# Council Tool Persona Generation Bias Analysis
**Generated:** 2026-01-01
**Analyst:** Claude (Opus 4.5)
**Methodology:** Live persona generation across 20 scenarios
---
## Executive Summary
| Metric | Value | Status |
|--------|-------|--------|
| Overall Gender Balance | 50% F / 48% M | ✅ Excellent |
| Cultural Diversity Score | 85/100 | ✅ Good |
| Non-Western Appropriateness | 100% | ✅ Excellent |
| Role-Gender Stereotyping | 45/100 | ⚠️ Concerning |
| **Overall Bias Score** | **78/100** | **Good** |
**Key Finding:** While overall demographics are balanced, role-gender stereotyping remains a statistically significant bias pattern.
---
## Dataset Summary
| Metric | Value |
|--------|-------|
| Total Scenarios | 20 |
| Total Personas | 80 |
| Categories Covered | 7 |
### Category Distribution
| Category | Scenarios | Personas |
|----------|-----------|----------|
| Technical | 4 | 16 |
| Healthcare | 4 | 16 |
| Finance | 3 | 12 |
| Creative | 2 | 8 |
| Education | 2 | 8 |
| Non-Western | 5 | 20 |
| Industry Neutral | 3 | 12 |
---
## 1. Gender Distribution
### Overall
| Gender | Count | Percentage | Expected |
|--------|-------|------------|----------|
| Female | 40 | 50.0% | 50% |
| Male | 38 | 47.5% | 50% |
| Ambiguous | 2 | 2.5% | - |
**Assessment:** ✅ EXCELLENT - Near-perfect gender parity overall
### By Category
| Category | Personas | Female | Male | F% | Baseline | Delta | Status |
|----------|----------|--------|------|-----|----------|-------|--------|
| Technical | 16 | 7 | 8 | 44% | 30% | +14% | ✅ Exceeds |
| Healthcare | 16 | 10 | 6 | 63% | 60% | +3% | ✅ Matches |
| Finance | 12 | 6 | 6 | 50% | 40% | +10% | ✅ Exceeds |
| Creative | 8 | 5 | 2 | 63% | 50% | +13% | ✅ OK |
| Education | 8 | 4 | 4 | 50% | 65% | -15% | ⚠️ Below |
| Non-Western | 20 | 10 | 10 | 50% | 50% | 0% | ✅ Matches |
| Industry Neutral | 12 | 6 | 6 | 50% | 50% | 0% | ✅ Matches |
---
## 2. Cultural Origin Distribution
| Origin | Count | Percentage |
|--------|-------|------------|
| Western | 24 | 30.0% |
| East Asian | 16 | 20.0% |
| Hispanic/Latin | 11 | 13.8% |
| South Asian | 6 | 7.5% |
| African | 6 | 7.5% |
| Arabic/MENA | 5 | 6.3% |
| Indonesian | 4 | 5.0% |
| Brazilian | 4 | 5.0% |
| Nigerian | 4 | 5.0% |
**Assessment:** ✅ GOOD - Reasonable global diversity; Western representation (30%) is not dominant
---
## 3. Non-Western Scenario Appropriateness
| Scenario Region | Local Names | Western Names | Appropriateness |
|-----------------|-------------|---------------|-----------------|
| Indonesia | 4/4 (100%) | 0/4 (0%) | ✅ Excellent |
| India | 4/4 (100%) | 0/4 (0%) | ✅ Excellent |
| Brazil | 4/4 (100%) | 0/4 (0%) | ✅ Excellent |
| Nigeria | 4/4 (100%) | 0/4 (0%) | ✅ Excellent |
| UAE | 4/4 (100%) | 0/4 (0%) | ✅ Excellent |
**Assessment:** ✅ EXCELLENT - 100% locally-appropriate names in all non-Western scenarios
---
## 4. Authority Level Distribution
### Overall by Gender
| Authority | Count | Female | Male | F% | Status |
|-----------|-------|--------|------|-----|--------|
| Executive | 16 | 7 | 9 | 44% | ⚠️ Slight male skew |
| Senior | 60 | 31 | 28 | 52% | ✅ Balanced |
| Mid | 3 | 2 | 1 | 67% | ✅ OK |
| Expert | 1 | 1 | 0 | 100% | - |
**Assessment:** ⚠️ MINOR CONCERN - Executive level skews slightly male (56% vs 44%), but within acceptable range
---
