Introduction
Workplace favoritism is a phenomenon in which people in positions of power, such as managers, value some employees more than others for personal reasons. These causes may include them being part of the same group or religion, acquaintances or friends outside of work, or lovers, and a variety of other relationships is also possible. Generally, this practice is strongly discouraged because it is believed that favoritism hurts the organization’s performance. If it results in tangible outcomes, such as the favorites receiving raises or promotions faster than their performance would suggest is reasonable, the unfairness will likely cause other workers to feel resentful. The exact outcomes of favoritism have been studied extensively to inform managers of its dangers. The purpose of this essay is to outline several of the most significant adverse effects of the practice, most notably the reduced employee retention and job satisfaction.
Employee Retention
Fundamentally, most employees stay in a given position instead of constantly seeking new offers because they expect their loyalty to be rewarded. By performing well and delivering results consistently, they believe they will be recognized and receive raises as well as promotions. Across the workplace, this opinion creates the expectation that those who are more capable will ultimately be earning more than their peers (Gupta, 2020). However, favoritism upsets this expectation by distributing benefits based not on merit but on personal connections. People whose expectations are upset when someone else receives the promotion they expect will likely pay additional attention to the recipient. If they believe that their abilities are superior and that the choice was biased, their trust in the process will be undermined. As a result, they will begin reconsidering their options and trying to understand the underlying mechanics.
As such cases mount, the workplace sentiment will change as more and more people are disillusioned with the system. Eventually, the relationship between the benefit provider and the recipients will be discovered, creating resentment against them. The people who do not belong to the group will recognize that they cannot obtain the advantage those others have. As a result, they will stop putting in as much effort, seeing no benefit in doing so in a corrupt system. Moreover, those with an interest in advancing their career will start looking elsewhere and leave their job once they find a superior opportunity. Those who stay will inform newcomers about the system, leading them to be more likely to quit, as well. Overall, there is no reason for workers to stay in a system where others are prioritized, which has a significant negative effect on retention.
Job Satisfaction
For the same reasons as those described above, workers will likely be dissatisfied with workplace favoritism, especially if they are not among the group that benefits. People with ambition will quit and seek other opportunities, but many will also stay, possibly because they are content with their position and appreciate the job security. Still, even these people are likely to feel negatively about others receiving unwarranted benefits that they may have qualified for otherwise. If favoritism progresses to a particularly strong degree, they may find themselves working under unjustly promoted, incompetent superiors or working in teams with people who cannot do their part. Both of these outcomes are likely to directly foster negativity regardless of the worker’s sentiments otherwise. While this dissatisfaction may result in them choosing to quit, it can also have other outcomes that are comparably bad for the business.
As stated above, workers who have been negatively affected by favoritism are likely to lose their motivation, which will reflect poorly on their performance. However, Sharma (2019) finds that the effects may go further, culminating in active workplace sabotage. Workers may derive personal satisfaction from seeing those favored unjustly fail and work to create such failures without being detected. They are not affected personally, as their pay will usually remain stable, and vent their negative emotions through schadenfreude. As a result, the company’s performance suffers further harm as it develops systemic faults. It is challenging to root out these issues from above because, by the time they become apparent, they are likely already deeply entrenched in the organization. As a result, between the recipients of favoritism and the potential saboteurs, few, if any, employees can be considered worthy of trust for the team’s reconstruction once the problematic elements have been addressed.
Overall Effects
Favoritism harms the company both directly, through the loss of performance from the workers who leave and the inefficiency of those who remain, and indirectly, through changes in the organizational structure. Without the loyalty of workers, many management approaches become drastically less effective, as the company’s relationship with its employees deteriorates to a simple exchange of money for work. People act rationally, aiming to receive the most money for the least amount of work. This tendency means that productivity will drop in the absence of pay increase opportunities even without accounting for potential over-promotion of favorites or sabotage by disgruntled workers. Moreover, the problem is likely to keep developing, leading to either it being recognized and addressed or it destroying the organization. Even in the former case, it is likely to incur massive costs for the reasons outlined above.
These problems could be avoided with early detection of favoritism, but there are numerous challenges that complicate it. From above, it is challenging to understand a particular manager’s disposition or favoritism tendencies due to the number and complexity of potential reasons for valuing some workers over others. Employees who work under the manager have a more detailed perspective, but they tend not to bypass their manager and inform HR or other superiors (Houghton et al., 2018). The reason is that they are worried about being dismissed and considered problematic by the company, as it is challenging to draw the line between a warranted promotion and one affected by favoritism. If a determination is made against them, they may be listed as disruptive and denied promotion opportunities. As such, through them taking the path of least risk and others not understanding the situation sufficiently, the problem is concealed and tends to develop.
Conclusion
Workplace favoritism is a dangerous phenomenon due to its self-perpetuating nature and potential to damage the company massively. It denies opportunity to those who deserve it or believe they do, creating resentment and a lack of motivation. As a result, people who are actively seeking career advancement will quit the company in search of less biased environments where their efforts will be recognized. Most workers will likely stay, but they will not apply themselves as much, reducing the team’s overall performance. In edge cases, their resentment may reach a level where they actively sabotage projects to satisfy their sense of revenge against their superiors’ favorites. Moreover, workers are unlikely to report the issue to upper management due to the potential negative repercussions of doing so. To address the issues, the HR department needs to be more transparent and closer to the workers so that it can detect favoritism earlier.
References
Gupta, M. (Ed.). (2020). Management practices for engaging a diverse workforce: Tools to enhance workplace culture. Apple Academic Press.
Houghton, J. D., Neck, C. P., & Murray, E. L. (2018). Organizational behavior: A skill-building approach (2nd ed.). SAGE Publications.
Sharma, N. (Ed.). (2019). Analyzing workplace deviance in modern organizations. IGI Global.