Nepotism : Adverse Effects On Employee Morale Favoritism of Close Friends and Relatives in Workplace

[Misanthrope 0]

Notice From the Enlightened Misanthrope: The original title, "Nepotism in the Workplace....It Vexes Me Terribly," has been edited. While the title fell fully within Trap 17 ReadMe guidelines, the revised title adheres to the obscure "Keyword Relevancy" policy which remains un-posted (that I can tell) for member viewing. If anyone should happen upon it, please share it's finer details with all of us. At any rate, enjoy the post and it's curious response!

 

Nepotism in the Workplace

It Vexes Me.......Terribly!

Have you ever been passed up for a job promotion only to lose out to someone who was less qualified? Imagine your ire at discovering your competitor happened to be a very close friend or relative of the boss. Then imagine your boss enabling your competitor?s bad behavior and poor work ethic, while you?re still expected to follow protocol and grovel before your feudal master. You?ve just become another casualty of nepotism in the workplace.

 

Welcome to the slippery world of nepotistic hiring practice and blatant favoritism. Chances are, you were infinitely more qualified than your boss?s friend, but your boss was lacking in the brains and ethics department and chose favoritism over scruples and common sense. Frankly, I?m sick and tired of seeing qualified folks lose out to complete idiots.

 

Are you with me yet? If not, let me just throw out a loose definition of the word: In a nutshell, nepotism is simply the act of hiring, promoting, or rewarding an individual with no regard to his actual qualifications. Of course, this implies the skills of persons who are actually qualified are not factored into the deliberation process. Usually, the management/supervisor/person-in-power makes a conscious decision to overlook the qualified candidate(s) because he already knows whom he wants for the position. This person may be a close friend, relative, or in some cases - someone who meets his personal ethnic, racial or gender preference. Outside of the small family business, all of the above practices are inappropriate, unethical and oft times grounds for workplace discrimination. In my book, using one?s position of power to benefit friends and family at the expense of the customer (or society) is nothing short of corrupt and contemptible behavior.

 

I raise this topic after a conversation regarding my sister?s brother-in-law, who works in the accounting department of a tech company. Apparently, there have been some disturbing hiring trends at this company as of late, starting with the unexpected promotion of a con artist who just happens to be a close friend of the CEO. For the sake of this topic we?ll refer to this irritating individual as ?Windbag.?

 

Windbag had no experience as a supervisor, but the CEO made the ill-fated decision to assign him this position based on their personal relationship. This, of course, led to a fair amount of discontent amongst management, who were not invited to sit on the hiring panel to help choose the best candidate. Nor did it go over well with other employees, who feared what effect the tiniest semblance of power would have on this frail, insecure charlatan. As could have been expected, this new, completely unqualified supervisor made a series of very bad choices, including sexually harassing female employees with his new found ?power,? lying about his credentials, and generally casting a very bad light on the company by creating a hostile, fearful environment. To add insult to injury, the CEO proceeded to reward Windbag?s bad behavior by promoting him to director of a satellite venture, rather than demote or otherwise penalize his behavior, as any ethical boss would have done in the same situation. I wonder if he dared consider what sort of precedent this would set for the rest of the staff? Talk about lowering the denominator on common decency.

 

You?d think the CEO might have commenced ethical hiring protocol after this sour experience, but the insanity continued. Not long following this fiasco did another completely unqualified person magically appear on the scene as a supervisor ? once again bypassing management input. And for good reason! Had the CEO even whispered of his plans to promote this low-grade moron to accounting supervisor (we?ll refer to her as ?Despot?), management would have immediately protested at the mere mention of such a heinous plot. You see, Despot was not the sharpest tool in the shed. Dearth of accounting experience aside, her meager grasp of basic grammar was such her memos appeared written by a drunken sixth grader. Juvenile sensibilities coupled with narcissistic personality disorder did not endear this idiot to an otherwise bright (and weary) staff. Morons relish their petty power, and this moron proved to be no different when given a supervisory role.

 

Fair and democratic process conveniently disregarded, the CEO promoted Despot to supervisor based on the fact she was a girlfriend of his best friend, the details of which are quite boring but perhaps the subject of another thread. This time the CEO attempted to keep his relationship to the new hire under wraps, but my sister's in-law deduced Despot had indeed been promoted based on her personal relationship to him after dissecting one of her one inane memos.

