As business school students, we’re no strangers to the hiring process. Most of us have spent countless hours polishing resumes, preparing for interviews, and wondering what happens behind the scenes after we click “submit.”
Whether we’re selecting AVPs for student clubs or building teams in our future careers, we increasingly find ourselves on the other side of the table. The processes we once experienced as applicants are now ours to shape. From defining job requirements to deciding who gets an interview or an opportunity to advance, seemingly small choices can have lasting consequences.
My career in technology and involvement with communities like PyData NYC have shown me how leadership decisions influence how people show up, contribute, develop, and grow. I believe leadership isn’t simply about achieving results, but about creating environments where people can thrive.
Early in my career, I was introduced to human-centered design thinking through product development, an approach that places people’s needs, experiences, and perspectives at the center of the design process. Before taking Professor Sterling’s Equity by Design (EBD) course, I understood this framework as a way to build better products and technologies. The course challenged me to think beyond product design and recognize that organizational processes deserve the same intentionality. Hiring, promotions, compensation, and even layoffs are not simply administrative functions, but systems shaped by human decisions, assumptions, and priorities. If we continuously examine and improve the products we build, why shouldn’t we apply that same rigor to the systems that shape people’s careers?
We often hear about the “glass ceiling,” the invisible barriers people face in reaching senior leadership, but Equity by Design introduced me to another challenge: the “broken rung.” Unequal opportunities can emerge as early as the first promotion into management, shaping who gains the experience and opportunities needed to advance further. When people are overlooked at that stage, the consequences can extend well beyond a single promotion. Building strong leadership teams requires attention to the entire talent pipeline, from who gets an opportunity to enter to who has a path to advancement.
In many ways, Equity by Design felt like a continuation of our core LEAD course, moving from understanding the dynamics of leading people and teams to examining how we design the systems that support them.
What struck me most was how easily these decisions can go unnoticed across hiring, promotions, and compensation. Whose resume gets a second look? Who receives a stretch assignment? These decisions may seem minor in isolation, but collectively, they shape an organization’s culture, morale, and future leadership.
The course taught me that even well-intentioned decisions can produce unintended consequences. A process that appears fair on the surface might not work equally well for all. As leaders, we have a responsibility to look beyond our intentions and examine the outcomes of the systems we create.
Meaningful organizational change requires more than introducing a new hiring rubric or promotion framework. Human-centered design is an iterative process, one that requires leaders to continuously assess, learn, and adapt. We need to establish clear criteria, measure results, identify unintended barriers, and refine our approaches as organizations evolve. This also means asking questions and listening to the people affected by these decisions. Do employees understand what it takes to advance? Are they receiving meaningful feedback and opportunities to grow? These questions are just as important as the policies put in place. The goal is to make fairness a consistent part of how organizations operate, rather than something that depends on individual decisions alone.
These principles aren’t limited to corporate America. Whether in business, government, education, or the nonprofit sector, leaders around the world shape systems that influence people’s access to opportunities and resources. In many ways, Equity by Design felt like a continuation of our core LEAD course, moving from understanding the dynamics of leading people and teams to examining how we design the systems that support them. Over six weeks, we explored practical tools and frameworks for translating these principles into organizational practices.
This responsibility feels even more consequential in an AI-driven world. Having built AI systems, I recognize technology’s potential to improve efficiency and decision-making. But when we automate flawed processes, we risk scaling their shortcomings. Technology can support better decisions, but it cannot replace the responsibility leaders have to question the judgment behind them.
The greatest opportunity isn’t just to become a leader who makes thoughtful decisions. It’s to create systems that make thoughtful decisions the norm.