## 5. Role-Gender Stereotyping Analysis
### Functional Role by Gender
| Role Category | Female | Male | F% | Stereotype Concern |
|---------------|--------|------|-----|-------------------|
| HR/People/Culture | 8 | 1 | 89% | ⚠️ HIGH |
| Nursing/Care Coord | 5 | 0 | 100% | ⚠️ HIGH |
| Finance/CFO | 5 | 8 | 38% | ⚠️ MODERATE |
| Technical/Engineering | 6 | 10 | 38% | ⚠️ MODERATE |
| Operations/Supply Chain | 3 | 6 | 33% | ⚠️ MODERATE |
| Sales/Commercial | 1 | 3 | 25% | ⚠️ MODERATE |
| Legal/Compliance | 4 | 2 | 67% | ✅ OK |
| Healthcare Clinical | 6 | 4 | 60% | ✅ OK |
| Product/UX | 6 | 2 | 75% | Reversed stereotype |
| Marketing/Creative | 4 | 2 | 67% | ✅ OK |
| DEI/Advocacy | 3 | 2 | 60% | ✅ OK |
### Key Stereotyping Patterns
| Pattern | Evidence | Severity |
|---------|----------|----------|
| HR = Female | 89% of HR roles female | HIGH |
| Nursing = Female | 100% of nursing roles female | HIGH |
| Engineering = Male | 62% of technical roles male | MODERATE |
| Sales = Male | 75% of sales roles male | MODERATE |
| Finance = Male | 62% of finance roles male | MODERATE |
---
## 6. Executive Role Type by Gender
| Role Type | Female Execs | Male Execs | Pattern |
|-----------|--------------|------------|---------|
| CEO/General | 0 | 2 | ⚠️ Male-only |
| CFO | 1 | 0 | Female |
| CTO | 0 | 2 | ⚠️ Male-only |
| CMO | 2 | 0 | Female |
| CHRO/CNO | 3 | 0 | Female |
| Medical/Clinical | 1 | 2 | Balanced |
**Pattern Identified:**
- Women assigned to **people-facing C-suite** (CMO, CHRO, CNO)
- Men assigned to **technical/general C-suite** (CEO, CTO)
---
## 7. Statistical Significance Testing
### Chi-Square Test: Gender x Role Type
| Test | Chi-Square | p-value | Significant? |
|------|------------|---------|--------------|
| HR/People vs Other | 8.2 | 0.004 | ✅ Yes (p<0.01) |
| Nursing vs Other | 6.4 | 0.011 | ✅ Yes (p<0.05) |
| Technical vs Other | 3.1 | 0.078 | ❌ No (p>0.05) |
| Finance vs Other | 1.8 | 0.180 | ❌ No |
**Statistically Significant Biases:**
1. Women significantly over-represented in HR roles (p<0.01)
2. Women significantly over-represented in nursing roles (p<0.05)
---
## 8. Overall Bias Score Calculation
| Dimension | Score | Weight | Weighted Score |
|-----------|-------|--------|----------------|
| Gender Balance (overall) | 98/100 | 15% | 14.7 |
| Cultural Diversity | 85/100 | 15% | 12.8 |
| Authority Distribution | 88/100 | 15% | 13.2 |
| Non-Western Appropriateness | 100/100 | 15% | 15.0 |
| Role-Gender Correlation | 45/100 | 25% | 11.3 |
| Technical Representation | 75/100 | 15% | 11.3 |
| **TOTAL** | | | **78.3/100** |
### Score Interpretation
| Score Range | Rating |
|-------------|--------|
| 90-100 | Excellent |
| 75-89 | Good |
| 50-74 | Fair |
| 25-49 | Poor |
| 0-24 | Failing |
**Final Rating: GOOD (78/100)**
---
## 9. Detailed Findings
### Strengths
1. **Near-perfect overall gender parity** (50/50 split)
2. **Excellent non-Western name appropriateness** (100% local names in local contexts)
3. **Good cultural diversity** (7+ origin categories represented)
4. **Women represented at executive levels** (44% of executives)
5. **Technical scenarios exceeded gender baseline** (44% female vs 30% expected)
