The Line

Nepotism

One of the biggest bees in my butt has to be about nepotism. I hate it! I hate the unfortunate truth that in this world (in America, anyway), it's not who you are and what you know, but what you are and who you know that counts! Not only is this tolerated, it's actively glorified.

In my professional experience, I've found that most businesses (and all the ones I've ever worked for) engage in nepotism to some extent. In most cases, this occurs when businesses give friends and acquaintances preferential treatment in the hiring process, if only by making sure that someone's resume is "on top of the stack". But, in some cases, it has manifested itself in even uglier ways.

I have worked in places where people were hired without there being an open-hiring process -- that is, people were brought in to fill jobs before those jobs even existed. I've worked in places where almost all of the people that were hired by a manager were former co-workers, friends and/or acquaintances. In one case, this was argued as actually being a good thing (the hiring authority was praised for having so many people who wanted to work for him). In another place I've worked, people were promoted into positions that they were obviously unqualified for; and entire departments were re-arranged to allow these promotions to occur.

It might be argued that I've just had really bad luck, or that Seattle (or Washington state in general) is just worse about nepotism than other places. But I don't believe this. Unfortunately, I believe that the business world is incredibly incestuous, everywhere.

As a senior in high school, I was invited to a "Scholar Citizenship Banquet" sponsored by the Rotary International. On the back of the flier, the goals and values of Rotary were described. In particular, it described as its FIRST goal and value, "The development of acquaintance as an opportunity for service." To me, this was nothing more than an endorsement (and celebration) of the idea of using friendship and acquaintances to give one an advantage in the business world over others. That is, be part of the "in crowd" and you'll go farther. This was unacceptable to me, even back then, and I declined the invitation, wanting no part of it.

I see nepotism having a number of negative effects on a workplace and, subsequently, on society as a whole:

• the most obvious effect of nepotism is that it works in direct opposition to the notion that merit dictates reward. When a company engages in nepotism, it effectively states that working hard will not necessarily be rewarded. Similarly, those who benefit from nepotism are rarely held to the same standards of accountability as those who are not. This works against our sense of justice and fairplay and can only lead to resentment by those who are not the beneficiaries of nepotism.

• nepotism also demonstrates that popularity is more important than quality. While it may be quicker and easier to hire someone that you know is qualified, unless you spend the time and energy to conduct an open hiring process, how can you know that you are hiring the best person for the job? There may be a number of other people out there that are even better than the person you know. But, unless you look for them, you'll never find them. A person or company that fails to make this effort, in my opinion, cannot claim to be truly committed to excellence.

• thus, work ethic also suffers in a company that employs nepotism. On the one hand, those who are not part of the "in crowd" will have less motivation to work hard (or work well) because they know that they will not be rewarded for it. Similarly, those who benefit from nepotism will not work as hard as they could because they simply don't need to. And finally, managers who practice nepotism, in doing so, demonstrate a lack of work ethic by choosing a shortcut rather than following proper hiring procedure.

• nepotism also works against any value in diversity or growth. If nature tells us anything, it's that inbreeding inevitably leads to defective offspring. This is because people who are very closely related, while they may share the same "good" genes, also share the same bad ones. Similarly, when a manager practices nepotism, any flaws that s/he has is likely to be present in the people s/he hires, as well. And while it may seem better to hire friends or people that we're comfortable with, doing so also causes a business to stagnate as it becomes more deeply entrenched in a single mindset. Having open hiring procedures allows for "new blood" to bring new and different viewpoints to the cause.

• all of these things work to breed mistrust and distrust. Employees come to distrust management because management demonstrates an inability (or unwillingness) to "play fair." Consequently, employees end up slacking or being less productive than they could be. This causes management to distrust the staff, seeing them as unmotivated and lazy. In many cases, management will then turn to nepotism to bring in more people that they think they can trust, not realizing that they are just feeding the fire by doing so.

  Unfortunately, this lack of trust carries beyond the workplace. People come to learn that the world isn't fair and that the only way they'll come out ahead is if they engage in unfair practices as well. Essentially, it's "screw or be screwed."

For these reasons, I have very little tolerance for nepotism and those who engage in it.

That is not to say that I think someone should never hire someone that they know. It's more a question of intent and procedure. If the hiring practices are conducted objectively and fairly, then it doesn't bother me if someone hires a friend, acquaintance or whatever. On the other hand, if a person is intent on hiring their friend or acquaintance, then any hiring process they conduct will be a farce.

Back to Top