 

Easily intimidated by those possessing more grey matter between the ears, it wasn?t long before Despot began lashing out at anyone who threatened her fragile, insecure ego. Her fascist, adolescent attempts to enforce tyrannical rules pulled out her backside won the instant disrespect of peers, and contempt of her staff. Poor language comprehension led to a series of embarrassing misunderstandings over the most basic terminology. But co-workers were soon to become aware of something even more disturbing: Despot had been shorting specific employee paychecks based on her personal dislike of these individuals. A peculiar brand of irrational indignation ensued upon her discovery, empowered further by a suddenly aloof CEO.

 

In both of the above cases, the CEO was made painfully aware of all issues yet did nothing to reprimand either Windbag or Despot. On the contrary, he rewarded them with praise and promotion, chastised those who sought justice, and expected his management staff to abide by his faulty, corrupt sense of logic. And needless to say, the situation has done nothing but lower morale for my sister?s brother-in-law and co-workers. Personally, I don?t see how the company can survive if these unscrupulous practices continue. Nepotism is bad business, plain and simple.

 

Having said that, I feel persons in positions of power should take heed of the following maxim:

 

?As above, so below.?

 

Or, in more modern terms, if you set a poor example in your lofty chambers by exercising corrupt, tyrannical policies ? how can you possibly expect any better from the employees and constituents you expect service and loyalty from?

 

My brother-in-law is asking the family for advice and I think it?s best that he start looking for work somewhere else. What do you think?

 

Now that I?ve vented, it?s your turn to expound on similar situations you?ve experienced in the workplace, at school, or anywhere you?ve encountered nepotism/favoritism. How did it affect you, your peers, and your environment?

 

Notice from BuffaloHELP:

Do remove moderator's note tag. If you wish to please PM the moderator who left the note tag.

*Curious*

Edited September 19, 2007 by Misanthrope (see edit history)

[BuffaloHelp 24]

Nepotism, whether like it or not, is part of human nature--more like a basic instinct--that protects "one of their own." Although some sociologist would protest, it is, I believe, a basic tattooed genetic response than a learned behavior.To make my point of view, the reason babies are 'cute' or puppies are 'adorable' is nature's way of striking maternal instinct from the very core. And as the baby grows and observes this maternal instinct, he/she adapts a positive response that's rewarded from this behavior. That maternal instinct somehow evolves and forms a different kind of bond--friendship, clique, love or what have you. Perhaps I am over generalizing. But then again, loyalty is hard to describe since it changes under circumstances. After all, nepotism is a form of loyalty...just that it's formed and defined within certain relationship between two people; like among members of a family.So to fight the nepotism and clearly the unfair hiring practice of a person or persons, with an instinct that's embedded from the day the human race began, is a losing battle from the start.But there's hope. Part of the solution to your bother-in-law's predicament is that he was able to identify the injustice quickly. The next step is to plan ahead instead of react. He cannot change the course of a river in a flash. It will take tremendous time to change the course. The key question here is, "is he willing to stick it out and fight the current" or "is he better off in a place where his aptitudes are well utilized and appreciated?"Why stress over something so insignificant? And I say this loosely, insignificant, because I am sure he has far better things in his life to occupy his thoughts--like taking care of his family, his health or his community. Is the job paying far better than what he can switch over? Perhaps he should ride the current until he can find much suitable alternative(s). Is he so obsessed with "saving-face" or cannot be disgraced among his colleagues that he cannot let this issue just idly pass by? Well the job may not be good for his health. Why would he stay in the situation that bring so much stress or grief and subject himself to such punishment?Whatever the case may be for the bother-in-law, his ego and esteem should not handle the situation. Weigh out the pros and cons of staying at his job. Find the answer quickly. And act with the conviction. The choice is clear: to leave or to stay. I rather look out for myself and find a place where I am appreciated. No amount of money/position is worth decaying my health. And if he is as well educated as you are, I'm sure he can come to a clear conclusion for himself--and not at others' suggestions. Taking the high road right now may seem weak and cowardice to the world, but the righteous path is always far harder to travel than the other road.

[Tetraca 0]

Nepotism in the workplace is pretty much patronage by the sounds of it. Patronage was banned in government practices years ago at the turn of the century because so many politicians were doing it. This is something that you could talk to your senator about and possibly outlaw(of course, if the family member was more qualified then you, it should be justified).

[TikiPrincess 0]

Nepotism in the workplace is pretty much patronage by the sounds of it. Patronage was banned in government practices years ago at the turn of the century because so many politicians were doing it. This is something that you could talk to your senator about and possibly outlaw(of course, if the family member was more qualified then you, it should be justified).

