Promotions Often Given to the Favored Employee
Is this from another issue of Duh Magazine (with compliments, as always to Andy Borowitz)? No, it’s actually worse.
Much as we Americans cling to notion that merit is the primary factor dictating success, there are personal elements going on, too. A study recently showed just how prevalent favoritism is in determining promotions in the workplace. The study came out of the Georgetown University’s McDonough School of Business on August 23.
Based on surveys of highly placed decisionmakers, the authors of the study concluded that although few people admit personally to employing favoritism in making promotion decisions, most of them have seen it in action. One striking statistic: 54% of decisionmakers knew which candidate they wanted to promote prior to interviewing; of those, a full 96% went with their favored candidate.
Unfortunately, as defined in this study, the source of the favoritism is not the candidate’s stellar performance. Instead, favoritism arises from affinity with the person’s background, ideology, race/sex/religion, and other insider type traits. As a result, most of the survey participants stated that the use of favoritism leads to poorer promotion decisions.
The survey also identified some failsafe mechanisms to avoid allowing favoritism to sway decisions, such as requiring multiple interviewers and impartial review of the decision. Still, with many jobs requiring subjective intangible qualities such as leadership potential, it is hard to imagine favoritism being rooted out altogether. But it would be interesting to develop a way to more closely monitor and measure favoritism and its effects. If the sociologists can pinpoint the illegal components of a decision, that advance would benefit employees who have been discriminated against.