The Effects of Nepotism and Favoritism on Employee Behaviour: As an Ethical Issue at the Workplace - Coursework Example

THE EFFECTS OF NEPOTISM AND FAVORISTISM ON EMPLOYEE BEHAVIOUR: AS AN ETHICAL ISSUE AT THE WORKPLACE (Reflective Writing) Name Course Tutor Date Introduction A strong work ethic forms the foundational success of the existence of sound relationships at the work place (Amico, 2015). Any employee, manager or entry level workers have to familiarize themselves with work ethics in the organization so as to keep the functions of the organization at their peak. Work ethics simply defines a set of moral standings that employees uses in their day to day activities at the work place (Amico, 2015). Some of the common work ethics components include integrity, sense of teamwork, and emphasis on quality, sense of responsibility, fairness, and discipline among others (Jenkins, 2015; Karakose, 2014). It is with no doubt work ethics is important in any organization. The aim of this paper is to evaluate the workplace ethics; favoritism at my work place that was based in the Middle East, where the act of favoritism is greatly permissible due to the widespread number of family owned organizations. Importance of Work Ethics Work ethics also enhances the public image of the company so that the business earns more clients and partnerships as well as stakeholders (Brenkert & Beauchamp, 2010). Lastly, work ethics also aids in the decision making process based on the culture of tailoring ethics when making decisions (Amico, 2015). This enhances transparency and accountability when making such tough decisions for the organization. Additionally, the decision made alongside ethics will enable smooth introduction of change in the organization without resistance (Lewis, Goodman, & Fandt, 2009). There are some challenges in applying work ethics in organizations include lack of commitment of the management, too large workforce to induce, poor communication strategies, and the fear of change in the normal functioning of business (Lewis et al., 2009). Feelings/ Emotions My Experience of Favoritism at the Workplace In my work place I have suffered favoritism, cronyism and nepotism, and patronage all in one plate. I have the necessary qualifications but each time a chance comes and I apply for promotion the managers keep on rejecting my applications. Instead the slots have always been given to friends, relatives and close associates. I have also suffered in times of applying for leaves and off, whenever my time comes I am called off duty to come and take the position of someone who has to attend to some pressing issues. This has affected me psychologically and since the management has authority I have not been able to report to anyone about the vice at my workplace. At one point a case happened, where the new manager started to promote and give favors to the family members of some of the executive. This was being promulgated amidst all the other forms of favoritism that had already taken root in the organization. How I Felt on the Issue and What I Thought The issue has greatly affected me both psychologically and even hampered my productivity at the workplace. I feel less pride to be part of this great organization however good the reputation might be outside. I felt demoralized and resentment took root of me. I always felt that no matter how hard I try to work all my efforts would not bear any fruit since when the time for recognition came friends and relatives were the best choice by the management. I also started being slow to report to the workplace and sometimes even forged sickness to avoid the daily frustrations that came my way. I did not have time for the special treated employees even in matters that required teamwork I did my part and left the rest. Ideally, the whole process brought down the morale that I had when I was offered the job. I usually never got it right why a person whose tenure in the organization is very small ranging from weeks to months and had questionable qualifications would be granted a position over me no matter how hard I usually tried. I knew my capabilities even from my fellow employees and this ate me alive. Whenever there were meetings to address the issues in the organization, the same special group gained the favor to represent the employees, instead of doing so they put their needs before the needs of the other employees I included. I thought of reporting the matter to the trade union so that corrigible measures could be taken. However, this was nearly impossible as the organization had a hierarchy that was now affected by the aforementioned ethical issues. I also felt that the managers lacked integrity and transparency that are the key guiding principles in any sound organization. This also made me feel that the managers lacked power and authority and could not make sound and fair decisions when crisis situations set in. I also felt that the management did not stand with the vision and mission as well as the values of the organization. I felt that whenever there was a new decision on how to improve the work place, I would rather have kept it to myself than share it with the management that would then acknowledge the same special people as the pioneers of such innovation. With this transpiring in the organization, I thought that there was no one to report to and that there was no any measure that could be used to correct the status quo. This made me keep quiet and accumulate the pain inside me until maybe when things would go on well. However, according to my own research and the individual beliefs I have on myself, I have decided to have a self induced method of coping with foavoritism since it is a wide accepted fact that it is prevalent in the Middle East. Causes of Favoritism in the Workplace There are very many avenues through which favoritism can take hold in any organization. Firstly, the management may be trying to cover their interests through appointing those they feel will guard against their past ill practices (Fu, 2015). A good example is when a manager appoints a person as a favor so that their unethical behaviors