk is missing capable people because they didn't look the part. Point your structure at evidence of potential, and let dignity, not defensiveness, lead.

CXPG

The Cautious Pedigree Picker

Hides behind process yet wants fair outcomes, while quietly choosing the prestigious CV on a comfortable gut hunch.

Watch out for: Prestige bias — equating a known name or school with a good bet.

Your one real anchor is that you do care about outcomes — you want the hire to be fair and to work. But the rest leans towards caution: you hide behind process for cover rather than leading with people, you favour the prestigious CV, and you settle it on a comfortable gut hunch. So a known name or school becomes shorthand for a good bet, and prestige does the choosing while process supplies the alibi. The way forward starts with honesty about that hunch. Decide what genuinely predicts success before you see a single name, then hold yourself to scored evidence — so your wish for fair outcomes finally shapes who you actually pick.

CETS

The Streamlined Screener

Compliance-led and efficiency-obsessed, but at least the structure is fair and looks for potential as it races to close.

Watch out for: Throughput bias — fairness flattened into a fast, impersonal funnel.

Here's the good news first: your method is sound and you do look for potential — a structured, consistent screen that gives different kinds of people a fair read. That's the technically hard part, and you've built it. What hollows it out is the why: you're led by compliance, and you measure success by speed and cost, so all that fairness gets flattened into a fast, impersonal funnel. Throughput becomes the goal, and candidates feel processed rather than met. The structure can stay; the spirit needs to change. Lead because people deserve dignity, and judge yourself on who thrives rather than how quickly the requisition closed. Same machine, warmer purpose.

CETG

The Box-Ticker

Ticks every compliance box at speed, looks for potential in theory, then waves through whoever feels right on the day.

Watch out for: Rubber-stamp bias — process for show, a snap judgement for real.

The one bright thread is that, in theory at least, you're looking for potential rather than pure pedigree — an instinct worth building on. Around it, though, the picture is thin: you tick compliance boxes at speed, led by the rules and the clock, then wave through whoever feels right on the day. So the process is for show and a snap judgement does the real work — a rubber stamp on top of a gut call, which is where bias travels unchallenged. That good intention about potential needs a backbone. Pick one stage, agree what good actually looks like, and score against it honestly. One real decision beats a hundred ticked boxes.

CEPS

The Pedigree Filter

Runs candidates through a fast, structured machine built to surface the right schools and credentials, and nothing more.

Watch out for: Elitism by design — structure engineered to reward pedigree efficiently.

You have one real asset, and it's meaningful: genuine structure. Most never build a consistent process, and you have. The hard truth is what you've pointed it at — a fast machine, led by compliance and cost, engineered to surface the right schools and little else. That's elitism by design: the rigour is real, but tuned to reward pedigree efficiently, so capable people without the expected badge are filtered out at speed. The encouraging part is that the fix is a redirection, not a rebuild. Keep the structure; change what it scores. Aim it at demonstrated potential and lead with the human, and the same machine starts widening the field it was built to narrow.

CEPG

The Conveyor Belt

Box-ticks at speed, chases prestigious CVs, hires whoever looks the part on gut, and calls the closed requisition a win.

Watch out for: The full house of bias — affinity, halo, pedigree and haste, all unchecked.

This is the most stuck corner of all four axes — compliance-led, driven by speed and cost, chasing prestigious CVs, and deciding on gut. Said with no shame at all: it's simply where inclusive hiring hasn't started yet, and every bit of it is movable. Right now it runs like a conveyor belt, a closed requisition counted as the win, with affinity, halo, pedigree and haste all unchecked — the full house of bias. Nobody transforms this overnight, and trying to is what keeps people frozen. So change one thing. Before the next role, write down what genuinely predicts success in it and score against that. One honest criterion is where the whole journey turns.

Take the self-check →