While civil service tests have prevented patronage in government jobs, it doesn't prevent it in the private sector. While most companies claim to be an "Equal Opportunity Employer," this simply means that they won't discriminate on the basis of race or sex. So they find other ways to discriminate.

I really can't complain too much because I've gotten jobs through networking, which you could consider a form of nepotism or patronage. I get more substitute teaching jobs because I'm friends with teachers, so they request me when they go on vacation or call in sick. Yeah, they probably wouldn't request me if they thought I was a horrible teacher, but lucky for them, I'm not. Or at least, that's what I tell myself.

[Misanthrope 0]

I?ve absolutely no doubt nepotism and it?s related afflictions stem from the most base animal survival mechanism, so there will be no argument from me there. On the contrary, my resigned acceptance of this truism, that being man?s proclivity toward resisting his higher nature in favor of tribal impulse, is the very thing fueling my pursuit of this topic (among other things). Nations advance toward a state of progressive civility only at the expense of wanton, nepotistic instinct. And while my sister's in-law's quandary may skim the surface of this broad reaching subject, I believe focusing solely on his specific situation does disservice to the discovery that might ensue if the topic is allowed to continue without biased censorship. Not that I am accusing anyone to this end, but the unusual response does seem to be leaning in that direction.

 

One post appears based on the assumption my sister?s brother-in-law (John) is somehow vying for promotion, when in fact he already holds a position in upper management. I apologize for not making that clear in the starter post. From what I gather his main concern is the current CEO has, on at least two occasions, excluded management in the hiring deliberation process, thereby setting himself up as a sort of dictator. Secondly, he?s been on the receiving end of the CEO?s wrath for daring to breach the topic in meetings. And last, he is witnessing the stifling effect on productivity this man?s draconian policies are having on the staff and fears the possible outcomes.

 

John strikes me as a level headed guy who carefully weighs the pros and cons, yet is also willing to risk his own neck to accomplish what others are either to ignorant or fearful to attempt. A dangerous balancing act yet? Yes- but the fact he?s successful in life leads me to believe egocentricities are not a motivating factor, else he would have fallen by the wayside long ago. In this case, he appears moved by a desire to maintain some semblance of a healthy work environment for he and his staff and a hope to see justice done. While he certainly doesn?t need anyone?s advice, it doesn?t surprise me he?s soliciting opinions at this point. And besides, the Enlightened Misanthrope is always looking for good stuff to write about.

[Watermonkey 0]

If an activity is a part of human nature or tradition, does that make it right? Can we not evolve as humans to a better place; learning from our ancestors and others who've blazed the trail in front of us? A tradition that doesn't work anymore and actually causes more harm than good should be discarded in favor of a new way, don't you agree Buff? Humans have the unique place in this world in that they're not forced to adhere to the rules of primal, reptilian instinct and are born with free will and the ability to control our impact upon the world and even the future. Inherent in this responsibility is the need for us to all be able to agree upon what's right and what's wrong. Traditionally nepotism has been used in a mixed light because empires have grown and families have grown by using it along with arranged marriages to some success. In more modern times, however, we find it to be a regular hindrance to progress in society mainly due to the fact it's usually no longer needed and more often than not, it's resented by those who came in to the game playing by one set of rules (thinking that position gained is position earned through seniority and competence, not favoritism or nepotism) only to find that the rug of rules is at some point pulled out from under them. Mainly the tradition of nepotism has mostly gone from most cultures and civility due to the fact it usually does so much harm to the organization that practices it, the organization ultimately fails if it's not reversed in time. In the climbing of the rungs of the ladder of society and occupation, there are really no short cuts. In the end, skipping a rung will usually lead to losing two. I'm betting Canon Inc. doesn't have much if any Nepotism going on or they'd have failed long ago. Politics is rife with this tradition and look at the mess it's in. I rest my case. Edited July 6, 2007 by Watermonkey (see edit history)

[BuffaloHelp 24]