such as misuse of office, financial embezzlement and bribery are not brought to the limelight (Fu, 2015). Secondly, the managers may also resolve to favoritism as a way of rewarding their relatives so as to get a good reputation or get some rewards in return as well (Hamlett, 2014). The third cause of favoritism is when the management wants to have succession planning and therefore picks on the individual who they feel has the best attributes over others (Fu, 2015). Favoritism also happens when the manager lacks the power and authority over the current workforce (Hamlett, 2014). They then resort to this to get those willing to bend the rules who are often friends and relatives as well as close relatives. Types of Favoritism In some cases favoritism is illegal, for instance, when the manager solicits for sexual favors for job advancements. There are various types of favoritism likely to be encountered in the workplace. The first one is nepotism where the managers and supervisors hire their family members regardless of their compatibility and qualifications. The second one is cronyism that is also a variation of nepotism, where the hired or promoted individuals are those who are close associates to the management as well as friends (Root III, 2015). The other form of favoritism is sexual favors where the manager asks for sexual favors from the subordinates so as to facilitate career advancements. This is a form of discrimination and is often regarded as sexual harassment and has legal ramifications (Root III, 2015). Lastly, favoritism could take the form of patronage that is a roundabout for a manager or executive to engage in cronyism or nepotism. In this unethical act of patronage, the manager chooses the individuals they deem fit due to the trust they have bestowed upon them especially when hiring managers then further asks the manager to hire their relatives and friends (Root III, 2015). Of all the forms of favoritism, patronage propagates the unethical behavior even into the future of the company as many of the favorite or the so called special employees will be hired. Effects of Favoritism When there is favoritism, nepotism and cronyism, the employees are likely to resent and get demoralized. To its worst, this could lead to the collusion between the employees who are being discriminated over to an extent of striking as well as instituting some other forms of industrial disputes that may alter the functionality of the organization (Arasli & Tumer, 2008). Secondly, they may also be the cause of workplace stress especially when the committed and hardworking employee is not being listened to or is not being involved in decision making process (Büte, 2011). Thirdly, the employee will not be able to participate in teamwork especially with the presence of the special employees (Büte, 2011). In case the position here is management, there can emerge a range of management issues hindering the organizations success (Arasli & Tumer, 2008). The employees will not be able to have a sense of pride in the organization and this makes them to have no job satisfaction, eventually the turnover rate might be very high in such organizations propagating ethical issues (Keleş, Ozkan, & Bezirci, 2011). Lastly, the employees will not feel responsible and accountable especially for the assets of the organization (Arasli & Tumer, 2008). This will lead to misuse of property as well as lack of transparency and integrity in decision making (Fu, 2015). Most studies have described favoritism as an unethical behavior in business. This is because it goes against the code of ethics that delineate what is good from what is wrong in any organization. There is no law that guards against favoritism making the management to breach business ethics and always take cover under the law (Fu, 2015). In most instances the managements have argues that through such ways only can they propagate the success of business by endorsing those they trust to hold management positions. Link between Favoritism and the management at the work place The managers have been facing a plethora of ethical issues in their day to day work experience. Since the management is often at times charged with leadership, control, planning, communication, motivation, and decision making, there is definitely a link between management and favoritism (Büte, 2011; Fu, 2015). The management regardless of the level has the capacity to harbor favoritism either for personal interests or that of the organization. The management makes unethical decisions without putting the interest of the employees at hand (Büte, 2011). The management also has the power to overshadow the resistance of the employees whenever they resist such appointments. Evaluation Proving Favoritism at the Work place Proving that favoritism actually takes place in the organization can be an uphill task (Chervenak & McCullough, 2007). However, if someone can show that other employees are being preferentially treated, and there is proof to indicate that there is a relationship between the two, then it can be easy to prove. In most instances tracking unfair treatment as well as preferential treatment may lack proof thus discrediting the claims of favoritism (Chervenak & McCullough, 2007). If there is a possibility to reach the emails and phone messages, that amount to favoritism it may even be much easier to prove this unethical act (Chervenak & McCullough, 2007). The access to the stated documents is impossible and is heavily guided by privacy rights and laws of information that breaching could lead to lawsuits. Consequences of Favoritism There are many consequence of favoritism on the employee. The consequences are felt on job satisfaction, job commitment, performance, morale, motivation, and decision making. Job satisfaction refers to the overall perception held by the employee on their job and the management (Sadozai, Zaman, Marri, & Ramay, 2012). In-group members will be satisfied with their jobs being that they are liable to favors from their managers and supervisors (Sadozai et al., 2012). On the other hand, the out-group members are may feel infringed of their