Favoritism in the Workplace

Identification and Analysis

Considering the devastating effects of favoritism in the workplace, stakeholders and the community at large are also impacted by the issue. The unethical nature of workplace favoritism means stakeholders need to ensure fair practices within organizations to enhance employee morale and productivity. Stakeholders are usually concerned about the problem of favoritism in an organization (Shalabi, 2019). However, transparency is considered one of the factors that help address any concerns shareholders might have about those issues. Transparency is considered ethical communication as well as decision-making that demands aspects of public trust. Stakeholders have a greater responsibility to ensure transparency, and the community benefits in many greater contexts. Subsequently, the public is responsible for raising the alarm whenever an issue of favoritism is detected in the workplace (Shalabi, 2019).

In contrast, the inclusiveness of managers in local communities provides selection-related benefits. The norms and commitments to the community put substantial pressure on organizations to diverge from professional values as well as participate in certain levels of favoritism. Hence, managers who target applicants from specific communities face acute challenges in resolving conflicts arising from social expectations within these communities (Palermo et al., 2018). Second, workplace exposure to community members may provide social norms that appeal to particular identities and obligations to those communities. Little has been done in identifying what drives leaders to act on communal obligations in workplaces. However, social interactions and exposure may impact the capacity for favoritism.

Consequently, favoritism plays a significant role in recruitment, promotion, or merit-based salary increases. While all companies are prone to embracing a culture of favoritism, specific issues may enhance this misstep, such as the expansion of globalization effects due to the rapid professionalization of the workplace. First, managers’ recruitment and selection often remain strategically embedded in local communities where obligations are still evident (Palermo et al., 2018).

Synthesis

The issue of workplace favoritism poses significant challenges for stakeholders, employees, and the organization as a whole. Employees not only considered favoritism as a type of workplace unfairness or injustice but also regarded it as an unethical practice. They often respond to it with negative emotions toward the company, tend to have tougher intentions to quit the job, and have less job satisfaction. Leaders who openly practice favoritism do not depict respect for the individuals they work with. As a result, this will lead to a damaging impact on the individuals involved (Ozavize Ayodele et al., 2019).

The topic of favoritism in the workplace is of significant concern because of the adverse impacts that favoritism has on employee performance, leadership, stakeholders, and the organization. Favoritism is often seen as human nature, but that does not form the basis for justifying it in the workplace. Favoritism affects an individual’s job satisfaction, turnover intentions, and organizational commitment and loyalty. In other words, companies may lose years’ worth of training and skill improvements of their employee should any opportunity arise due to favoritism by leaders. Indeed, there is a need to focus on cross-sectoral analysis. Research suggests that managers and leaders are faced with a paradoxical social problem, particularly in collectivist societies (Shalabi, 2019). On the one hand, they may experience considerable pressure to favor acquittals and family members at work. Research shows that favoritism carries an immense social cost that can ruin managers’ jobs. Some organizations have standing rules against direct relationships between subordinates and managers, while other organizations try to standardize work items to curb favoritism of related communal ties with managers (Arasli et al., 2019).

Leaders in today’s organizations can be significantly affected by workplace favoritism. Leaders in today’s organizations may not be completely aware of the severity of favoritism in the workplace because some of these practices are subtle and elusive in maturity. Ethically, the ability to interact with other people is vital both personally and professionally. It’s an effective tool of emotional intelligence and leadership effectiveness (Ozavize Ayodele et al., 2019). Relationship building is a critical component of leadership; however, leader favoritism violates the workplace's regard for fairness norms, requiring equal treatment for all subordinates. As a result, today’s leaders encounter a lack of balance in establishing a line between building a more personal relationship with their subordinates and interacting with subordinates in various manners (Ozavize Ayodele et al., 2019). Although research has constantly confirmed the perversive nature of leadership favoritism, an in-depth understanding of its perception by both leaders and subordinates makes it a contextual factor from divergent ethical perspectives at the workplace.

Over time, leadership favoritism can turn into patronage. Eventually, leaders will promote the favored employees, encouraging other subordinate managers to engage in similar behavior (Shalabi, 2019). This will continue favoritism among most employees, leading to conformity and group mentality in the organization and may cause high employee turnover. Smaller companies struggle more with the loss of employees than large organizations due to favoritism.

Recommendation

One of the best practices to address favoritism in the workplace is to create a professional environment. It is crucial to protect the workplace setting from favoritism by establishing a professional environment (Shalabi, 2019). Generally, favoritism is an unprofessional aspect, and thereby, nurturing a serious work focus is a fundamental step toward protecting against favoritism. Another recommendation is to outline the policy and communicate it to managers and employees regarding expectations to protect against favoritism (Palermo et al., 2018). Clear guidelines concerning rewards and tasks should be provided to prevent any perceptions of favoritism. Furthermore, managers may approach social responsibilities with ease with unrelated job applicants since the impact of non-conformity is less permanent. Also, if the job applicant is unrelated but poses a direct tie to the manager, emotional attachment embedded in that tie may lead to symbolic acceptance, ritualism, or ceremonial pretense of community obligations

Subsequently, a clear policy would provide a crucial means of emancipating the members in the workplace. Tasks should also be assigned fairly and equitably, and establish accountability in the workplace context. The managers or supervisors should check who has been assigned prestigious projects (Palermo et al., 2018). It is evident that favoritism, if left unchecked, would have worse detrimental effects that have yet to be fathomed. Also, laws must be passed to guard against malicious recruitment and selection of employees in organizations based on nepotism, cronyism, and favoritism to minimize this unethical behavior, affecting organizational effectiveness on a global scale. Finally, future studies should focus on the impact of education and awareness on workplace favoritism to determine whether, indeed, they may play a significant role in mitigating it.