M4A1: Favoritism and Nepotism in the Workplace

Joshua C. Santos

Professor Racquet

BUS323: BUSINESS ETHICS

 Outline

Name and Date:

Topic: Favoritism and Nepotism in the Workplace

1. Nepotism and Favoritism

a. Introduction

i. Favoritism and nepotism

ii. Nepotism ethical or unethical

iii. How nepotism affects organization processes

2. Background

a. Nepotism overview

b. Modern world nepotism/favoritism

c. Traditional nepotism theory

i. Kin selection theory

a) Explanation and application

ii. Ethnic nepotism theory

a) Explanation and application

d. Modern nepotism theory

i. Genetic similarity theory

a) explanation and application

3. Problem statement

i. Effects of Nepotism/favoritism at workplace

4. Literature review

i. Relating scholars finding about Nepotism at workplace

 ii. Impacts of nepotism in the workplace

a) Proposers’ views

 Undermining professionalism,

 Work discrimination

 Job stress and dissatisfactions,

 Reduce employee retention and talent,

b. Objections

 Enhance organization growth,

 Offering equal chances to all people

5. Conclusion and recommendations

i. Nepotism and labor law enforcement

ii. Equal opportunity for all employees,

iii. Maintaining professional attitude and organization values

 Favouritism and Nepotism in the Workplace

Nepotism and favoritism

In the workplace, equality is the most fundamental principle in running the organisation

affairs and employees. The policy helps in implementing professionalism and effective

management in their respective work stations (Eubanks & Chater, 2015). However, some

organizations do not regard fairness and its effects on their employees. Nepotism is an act of

showing favor in the treatment of others in the workplace based on generic relationships, by

giving them an opportunity because of their affiliation rather than their competences. Both small

and large firms practise the favouritism and nepotism. Haugen and Westin (2016) defined

nepotism as an act of favouring a person in the workplace because they are genetically related to

the manager or person in charge.

The perception of nepotism differs significantly, whether it ethical or unethical based on

the cultural background. Despite the distinct personal and cultural views, the moral issue is a

delicate matter and must be given attention. The business ethic considers nepotism as an ethical

and has direct impacts on the organizational processes.

Background

Padgett, Padgett, and Morris (2014) argued that the people in management practise

favouritism and nepotism by either favouring their friends or relatives, mostly when hiring

(Padgett, Padgett, & Morris 2014). Nepotism is derived from a Latin word from "  nipote” that

refer to a nephew or grandson. Nepotism concept started in the middle age. According to Pearce

(2015), it evident that in the late 17th century, catholic leaders such as popes and bishops how had

vowed to chastity did not have their kids. According to Atkinson (2015), the World Bank was
accused of breaching staff rule 4.01 that banned the institution from recruiting more than one

family member. Richard Stern, the human resource vice president of World Bank, hired his

brother Nick stern as the new British chief economist. The staff association complaint’s claimed

that there was favoritism on the appointment to Professor Stern. Also, Deutsche bank based in

Russia practised nepotism, whereby they permanently hired Dmitry Pankin, deputy finance

minister's daughter, who was a temporary employee. The deputy finance minister daughter

offered the job not based on merit but the nature of relatedness (Robinson & Rudnitsky, 2019).

In the modern world, nepotism is perceived differently depending on the nature of the

organization. The government entities prohibit nepotism, and hiring relative or friend is

considered unlawful. According to Umali (2015) described nepotism in Philippine government

as A knowledge on the laws and rules governing nepotism as essential to all officials of the

government, since it was an inherent trait of Filipinos first to take care of the kamag-anak. The

act was against the administrative code that ruled against nepotism. In a family business set up,

nepotism might be tolerated since the members can help each other to make the business excel.

Ethical theories

Traditional Nepotism theories

Kin selection

Charles Darwin introduced the kin selection theory in 1859 in his book "On the Origin of

Species". Hamilton popularized the concept by his Hamilton's rules. Conferring to Hamilton's

rule, the kin selection makes genes improve their frequency when "genetic relationship of a

recipient to an actor by-product of the advantage to the beneficiary is higher than the

reproductive cost to the actor(Carter, Wilkinson & Page, 2017). He proposed two tools.
 First, Kin recognition, he argued that kin selection allows the member to identify their

relatives. Second, in viscous population in which the movement of individuals from their

birthplace is relatively slow, and they first interact with relatives by default (Gilbert, 2015). The

viscous population tool makes kin selection and social collaboration in nonexistence of kin

acknowledgement. Therefore, the “nurture kinship” individual is treated as kin as a resulting of

living together, and coincidentally sufficient for kin selection. The theory “ is the evolution of

characteristic that favour the survival of close members of the affected individual, by processes

that do not require any discontinuities in the population breeding structure" (Carter, Wilkinson &

Page, 2017).