The basic idea is that whether it is right (tolerate it by default since can't win the battle) or wrong, would he subject to continued abusive power when (John) realized this on-going unfair practice?There is no right solution since every experience is not the same. And no one can claim that a solution presented is the right one. But the understanding that there's an alternative is the advice. Whatever the objective may be a monetary promotion is involved or principle and integrity are at stake, John can stay within the system--nepotism--or find an employer who can provide better working environment and with much deserved respect. I have been at the end of both edges. I was once hired as a young man because I made a good impression to my superior. But at the same time I missed out many promotions due to the topic, which is in discussion.This made me wonder how many of us received the better end of nepotism (or favoritism), either knowingly or unknowingly? Some of us gained great discounts at purchase(s) because a close member of the family worked at a *insert name* retailer. Some of us had received reduced price on service(s) with the same reason. It is a subtle yet quite strong practice we, as a human race, perform consciously or subconsciously. To deny this may be the few percents of the population but, the majority of the occasion we have received favors from nepotists around us. In a perfect world, nepotists would not exist. In the imperfect world the good people fight and resist. The advancement in human race should include objectivity toward color, race, sex, creed and family. It may happen in our life time or it may not. But before that day can any one of us truly say that there's a level of tolerable nepotism? If we were treated any specially because of our relationship one time or another, we have all succumbed to nepotism. Is there one nepotism greater offense than another? That is the folly of mankind, I believe. We grade and define compromising standard according to the benefit of an outcome. Let's not dwell on the cause of the problem, but deal with the path which John may consider--or reply to a member's post that implicates the question of a statement or a belief (this may seem like a personal attack rather than a forum discussion). The advancement of human race will not spawn from mentioning a mistake but preparing the future by removing it. We can pick apart the issue in immeasurable ways and there will be no one opposing to the answer, "nepotism is not right". Instead, we could address the problem in how to work this terrible stain in John's work place to his favor. If all resolutions come to fail and all possible tries have exhausted then, perhaps, it's time for John to move on to better things. That is, after all, John's free will.

[Watermonkey 0]

Having a fatalist outlook regarding civility in the workplace won't solve the problem and it's this attitude that has caused modern power-brokers on this planet to continue to gain power and corrupt their offices to such a point it'll make Caligula's Rome look tame in comparison. It's already come to pass in many places in the halls of globalist government, and we see it in the newspapers all the time. Gay porn stars making visits to the White House, stories of rampant drug abuse, child sex-slave rings, torture in prisons all around the world. All these things have happened because the people roll over and say, "as long as it doesn't affect me, I don't care." And they force inoculations on our children by threat of their removal from the household of their parents and most people just say, well it's an inoculation, it won't hurt them. But few people wonder why Autism is a veritable plague right now. The only reason people pay the Federal income tax to the I.R.S. is because they're afraid of being thrown in jail or having all their possessions stolen from them by this corrupt federal reserve's attack dog when, in reality, there is no law on the books that says a tax on a person's income can be enforced because that would constitute slavery which was outlawed after the Civil War. Furthermore the 16th amendment was never ratified. But only a very tiny particle of a percentage of the United State's population refuses to pay. What would happen if we all refused? We'd overturn slavery in this country. But people have this fatalist attitude toward the status quo so nothing changes until the abuses become so grave that hundreds of thousands of people are being slaughtered, but by the time it hits that critical mass, it'll be way past time to complain. It'll be next to impossible to do anything about the injustices and to right the wrongs of the corrupt elite power brokers who got their positions of power through nepotism among other ugly means.

[Misanthrope 0]

Nepotism in the workplace is pretty much patronage by the sounds of it. Patronage was banned in government practices years ago at the turn of the century because so many politicians were doing it.

I believe youre right. Nepotism involving close friends and relatives is considered corruption and therefore illegal within government entities to the best of my knowledge. Unfortunately, the practice itself is not yet illegal in the private sector, but the results of its practices can certainly be. Discrimination, wrongful termination suits and so forth can be filed against such employers.
As previously mentioned but a small percentile at any given time are willing to take on corrupt entities, hence their continued proliferation. But oft times a relative handful is all it takes to bring on change, as was evidenced by the American Revolution in which only 5% of the population stood up against England. But Manifest Destiny prevailed and we have the heroes who fell within that tiny sector to thank for the freedom we in the United States of America currently enjoy. Nor would I discount the power one individual have can have on the course of history (think Ghandi, Martin Luther, etc..).

Apparently, John falls within that tiny percentile who is not intimidated by the man. I suppose having an attorney in the family doesnt hurt matters, but still, its the rare personality who chooses the high road over blind complacency. The latest is that hes received two solid job offers and has transferred his pension options to an external investment firm, so at this point hes not concerned about possible retaliation at exposing the scum. In fact, he fully expects corrupt response from the corrupt CEO and his crony mouthpiece. Knowing him, intimidation from high places will have the opposite effect it has on most, and will make him all the stauncher in his conviction. He has been advised to stay the course until hes good and ready to do otherwise, and to document all response from the lofty chambers of corruption.

Thank the fates for that tiny percentage, John among them, who are willing to stand up for the rest of us!