Imagine your manager or boss saying the following words in a team meeting:

“Don’t ever dare to do a presentation if you’re not as articulate or skilled in communication as B______ [insert the name of a favorite employee]!”

– An actual manager of a big multinational company

What kind of manager or boss would utter such a statement? That remark doesn’t just lack sensitivity, compassion, or emotional intelligence; it also exposes the sheer incompetence of the speaker.

Wouldn’t anyone, especially those who’ve successfully passed job interviews and joined reputable organizations, find it crass and utterly disgusting? Particularly when such words come from someone wielding corporate power, ironically demanding proper behavioral conduct from their team?

Think about the kind of people this manager hires, promotes, and favors as pets.

This statement, typical of managers showcasing overt favoritism, illustrates how biased leadership can harm team dynamics and foster toxicity in the workplace.

And we’re not even discussing the traits and behavior of the ‘favorite’ in this situation or in the above quotation! That ‘favorite’ could have been perceived by colleagues as a shameless credit-grabber, lazy, an ass-kisser, passive-aggressive, childish, and utterly immature! Yes, those are the kinds of people that the incompetent manager in this situation promotes!

This is a problem in the Philippines, where some big companies that initially began as BPOs hire veterans from the call center industry to lead teams that are not “call center-ish.”

Consider the scenario of hiring a BPO manager from a large call center with no professional writing experience and who lacks an understanding of the difference between “civil” and “civilized” (in the context of, for example, having a “civil discussion”) to lead a proper writing team or department.

This situation highlights the potential challenges arising from a mismatch between the skills required for effective leadership in a specific domain, such as writing, and the expertise acquired in a different professional setting. Not only does this choice risk compromising the quality of work produced by the writing team, but it also raises questions about the decision-making process within the organization.

A leader’s proficiency in communication, especially in written form, plays a crucial role in guiding and inspiring a team. In instances where the leader lacks this essential skill set, there is a risk of misunderstandings, misinterpretations, and a general breakdown in effective collaboration. To address such challenges, organizations need to carefully assess the alignment between the skills demanded by a leadership role and the background of the individuals chosen to fill those positions.

Psychologically, such managers may display signs of insecurity or a need for control and validation. They might favor specific employees who resemble their attributes or viewpoints, seeking validation and reassurance by favoring those who closely align with their communication style or skill set. This behavior might stem from a fear of losing control or an unconscious need to maintain a perceived hierarchy within their team.

So it’s no surprise if that manager’s decision-making often turns out bad, or if the people they promote can’t perform their job well. Furthermore, the individuals they hire might lack the necessary job qualities.

These managers often lack the emotional intelligence needed to comprehend the diverse needs and strengths of their team. Instead of recognizing and nurturing individual talents, they tend to rigidly favor those who mirror their own strengths or preferences. This behavior hints at a lack of adaptability, inhibiting their capability to effectively lead diverse teams.

Moreover, favoritism-driven managers may unwittingly create a culture of fear and mistrust within the team. Employees who feel undervalued or unfairly treated due to favoritism may become disengaged, leading to decreased productivity and declining team morale. This negative environment breeds competition rather than collaboration, stifling creativity and innovation.

By heavily favoring certain individuals, these managers risk overlooking the hidden potential and unique contributions of other team members. This tunnel vision not only limits the growth opportunities for overlooked employees but also hampers the team’s ability to fully capitalize on diverse skill sets and perspectives available within the team.

Indeed, managers displaying blatant favoritism undermine team unity, stifle diversity, and hinder organizational progress. These behaviors reflect deeper psychological tendencies rooted in insecurities, control issues, and a lack of emotional intelligence.

To nurture a thriving work culture, organizations must address and rectify these behaviors by promoting fair and inclusive leadership practices that value and develop the potential of every team member.

Now, here are ten reasons why such a manager is utterly incompetent and doesn’t deserve to hold a leadership position in a corporate setting:

1. Fosters Toxic Environment: The favoritism demonstrated by such a manager cultivates a toxic work atmosphere, breeding resentment and demotivation among non-favored employees.
2. Undermines Team Morale: Employee morale plummets when they witness biased treatment, leading to decreased enthusiasm, loyalty, and commitment to the organization’s goals.
3. Inhibits Fairness and Equality: This behavior goes against the principles of fairness and equality in the workplace, hindering the establishment of a level playing field for all employees.
4. Limits Diverse Perspectives: Favoritism restricts exposure to diverse perspectives, stifling innovation and creativity that emerge from varied experiences and viewpoints.
5. Undermines Trust and Transparency: Employees lose trust in management due to a lack of transparency and unfairness, hindering healthy communication and mutual respect.
6. Reduces Employee Engagement: Non-favored employees become disengaged and less motivated to contribute positively, leading to reduced overall productivity and output.
7. Creates Division and Conflict: Favored versus non-favored groups can generate conflicts within the team, hampering collaboration and cooperation necessary for achieving organizational objectives.
8. Limits Talent Development: Ignoring the potential of non-favored employees hampers their professional growth and limits the organization’s access to diverse skill sets and talents.
9. Impacts Retention Rates: Employees who feel undervalued or unfairly treated due to favoritism are more likely to seek opportunities elsewhere, impacting the organization’s retention rates and costs.
10. Reflects Poor Leadership Traits: Leaders who display favoritism exhibit weak leadership traits by failing to foster an inclusive and supportive environment, ultimately damaging the organization’s reputation and potential for growth.