Ethnic nepotism

The theory described the human tendency for in-group act practiced by people from the

same tribe in a region consisting of several ethnic groups. The approach was developed in the

1960s as a result of ethnical tension and rivalry in the developing countries in Saharan Africa.

The theory perceived racism and ethnocentrism as favoritism toward favoured relatives and as

extensions of the kin selection. The approach showed the tendency of a human being to favour

their member from a common racial group. It stated that all organism grow toward more humane

toward kin since they want to spread further copies of their species. To guard one's inherent

genes, Frank salter notes self-sacrifice for one's co-ethnics (Jones, 2018).

Hamilton's 1975 model concerning the inherent basis for ethnic altruism illustrated that it

is hypothetically probable to adapt a way to defend the genetic interests, even if the altruism

necessitates self-sacrifice. The model demonstrated selflessness acts focused toward the tribe

could be adaptive when it could protect the combined of distant in-group members. Further, he

noted that sexually-reproducing species population's separation directly reduced the levels of the
interrelatedness of its ethnic and hence making greater altruism adaptive. By reducing

immigration of among in-group improve the level of affiliation of its members, which in return

lead selections of altruistic acts directed to ethnic members, but when these acts "aid in tribal

fitness in some way...” (Stewart, Méhu & Salter, 2015).

The application of ethnic nepotism based on case studies of US., Africa and East Asia

shown that tribal group are less generous other ethnic members or groups. Also, Moscow street

families get more offers from their ethnic members than from different ethnics. In a recent study

of county expenditure in the US illustrated that racially diverse states have less expensive and

less expenditure on public activities compared to the more identical countries (Dutton, Madison

& Lynn, 2016).

Modern nepotism theory

Genetic similarity theory

The approach was formulated by Johnson Phillippe. It states that genetically matching

individuals tend to pursue each other by providing a compassionate environment such as unions

and social groups. The biological factor of first group selection and ethnocentrism. The theory

urged that people for an ethnic carry common genes, ethnic consciousness which originate from

the biology of altruism and mutual reciprocity. Besides, shared genes relatively govern the

degree of adopting an ideology. Therefore, individuals have more concentration on genetic

interest within-group than other individuals from different ethnic groups (Necla, Kiral &

Muhammet 2011).

The ethnic member prefers to state in the same region and closely associate with the

group and social groupings. Empirical studies have proved that most charitable organization are
made in more enormous quantities within ethnic groups. In other words, individuals from a

particular group are like to offer support to members of their own ethnic or state compare to

counterparts from different ethnic or foreigners. In 2010, the chairman of the committee of

standards in public life in the United Kingdom, Sir Christopher Kelly complained about 200

members of parliament using parliamentary funds to offer jobs to relatives in various office roles

(Dutton, Madison & Lynn, 2016).

Problem statement

Nepotism poses a severe challenge to both small and large organization. According to

Haugen and Westin (2016), favouritism is attached to several ethical issues as it results in a

conflict of interest to power misuse. By offering inclination to specific friends or relatives in an

organisation disrupt nearly the entire flow organisational processes. Unbiased hiring kills the

employees' morale and ultimately affecting individual performance. As a result, productivity is

likely to reduce. Therefore, nepotism is a crucial concept that requires attention and is dealt with

the rules and regulations provided to the latter.

Literature review

The literature review sections entail the analyzing scholarly reviewed articles that relate

to nepotism and its impact on modern organizations.

Impacts of nepotism and favouritism

According to Chukwuma, Agbaeze, Madu, Nwakoby, and Icha-Ituma (2019), nepotism is

a form of favouritism to friends or relative while at the workplace. The author urged that

nepotism deteriorate work culture as well as weakening business structure. The scholars

recommended that the practice is unethical and should be avoided by management or people
misusing the powers. The unfairness associated with nepotism can lead to conflict between the

managers and the subordinates at the workplace (Chukwuma et al. 2019).

To the extent of the employer may face criticism and viewed as selfish and

unprofessional. Haugen and Westin (2016) stated that employers who practice nepotism lose

substantial respects from his subordinates. The act of favouring specific employees because of

their relatedness with the top-level managers or supervisors lead to biased performance

assessment and kills the culture of hard work among employees (Wated & Sanchez, 2014).

Nepotism in the organization results in discrimination (Eubanks & Chater, 2015). The

people in power must put organizational values and enhance equality in the decision-making

process. The labour law highlights discrimination practices. It unlawful to discriminate

employees based on race, religion, geographical and age; however, still do not involve nepotism

(Necla, Kiral & Muhammet, 2011). According to Padgett, Padgett, and Morris (2014), the

employee may perceive their workplace as hostile when they face discrimination.

Arasli and Tumer (2008) argued that nepotism and favouritism are unprofessional acts

that affect the working environment of the employees. They stated that the ethical issue might

result in job stress at the workplace as well as leading to job dissatisfaction of the employees.