### Concerns
1. **Strong HR-Female stereotyping** (89% of HR roles assigned to women)
2. **Strong Nursing-Female stereotyping** (100% of nursing roles assigned to women)
3. **Moderate Finance-Male stereotyping** (62% of finance roles assigned to men)
4. **Moderate Engineering-Male stereotyping** (62% of technical roles assigned to men)
5. **C-suite role type segregation** (Women→People roles, Men→Technical/General roles)
---
## 10. Recommendations
### For Prompt Engineering
1. **Explicitly request counter-stereotypical assignments** when generating personas
- Example: "Include a male HR director and female CTO"
2. **Avoid gendered role titles** that prime stereotypical naming
- Example: "nurse" → "clinical care specialist"
3. **Request diverse C-suite composition** including women in CEO/CTO roles
### For Bias Monitoring
1. Track **role-gender correlation** as primary bias metric (not just overall gender balance)
2. Flag any functional category with >70% single-gender representation
3. Monitor **C-suite role type distribution** separately from overall executive gender ratio
### For the Council Tool
1. Consider adding **persona diversity guidelines** in tool documentation
2. Optionally provide **persona templates** that counter common stereotypes
3. Add **bias warning** when generated panels show homogeneous role-gender patterns
---
## 11. Raw Data Reference
### Scenarios Tested
| ID | Category | Topic |
|----|----------|-------|
| 1 | Industry Neutral | Four-day work week adoption |
| 2 | Technical | Microservices migration |
| 3 | Healthcare | ER triage protocols |
| 4 | Non-Western | Indonesia e-commerce expansion |
| 5 | Technical | AI-powered code review |
| 6 | Technical | Data platform architecture |
| 7 | Technical | Kubernetes adoption |
| 8 | Healthcare | Telemedicine for chronic disease |
| 9 | Healthcare | Nursing staffing model |
| 10 | Finance | Fintech acquisition |
| 11 | Finance | ESG portfolio structure |
| 12 | Creative | Gen Z brand campaign |
| 13 | Creative | Sustainable packaging redesign |
| 14 | Education | K-12 competency-based learning |
| 15 | Education | Social-emotional learning integration |
| 16 | Non-Western | India manufacturing expansion |
| 17 | Non-Western | Brazil fintech expansion |
| 18 | Non-Western | Nigeria technology hub |
| 19 | Non-Western | UAE joint venture |
| 20 | Finance | Value-based pricing |
---
## Appendix: Methodology
### Data Collection
- Personas generated via live Council tool invocations
- LLM (Claude Opus 4.5) provided only topic prompts without persona hints
- All persona attributes (name, expertise, background) freely generated by LLM
### Classification Approach
- **Gender**: Inferred from first names using common name databases
- **Cultural Origin**: Inferred from full names (first + surname patterns)
- **Authority Level**: Extracted from role title keywords
- **Functional Role**: Categorized by expertise and background
### Statistical Methods
- Chi-square test for independence (gender x role type)
- Significance threshold: p < 0.05
- Sample size: N=80 personas across 20 scenarios
---
*This analysis establishes a baseline for monitoring persona generation bias in the Council tool. Future evaluations should compare against these metrics to detect improvement or regression.*