rights and see this as injustice. This may make them feel that their personal connections and beliefs need to be promoted. Sadozai et al. (2012) point that the degree of satisfaction therefore differs depending on the side of the curtain where one falls. In my case I was able to feel insecure about the job because I was very uncertain of the future. I held on just for the meantime but promised myself to get a better organization that had sound policies that guard the workplace relations. I sought for interviews and attended seminars on career advice with the notion of switching to a better organization. Favoritism with respect to the aforementioned forms, often leads to lack o organizational commitment. The employees fail to have a sense of belonging and therefore pride in the organization. As cronyism and patronage take root in the organization, task and rewards allocation may also take the same course (Ozler & Buyukarslan, 2011). As a result the out-group employees may lack to show loyalty in the organization and especially the management (Joo, 2010). However, on the side of the favored the commitment level to the organization is always higher (Ozler & Buyukarslan, 2011). It reached a point where I felt as if working extra hard to impress the management was of no use. I eventually did the tasks assigned to me at the pace of other workers and this really slowed my pace for work. Performance goes hand in hand with the competence of the employees. The current workplaces’ performance success depends on the availability of knowledge workers (Arasli & Tumer, 2008). When the management decides to bring in people who are incompetent and unqualified, the performance of the organization also diminishes in a similar fashion. The management may use this system in performance appraisal (Ponzo & Scoppa, 2010). The employees who have close relationships to the supervisors and managers are always rated higher during performance evaluations (Joo, 2010). The managers rarely give negative feedbacks to such employees however negative and overt it may be (Chervenak & McCullough, 2007). The in-group members often receive doctored ratings on performance appraisal; this is usually very unfair to other members of the organization. When the out-group members realize this trend their performance levels deteriorate and so does that of the organization (Ponzo & Scoppa, 2010). The treatment of the special group at my workplace made me work at a slow pace and at times even abscond reporting due to faked sickness. As a result my performance track record reduced and I was comfortable as I used such periods to make change to myself through attending interviews in other organizations. In the same manner favoritism impacts job satisfaction does it affect morale of the employee (Ozler & Buyukarslan, 2011). Morale comes as a result of job security and satisfaction as well as organizational commitment. The insiders experience higher levels of morale and may perform best compared to the outsiders whose morale is affected (Arasli & Tumer, 2008). In the long term the outsiders end up feeling alienated and powerless due to lack of fairness. This affects teamwork due to resentment of the two parties at the work place (Arasli & Tumer, 2008). When I was exposed to favoritism in different forms as stated previously, I resorted to resentment as the only way. This affected my interpersonal relationship with the workers whom we were previously friends. As a result my morale to do better in the organization for promotions reduced since I was pretty sure that the trend would not change. I also felt least motivated since consulting the management would be an uphill task for me. I therefore made decisions based on my own perceptions and did what I felt was ethical and right for the company but at my pace. How to Deal With Favoritism at the Work Place The four lenses of ethics that can aid in dealing with nepotism include justice, critique, care and profession (Ponzo & Scoppa, 2010). In the Middle East favoritism is referred to as wasta (Nadeem, Ahmad, Ahmad, Batool, & Shafique, 2015). Since most of the organizations in the Middle East are family owned, favoritism has always been allowed (McQuerrey, 2015). This is because it is seen as a procedure of cutting costs and increases the employee loyalty. There is a strong collectivism orientation in the Middle East translating to commitment to the work organization (Nadeem et al., 2015). With this in mind it was very difficult for me to sue the management as that would only amount to conflicts within the organization and wastage of time and resources (McQuerrey, 2015).The management does not chase away the employees however poorly they perform since there is the family loyalty value attached to the jobs (Nadeem et al., 2015). The governments should be able to come up with policies and regulations that would guard against favoritism at the workplace especially in the global economy world (McQuerrey, 2015). Shapiro and Stefkovich (2011) argue that the ethics of critique is a lens through which favoritism can be assessed to reveal its impacts on social class and related inequities. There are two ways here, when incompetent individuals are charged with decision making, the organizational success is hampered (Shapiro & Stefkovich, 2011). Secondly, when the new hires are more concerned with personal power, they end up bringing down the performance of the organization. In fact nepotism has negative reputation on business (Keleş, Ozkan, & Bezirci, 2011). It also discourages outsiders from seeking jobs in such organizations (Shapiro & Stefkovich, 2011). However, certain situations like the case of Middle East allow nepotism to take course (Nadeem et al., 2015). When applying the ethics of care to favoritism it is very practical for family businesses to benefit from cross generational nepotism. This is because the company’s secrets will live forever with the family (Shapiro & Stefkovich, 2011). With reference to ethics in profession, favoritism is a sensitive case and is inevitable towards people with negative attitudes (Guerin, 2014). It comes in when there is