The employees’ performance is based on the relationship they have with the person in charge of

management and administration. The ultimate result will be job stress and dissatisfaction

(Pearce, 2015).

Nepotism kills talents and employees retentions (Haugen & Westin 2016). The study

showed that three out of four millennials we planning to leave their current jobs by 2021.

Haugen and Westin (2016) findings showed varying results where the millennial had kin at the
management and administration. By virtual of having a relative at the administration act as job

security and vice versa (Sarpong & Maclean, 2015).

However, some researcher has disregarded that nepotism is unethical. Jones and Stout

(2015) argued that nepotism have their pros and should be practised. For instance, an individual

who is well educated should not be denied a chance to work in an organisation with a relative at

the top management. More so, an organisation dominated with relatives performs better than

those without (Necla, Kiral & Muhammet 2011). Gjinovci (2016) argued that it is unethical to

leave a friend or relative to suffer, yet they can help solve their problems.

Conclusion and recommendations

Nepotism and favoritism can be eliminated in the organization through enforcement of

well stipulated written guidelines (Palmer & Fleig-Palmer 2015). The employees should not be

involved in any act of special treatment for the sake of business culture and their colleagues. HR

Specialist (2019) stated that the management should set nepotism policies that regulate managers

from hiring relatives or friends.

The employees with a relative at top management should be given a chance to walk their

way up (Firfiray et al. 2018). To ensure that no favouritism of any nature that will occur. All the

employees will have equal chances starting from scratch to the top. The ethical practice helps the

employer to gain trust and respect from staff and the public.

Finally, the company is supposed to maintain a professional attitude and keeping

organizational values as topnotch (Pearce, 2015). Also, employees can secure a hardly earn

appointment from Human resource department after a free and fair appraisal process (Liu,
Eubanks & Chater, 2015). An organisation with well-established anti-nepotism policies can curb

nepotism and favouritism practices at ease.

 References

Argasinski, K., & Rudnicki, R. (2019). Beyond classical Hamilton's Rule. State distribution

asymmetry and the dynamics of altruism. arXiv preprint arXiv:1912.00518.

Atkinson, M. (2015). World Bank accused of nepotism and corruption. Retrieved 1 April 2020,

from https://www.theguardian.com/business/2000/mar/17/3

Carter, G. G., Wilkinson, G. S., & Page, R. A. (2017). Food-sharing vampire bats are more

nepotistic under conditions of perceived risk. Behavioural ecology, 28(2), 565-569.

Dutton, E., Madison, G., & Lynn, R. (2016). Demographic, economic, and genetic factors related

to national differences in ethnocentric attitudes. Personality and Individual Differences,

101, 137-143.

Erez, L. (2017). Patriotism, Nationalism and the Motivational Critique of Cosmopolitanism. The

Handbook of Patriotism.

Gilbert, O. M. (2015). Microscale kin discrimination in a famous soil bacterium. Proceedings of

the National Academy of Sciences, 112(45), 13757-13758.

Gjinovci, A. (2016). The impact of nepotism and corruption in the economy. Knowledge

Horizons. Economics, 8(2), 133.

Haugen, K., & Westin, K. (2016). 'Not a Problem Until it Becomes a Problem': A Qualitative

Study of Values and Risks of In-house Family Ties in Swedish Workplaces. Nordic

Journal of Working Life Studies, 6(4), 67-86.

Jones, D. (2018). Kin selection and ethnic group selection. Evolution and Human Behavior,

39(1), 9-18.

Jones, R. G., & Stout, T. (2015). Policing Nepotism and Cronyism without Losing the Value of

Social Connection. Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 8(01), 2-12.

Liu, C., Eubanks, D. L., & Chater, N. (2015). The weakness of strong ties: Sampling bias, social

ties, and nepotism in family business succession. The Leadership Quarterly, 26(3), 419-

435.

Palmer, D. K., & Fleig-Palmer, M. M. (2015). Integrating trustworthiness for a more nuanced

understanding of nepotism and cronyism. Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 8(1),

22-27.

Pearce, J. L. (2015). Cronyism and Nepotism Are Bad for Everyone: The Research Evidence.

Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 8(01), 41-44.

Robinson, M., & Rudnitsky, J. (2019). Bloomberg - Are you a robot?. Retrieved 1 April 2020,

from https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-08-23/deutsche-bank-classic-nepo-

hires-in-russia-spur-fresh-scandal

Sarpong, D., & Maclean, M. (2015). Service nepotism in the multi-ethnic marketplace:

mentalities and motivations. International Marketing Review, 32(2).

Stewart, P. A., Méhu, M., & Salter, F. K. (2015). Sex and leadership: Interpreting competitive

and affiliative facial displays based on workplace status. International Public

Management Journal, 18(2), 190-208.