hiring, promotion, rewarding, and selection among others in the organizations (Guerin, 2014). Considering this the best action for me would have been to be content with the position I were in. the other alternative was maybe to search for organizations with tight internal policy regulations. Personal conclusions/ Application The lessons I learnt here are many. First, that favoritism happens in variety of ways and has many consequences. Second, the insiders always benefit than outsiders. Lastly, the management and the employer always have the ability to control over the unethical practices in the organization. With the knowledge that I have garnered now I would have ridden along with the same practice and being subject to the authority through doing my tasks. The best thing probably would have been forging best relationships with the special group so as to avoid the negative feeling. However, trying to convince the management of the impacts of favoritism through pointing the failures in the organization would have been the different thing I would have done at that moment. Recommendations Generally all workplaces have ethical dilemmas and issues. Favoritism being the most profound one and whose effect is largely felt should be controlled. The lenses of ethics that is ethics of justice, care, profession and critique could be a foundation to build all the decisions when formulating policies in the organization. The policies should balance the negatives and the positives in the organization so as to achieve best results that are reverse of the aforementioned consequences. The organizations should also seek the contribution of the employees when instituting the policies. Additionally, whenever a justifiable appointment is made, the employees should be informed so as to avoid resentment and resistance. The managers should be taken through a course or training that will make them appreciate the need of transparency as well as fairness at the work place. The organizations should be at the forefront in establishing the consequences of favoritism and explaining that to the management and whenever there is an avenue for such, the employees should be informed prior to the actions. A method of promoting and motivation should also be introduced in instances where favoritism is the only way forward. Bibliography Amico, S. 2015, “Workplace Values & Ethics | Chron.com”. Retrieved from http://smallbusiness.chron.com/workplace-values-ethics-4887.html Arasli, H., & Tumer, M. 2008, “Nepotism, favoritism and cronyism: A study of their effects on job stress and job satisfaction in the banking industry of north Cyprus”. Social Behavior & Personality: An International Journal, 36(9), 1237–1250. doi:10.2224/sbp.2008.36.9.1237 Ayodigan, I. (2012). “The existence of favoritism in organizations”. African Journal of Business Management, 6(12), 4577-4586. Brenkert, G. G., & Beauchamp, T. L. 2010, “The Oxford handbook of business ethics”. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Büte, M. 2011, “The Effects of Nepotism and Favoritism on Employee Behaviors and Human Resources Practices: A Research on Turkish Public Banks”. Review of Public Administration, 5(1), 185-208. Chervenak, F. A., & McCullough, L. B. 2007, “Is it ethically justified nepotism in hiring and admissions in academic health centers an oxymoron?”.Physician Executive, 33(5), 42–45. Fu, I. (2015). Favoritism: Ethical Dilemmas Viewed Through Multiple Paradigms. The Journal of Values-Based Leadership, 8(1), 1-7. Guerin, V. 2014, “Can I Sue For Employee Favoritism? | EmploymentLawFirms.com”. Retrieved from http://www.employmentlawfirms.com/resources/employment/discrimination/can-i-sue-for-employee-favoritism Hamlett, C. 2014, “Nepotism in the Workplace With Friends | Chron.com”. Retrieved from http://smallbusiness.chron.com/nepotism-workplace-friends-13206.html Jenkins, A. 2015, “5 Factors That Demonstrate a Strong Work Ethic | Chron.com”. Retrieved from http://smallbusiness.chron.com/5-factors-demonstrate-strong-work-ethic-15976.html Joo, B. (2010). Organizational commitment for knowledge workers: The roles of perceived organizational learning culture, leader-member exchange quality, and turnover intention. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 21(1), 69–85. Karakose, T. 2014, “The Effects of Nepotism, Cronyism and Political Favoritism on the Doctors Working in Public Hospitals”. Ethno Med, 8(3), 245-250. Keleş, N. H., Ozkan, K. T., & Bezirci, M. 2011, “A study on the effects of nepotism, favoritism and cronyism On organizational trust in the auditing process in family businesses in turkey”. International Business & Economics Research Journal, 10(9), 9-16. Lewis, P. S., Goodman, S. H., & Fandt, P. M. 2009, “Management: Challenges for tomorrow's leaders (6th ed.)”. Mason, OH: Thomson/South-Western. McQuerrey, L. 2015, “How to Handle Favoritism at Work | Chron.com”. Retrieved from http://work.chron.com/handle-favoritism-work-21021.html Nadeem, M., Ahmad, R., Ahmad, N., Batool, S. R., & Shafique, N. 2015, “Favoritism, nepotism and cronyism as predictors of job satisfaction: Evidences from Pakistan”. Journal of Business and Management Research, 8(2015), 224-228. Ozler, D. E., & Buyukarslan, B. A. 2011, “The Overall Outlook of Favoritism in Organizations: A Literature Review”. International Journal of Business and Management Studies, 3(1), 275-285. Ponzo, M., & Scoppa, V. 2010, “The use of informal networks in Italy: Efficiency or favoritism?”. Journal of Socio-Economics, 39(1), 89-99. Root III, J. N. 2015, “Types of Favoritism in the Workplace | Chron.com”. Retrieved from http://smallbusiness.chron.com/types-favoritism-workplace-11537.html Sadozai, A. M., Zaman, H. M., Marri, M. Y., & Ramay, M. I. 2012, “Impacts of Favoritism, Nepotism and Cronyism on Job Satisfaction: A Study from the Public Sector of Pakistan”. Interdisciplinary Journal of Contemporary Research in Business, 4(6), 760-771. Shapiro, J. P., & Stefkovich, J. A. 2011, “Ethical leadership and decision making in education: Applying theoretical perspectives to complex dilemmas”. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Read More

This has affected me psychologically and since the management has authority I have not been able to report to anyone about the vice at my workplace. At one point a case happened, where the new manager started to promote and give favors to the family members of some of the executive. This was being promulgated amidst all the other forms of favoritism that had already taken root in the organization. How I Felt on the Issue and What I Thought The issue has greatly affected me both psychologically and even hampered my productivity at the workplace.

I feel less pride to be part of this great organization however good the reputation might be outside. I felt demoralized and resentment took root of me. I always felt that no matter how hard I try to work all my efforts would not bear any fruit since when the time for recognition came friends and relatives were the best choice by the management. I also started being slow to report to the workplace and sometimes even forged sickness to avoid the daily frustrations that came my way. I did not have time for the special treated employees even in matters that required teamwork I did my part and left the rest.

Ideally, the whole process brought down the morale that I had when I was offered the job. I usually never got it right why a person whose tenure in the organization is very small ranging from weeks to months and had questionable qualifications would be granted a position over me no matter how hard I usually tried. I knew my capabilities even from my fellow employees and this ate me alive. Whenever there were meetings to address the issues in the organization, the same special group gained the favor to represent the employees, instead of doing so they put their needs before the needs of the other employees I included.

I thought of reporting the matter to the trade union so that corrigible measures could be taken. However, this was nearly impossible as the organization had a hierarchy that was now affected by the aforementioned ethical issues. I also felt that the managers lacked integrity and transparency that are the key guiding principles in any sound organization. This also made me feel that the managers lacked power and authority and could not make sound and fair decisions when crisis situations set in.

I also felt that the management did not stand with the vision and mission as well as the values of the organization. I felt that whenever there was a new decision on how to improve the work place, I would rather have kept it to myself than share it with the management that would then acknowledge the same special people as the pioneers of such innovation. With this transpiring in the organization, I thought that there was no one to report to and that there was no any measure that could be used to correct the status quo.

This made me keep quiet and accumulate the pain inside me until maybe when things would go on well. However, according to my own research and the individual beliefs I have on myself, I have decided to have a self induced method of coping with foavoritism since it is a wide accepted fact that it is prevalent in the Middle East. Causes of Favoritism in the Workplace There are very many avenues through which favoritism can take hold in any organization. Firstly, the management may be trying to cover their interests through appointing those they feel will guard against their past ill practices (Fu, 2015).

A good example is when a manager appoints a person as a favor so that their unethical behaviors such as misuse of office, financial embezzlement and bribery are not brought to the limelight (Fu, 2015). Secondly, the managers may also resolve to favoritism as a way of rewarding their relatives so as to get a good reputation or get some rewards in return as well (Hamlett, 2014). The third cause of favoritism is when the management wants to have succession planning and therefore picks on the individual who they feel has the best attributes over others (Fu, 2015).

Favoritism also happens when the manager lacks the power and authority over the current workforce (Hamlett, 2014).

Read More